[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 198 (Friday, November 20, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H6010-H6014]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           ISSUES OF THE DAY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2019, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, we have had an interesting week. Not a lot 
of critical votes have taken place. It was more of an organizational 
week we have had here. At the same time, the country's election hangs 
in the balance.
  I think it is important to take a step back in history, though. It is 
very interesting when you look back and see what things have happened 
in the past that maybe affected our future.
  Here is an article from Republican _ Michigander published by 
RedState:

       Don't let Soros and the ``Secretary of State Project'' take 
     over your State.
       In 2010, the Secretary of State Project is so far targeting 
     Michigan, California, Iowa, South Dakota, Ohio, and 
     Minnesota. This post is Michigan specific, but look at the 
     list of donors to a State level Michigan downticket race. 
     Chances are this is happening in your state, too.

  The article says:

       You know comrades, says Stalin, that I think in regard to 
     this: I consider it completely unimportant who in the party 
     will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is 
     this--who will count the votes, and how. That is from Boris 
     Bazhanov's, ``Memoirs of Stalin's Former Secretary.''
       Boss Tweed says, As long as I count the votes, what are you 
     going to do about it?
       Some of the most overlooked and ultra-important positions 
     in this state, talking about Michigan, are those who run the 
     elections. Those are the county clerk, township/city clerk, 
     and the secretary of state's office. It takes the work of 
     these offices and their staffs to run the elections and make 
     sure the process is above board--and, again, this is 10 years 
     ago, 2010--competent, and with integrity. Livingston County 
     does a great job with its Bureau of Elections. While these 
     positions shouldn't be politicized, at least when it comes to 
     elections, they are in a big way, and this politicization is 
     coming to Michigan.
       Some people don't like it when their boys don't make the 
     rules of the game. First and foremost is the benefactor of 
     the Democrats, convicted insider trader George Soros, the man 
     who broke the Bank of England. Much like his counterparts at 
     Goldman Sachs, he makes a killing off of speculating, and 
     what better way of doing that than by controlling elections. 
     Other rich leftist democrats also wanted to get their people 
     elected in their attempt to control our lives.
       Their project is called the Secretary of State Project. Its 
     goal is to get their type of democrats in charge, and then 
     look the other way when ACORN and PIRG to commit voter fraud, 
     rigging the election for the democrats.
       They had some success in 2006. . . .

  And people can go online and find back in 2006 a report that George 
Soros and Democrats were going to be funding elections and selections 
of people, who would be involved in counting the votes in important 
places.
  Most of us didn't pay much attention to that. I know in Texas I 
thought, well, we are Texas. We elect Republican Governors, and they 
appoint our Secretary of State, so we are safe from this effort by the 
Soros Democrats.
  What I didn't think about back in 2006 and 2010 was the fact that 
county clerks are really responsible for the vote counting in their 
county. In most of east Texas, west Texas, south, and the Panhandle, if 
a county clerk and her or his staff did not do the counting of the 
ballots, we might get upset and vote them out. But in our biggest 
cities, biggest counties, like Dallas, Harris County where Houston is, 
Austin area, San Antonio area, they hire firms that come in, some of 
which we find out had Soros-type money that helped start these things. 
Maybe it is his, maybe it wasn't, maybe it was through Open Source or 
Tidewater, different groups that launder the money through different 
organizations, so it is hard to tell where it really came from, but we 
know it is people that wanted to control elections that got involved in 
deciding who would be in charge of counting the votes. Just like 
brother Stalin and brother Boss Tweed, they had figured out it doesn't 
matter who votes. What matters is who counts the votes.

                              {time}  1245

  So this article goes on. This is 2010. FOX News reported: ``Since 
2006 the Democracy Alliance, a left leaning influence group funded by 
George Soros among others, has had remarkable success in targeting and 
claiming Secretary of State's offices in 11 of 13 critical States they 
targeted, including Ohio, Minnesota and Iowa.
  ``Called the Secretary of State Project (SOSP) its aim is to target 
and capture the obscure, often overlooked office and implement election 
rules changes that give democrats a better chance of winning a 
plurality. Among those changes that the Secretary of State Project 
calls `election protection,' are a loosening of voter registration 
requirements and a lessening of efforts to prevent fraudulent voting, 
according to Matthew Vadum, a political analyst with the Capital 
Research Center.
  `` `The thing that is amazing is that they can get the office for as 
little as $100,000 in campaign funding because no one pays attention to 
it, and they get to control election opportunities in a State. It is 
cheap,' Vadum said. He said SOSP is currently targeting three States in 
the 2010 election: California, Michigan, and Minnesota. In total they 
count for 82 electoral votes.
  ``Vadum says that because of chaos and demoralization the Republican 
Party has not formulated a response to the Secretary of State Project 
or tried to match their efforts.''
  That was 2010. We did not learn. And those campaigns, the project, 
had a profound effect.
  ``Brunner has been a disaster in Ohio, unless you are trying to rig 
the game for the dems. There was tons of shadiness in Ohio for the 2008 
election. The good news about Brunner is that she is running for U.S. 
Senate where she can do less damage, even if she wins.
  ``Brunner made news in October 2008 when she declined to hand over to 
county election boards 200,000 names on voter registration forms where 
the drivers license or Social Security number on the forms did not 
match the name. The Secretary of State Project praised her actions.''
  This is another report: ``Blackwell's office was one of the first and 
most critical offices claimed by the Secretary of State Project. He was 
succeeded in 2006 by Jennifer Brunner, who received $167,000 in 
campaign contributions from the Secretary of State Project, and 
immediately began a complete overhaul of Ohio's voting system. Among 
the changes she made were allowing election day registration and the 
failure to purge election rolls of ineligible and dead voters.''
  As Lyndon Johnson famously told his campaign manager:
  No, sir. This man has every bit as much right to vote as anybody else 
in this cemetery.
  Back to the article. ``Her most memorable moment was when a Federal 
court judge ruled that she had violated Federal law for `not taking 
adequate steps to validate the identity of newly registered voters.' At 
the time she admitted that there were `discrepancies' in about 200,000 
new registrations but refused to allow polling workers to take action 
on the questionable ballots.''
  Mr. Speaker, if someone begins to see a pattern--gee, this was 2010. 
I didn't wake up until late in 2018. But this went on around the 
country, getting people in positions that they would be responsible for 
counting the votes and making rules, though that is supposed to be left 
to the legislature of each State, according to the Constitution, making 
rules as to what votes count and what votes don't.

[[Page H6011]]

  Going back to the article. ``When Jennifer Brunner defeated incumbent 
Kenneth Blackwell in Ohio in 2006, 12 of the 18 individuals who 
contributed the maximum $10,000 to Brunner's campaign resided in States 
other than Ohio. (One of these donors, incidentally, was Teresa Heinz 
Kerry.) Said Brunner, `I received significant support from the 
Secretary of State Project, which helped me toward the election.'
  ``Brunner went on to make her influence felt in the 2008 election 
cycle, when she ruled that Ohio residents should be permitted, during 
the designated early-voting period extending from late September to 
early October, to register and vote on the very same day. Citing the 
potential for voting fraud under such an arrangement, Republicans 
objected. But on September 29 of that year--the day before early voting 
was scheduled to commence--the Ohio Supreme Court affirmed Brunner's 
decision.''
  I thank the Ohio Supreme Court for their contribution to voter fraud; 
and not to leave out our wonderful Chief Justice John Roberts, who 
similarly ruled, in effect:
  So what. There is fraud maybe, maybe not. I am not going to do 
anything about it. Thank you very much.
  ``In a separate matter, Brunner sought to effectively invalidate a 
million absentee-ballot applications that Republican Presidential 
candidate John McCain's campaign had issued. Each of those applications 
had been inadvertently printed with an extra, unnecessary checkbox, and 
Brunner maintained that if a registrant failed to check the box--even 
if he or she signed the form--the application could be rejected. On 
October 2, the Ohio Supreme Court overturned Brunner's directive on 
grounds that it served `no vital purpose or public interest.' ''
  I mean, after all, it was John McCain; he was going to be beat, so we 
will let that one go.
  ``Brunner's most noteworthy claim to fame took place in October 2008, 
when she refused to provide county election boards approximately 
200,000 voter-registration forms in which the name did not match the 
driver's license or Social Security number.
  ``Count the dems, and reject the GOP votes. Boss Tweed would be 
proud. That is what the Secretary of State Project wanted, and what 
they got.
  ``Mark Ritchie was the Secretary of State who certified Al Franken's 
win on a recount. He was a Secretary of State Project candidate and 
here is the result.
  ``(Mary) Kiffmeyer is `absolutely sure' that Ritchie's efforts to 
eliminate voting regulations ensured Franken's victory.

  `` `The first thing he did when he got into office was to dismantle 
the ballot reconciliation program we started. Under that program 
districts are required to check that the number of ballots issued by 
matching them with the number of ballots cast,' she said, `that way we 
know immediately that the vote count is accurate.'
  `` `But that isn't what happened,' she said. `We now have 17,000 more 
ballots cast than there are voters who voted and no way to determine 
what went wrong. Why anyone would eliminate that basic check, I don't 
know,' she said.''
  Well, she doesn't know, but some of us know exactly why you eliminate 
that check to make sure the vote counting is accurate, because that way 
you can have 17,000 people who didn't vote cast votes. And, obviously, 
there are people that have lost with a whole lot less than 17,000 votes 
on the other side.
  ``The Vadum guy quoted earlier was Matthew Vadum. He is one of the 
main guys at Capital Research, a good organization that has tracked the 
shadiness of these foundations and similar groups for years. He wrote a 
good piece in The American Spectator about the Franken-Coleman race and 
its Secretary of State.
  ``Both Franken and Obama, by the way, were endorsed by ACORN Votes, 
ACORN's federal political action committee.
  ``Minnesota's secretary of state isn't a Democrat by happenstance.
  ``Ritchie, who defeated two-term incumbent Republican Mary Kiffmeyer 
in 2006, received an endorsement and financial assistance for his run 
from a below-the-radar nonFederal `527' group called the Secretary of 
State Project. The entity can accept unlimited financial contributions 
and doesn't have to disclose them publicly until well after the 
election.
  ``The founders of the Secretary of State Project, which claims to 
advance `election protection' but only backs Democrats, religiously 
believe that right-leaning secretaries of state helped the GOP steal 
the presidential elections in Florida in 2000 (Katherine Harris) and in 
Ohio in 2004 (Ken Blackwell).
  ``The secretary of state candidates the group endorses sing the same 
familiar song about electoral integrity issues: Voter fraud is largely 
a myth, vote suppression is used widely by Republicans, cleansing the 
dead and fictional characters from the voter rolls should be avoided 
until embarrassing media reports emerge, and anyone who demands that a 
voter produce photo identification before pulling the lever is a 
racist, democracy-hating Fascist.
  ``Most media reports also leave out the fact that Ritchie has 
extensive ties to the controversial in-your-face direct action group, 
ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), whose 
employees have been implicated in electoral fraud time and time 
again.''
  Which is another reason ACORN doesn't exist. They were driven out of 
existence because of illegality and fraud, and it sounds like they just 
melded into other groups that were trying to do the same things ACORN 
did before being disbanded.
  Going back to the article. ``In 2006, the Minnesota ACORN Political 
Action Committee endorsed Ritchie and donated to his campaign. 
According to the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure 
Board, contributors to Ritchie's campaign included liberal 
philanthropists George Soros, Drummond Pike, Deborah Rappaport, along 
with veteran community organizer Heather Booth, a Saul Alinsky disciple 
who cofounded the Midwest Academy, a radical ACORN clone. One article 
on Ritchie's 2006 campaign website brags about the fine work ACORN did 
in Florida to pass a constitutional amendment to raise that State's 
minimum wage.
  ``ACORN got their man in. Their man made sure Stuart Smalley became a 
senator. The good news is that Mark Ritchie is running for reelection 
in Minnesota. Hopefully, the good people there throw his sorry rear 
out.
  ``But closer to home, the Secretary of State Project wants their own 
Mark Ritchie or Jennifer Brunner right here in Michigan. Her name is 
Jocelyn Benson. What are Benson's credentials?
  ``Benson is a native of Philly, well known for vote fraud.''
  In 2010, this article is being written. Philly, well known for vote 
fraud. Don't we know.
  ``She went to Harvard Law. I have seen enough damage done by Harvard 
Law politicians like Obama and Granholm to refuse to back anyone who 
went there for political office. In 2004, for the democrats, she ran 
the poll challenging/poll watching programs for the DNC. They want the 
fox guarding the henhouse. She is also a protege of Jennifer Brunner. 
Yes, that Brunner. She was recently endorsed (before dems convention) 
by the SEIU, the most far left of the union leadership.
  ``The Blog Prof has been on the case researching Benson with posts 
here and here.
  ``In order to ensure that elections are fair, conducted with 
integrity, and legitimate, Jocelyn Benson and her friends at Secretary 
of State Project MUST be defeated by any legal means necessary. We must 
keep ACORN, PIRG-IM, Soros, MoveOn.org, and the rest of those groups 
out of the Secretary of State office here.
  ``We will be keeping a close eye on this race. . . .''

                              {time}  1300

  But nonetheless, that again, that was 2010, and then they go on to 
list lots of liberal Democrats supporting the Secretary of State 
Project, at least 250 of the 1,600.
  But then here is another article from February of 2010, FOX News, Ed 
Barnes: ``States' Secretaries of State Are Tipping the Balance of 
Power.''
  ``In 2000, it was Katherine Harris, the secretary of state of 
Florida, who made critical decisions that helped swing the State 
Republican.
  ``In 2004, it was Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio's secretary of state, who 
earned

[[Page H6012]]

democratic wrath for ensuring a close Republican win.
  ``In 2008, it was the secretary of state of Minnesota, Mark Richie, 
who handed that State's Senate seat to Al Franken and control of 
Congress to the Democrats.
  ``In every major election since 2000, secretaries of state have 
emerged as key, often decisive, and partisan figures in the outcomes of 
those ballot battles.
  ``And just last week in Massachusetts, there was cause of concern 
that the upset victory by Scott Brown could be compromised by that 
State's secretary of state, who has to certify the results.
  ``According to Professor Robert Pastor of the Center for Democracy 
and Election Management at American University, the situation has 
gotten so bad that the partisan roles of the secretaries of states in 
the election process are undermining the faith of Americans in the 
election process.
  `` `After the 2000 election, partisanship in the office accelerated. 
It has skewed enough elections since then that a sufficient number of 
Americans should be concerned,' he said. `We are worse than many Third 
World countries' in holding fair and nonpartisan elections.''
  And, again, that is February 2010 that this was written.
  ``And now there is a quiet, below-the-radar but major effort to 
target secretary of state offices in order to influence the outcome of 
upcoming elections.
  ``Since 2006, the Democracy Alliance, a left-leaning influence group 
funded by George Soros among others, has had remarkable success in 
targeting and claiming secretary of state's offices in 11 of 13 
critical States they targeted, including Ohio, Minnesota and Iowa.
  ``Called the Secretary of State Project, SOSP, its aim is to target 
and capture the obscure, often overlooked office and implement election 
rules changes that give Democrats a better chance of winning a 
plurality.''
  So, on that goes, and it covers some of the same ground as the last 
article.
  But it is amazing, though, the brilliant strategy--you know, if you 
don't mind fraud--the brilliant strategy of targeting secretaries of 
state, and in States like Texas where the secretary of state is 
appointed by a Republican Governor--has been for years--you go after 
the county clerks and make sure you have got good, stout Democrats who 
will hire firms funded, started by Democrat-leaning organizations so 
that they can work the system.
  Now, I mentioned earlier, I didn't wake up on how serious this 
effort, this brilliant effort by people on the far left was until I saw 
evidence of manipulating the results in Dallas County by the firm--and 
if I recall correctly, that may have been one of the Canadian-started 
firms. It has been a while, but they were hired to come in.
  And think about it. If you wanted to manipulate the outcome of an 
election, you get your person in to hire a firm where people could be 
trained to manipulate the vote.
  And say you had early voting, like Dallas, like every place in Texas 
had, and each precinct turns in a flash drive with the votes on the 
flash drive to the person heading up the Democrat firm--Democrat-funded 
firm that then has from Friday night until Tuesday night to play with 
those returns.
  And there were clear indications that in 2018, in the primary, that 
the early voting counts were manipulated.
  They made some mistakes. But, you know, they were just getting this 
thing down, trying to figure out how to do it without being caught, so 
they made some silly blunders that made very evident the fact that they 
had manipulated numbers in the primary.
  By the general election of 2018 in Dallas County, they got better 
about hiding it, but when you have got brilliant people who are looking 
into it, it is easier. I mean, those manipulations can be found and 
were found, and the information was offered to the Texas attorney 
general, whom I personally urged multiple times over the past 2 years: 
You have got to get on top of this, because the manipulations that we 
saw in Dallas County need to be exposed. People need to be indicted, 
and people need to go to jail for stealing elections or, at least, 
manipulating elections, and that way we can ensure a fair vote 
nationally in 2020.
  Apparently, our attorney general was preoccupied by other things, so 
he never got around to getting a warrant, which I believe it sure 
looked like probable cause evidence sufficient to get a warrant to 
seize the vote counting equipment used in 2018.
  As I understand, that has all been destroyed by now. The opportunity 
was missed by the Texas attorney general's office to seize those with a 
warrant and show for the world exactly how manipulations were done. It 
is a lost opportunity.
  And, of course, since we have a Director of the FBI who has shown 
more of an interest--he was put there to clean up the FBI of the 
massive abuse at the top, not necessarily demonstrated around the 
country. We have got a lot of great FBI agents around the country, but 
right here in Washington, I have seen the corruption firsthand. I have 
seen manipulation of the truth. I have seen FBI agents who lied about 
what they found and what they did in order to prevent people from being 
prosecuted that should have been.
  I have seen deals made like with Cheryl Mills: Gee, you let us--we 
have got plenty of evidence to get a warrant and seize your computer, 
but if you will just let us look, we promise not to make copies of 
anything. We promise that we will give it back, and we promise, under 
this agreement, you can't be prosecuted for anything that we find--and 
then giving the evidence back that could have been seized with a 
warrant, allowing that individual to sit in on the questioning of a 
potential target, though Mills could have been a target herself.

  These are the kinds of things that have given people across America 
the wrenching questions: Why has nobody gone to jail on that side of 
the political aisle?
  And that is a good question, and the answer is heartbreaking.
  If we don't enforce the rule of law, especially in something as 
critical as elections, then we have known for some time we were going 
to be headed in the direction of a Third World government. And that is 
apparently what we have got in this election.
  It could still be saved. The good thing for those involved in fraud 
in this last election is that you have a lot of Republicans who say: 
Look, we just want people to get along. You know, it is unpleasant when 
you talk about fraud in an election.
  Well, yeah, it is because it will mean the end of this little 
experiment in self-government. So, yeah, that is unpleasant to talk 
about. But if we don't clean up the process in this election, then 
there will be no free and fair future elections.
  As a judge handling felonies, it was made clear in the short school 
we went to upon becoming judges, and then it was made abundantly 
clear--anybody who just kept researching the law, trying to follow the 
law--that there are two critical types of deterrents that can ensure a 
brighter future for a self-governing country.
  One is general deterrence. There needs to be treatment of 
lawbreakers, in this case, people who have been involved in the fraud, 
to such an extent that the general public would not be tempted to 
engage in the fraudulent conduct. But that would be a deterrent. It 
would scare them out of participating.
  That is what I had hoped if our Texas attorney general's office had 
pursued the fraud that we knew of in Dallas County from the 2018 
elections. There could have been general deterrents.
  And then, also, there are specific deterrents for the person engaged 
in the fraud, and that is you have a sentence strong enough that would 
deter the individual criminal from engaging in such conduct in the 
future that they would want to conform their conduct to the 
requirements of the law so they did not end up with another sentence 
like they got in that case.
  The problem for both general and specific deterrents, when it comes 
to voter fraud over recent years, is there has been no deterrence. 
There were a number of indictments issued in specific places, including 
the Gregg County commissioner, Democrats involved and others, but none 
involving the big frauds that would change a national election.
  So that has been really tragic to see the missed opportunities. But 
those of us who never stop studying history know that this is one of 
those lessons

[[Page H6013]]

that gets--that is failed to be learned over and over, that brings 
about the end to republics.
  Of course, in the first great republic, the Roman Republic, they had 
tried to learn lessons from the democracy of Athens, and they did. But 
soon things degenerated. The leadership was absent.
  Caesar, as head of the military, did something that was illegal, 
crossed the Rubicon, and that was the end of the republic. Though 
senators still continued to be elected, by that point, it was a lost 
cause.

                              {time}  1315

  So I am looking here at an affidavit by Mellissa Carone, and 
something that many in the news media have not understood, and that is 
that when you say an allegation is unfounded, it means there is no 
evidence, a no evidence point, as appellate courts would call it. And 
when there is somebody who has risked going to jail for perjury and 
sworn to being a witness to fraud, then whether you like the evidence 
or not, that is evidence. It is not unfounded. It is evidence.
  There are hundreds of affidavits that have been produced--maybe 
thousands. Some witnesses really don't have anything helpful, 
speculative suggestions, and those are not real evidence because they 
have no direct knowledge. It is kind of like the whistleblower--so-
called whistleblower--who had no direct knowledge and no direct 
evidence. Well, that is not evidence if it would not be admissible in 
court. But if somebody has taken an oath and stated they witnessed 
fraudulent conduct, that is evidence. In some cases, the testimony is 
the creating of an environment in which fraud could occur and then 
seeing indications that fraud had occurred.
  As someone once said about circumstantial evidence--I know some 
people say that you can't convict somebody on circumstantial evidence. 
Oh, yes. It is done all the time. This particular law student gave an 
example: If I am driving by Baylor Stadium, I can't see what is going 
on inside the stadium. But I know it is the time that a game was 
supposed to happen between Baylor and another team, and I can see the 
scoreboard and both of those teams are listed on the scoreboard. There 
is time that is clicking down, and there are scores, and there is the 
roar of the crowd, and I see the score change. I don't have direct 
evidence there is a football game going on, but when you look at all 
the circumstances, then clearly that is circumstantial evidence that a 
football game is going on.
  So, Mr. Speaker, when you have evidence of all the circumstances and 
then outcomes that show this could not have happened without some 
misconduct or some gross negligence, then you have got significant 
evidence.
  This affidavit by this witness talks about the Dominion training, and 
this witness was hired, contracted, by Dominion Voting Services to 
perform IT work at the TCF Center in Detroit for the November 3, 2020, 
election. This person is a resident of Michigan.
  It says:

       During both shifts that were worked, I witnessed extreme 
     irregularities in ballot counting, ballot fabrication/
     completion and data security.

  Now, that is a summary, and again, not necessarily direct evidence, 
since we don't have any specifics.
  But the affidavit goes on:

       Improper counting protocol was prevalent during both 
     shifts. It appeared the majority of people who manned the 
     scanners or the counters were either untrained, poorly 
     trained. They kept jamming machines and rescanning certain 
     stacks of ballots. The proper procedure was to run a batch, a 
     stack of 50 ballots through the tabulator and each ballot 
     counted only once. When a jam happened, the computer would 
     issue an error message indicating what number of the ballot 
     stack had jammed the tabulator. At that point, the counter 
     had two options: manually discard the batch on the tabulator 
     and rescan it, or to continue scanning from the jammed ballot 
     through the end of the batch.
       Countless times, as I floated on the floor to assist with 
     the jammed tabulators, I saw workers rescan entire batches of 
     ballots without first discarding that very same partially 
     scanned batch. I witnessed entire ballot batches rescanned 
     multiple times.
       Many Dominion employees were hired like me to un-jam the 
     tabulator machines throughout the counting process. The jams 
     and rescans of batches of ballots without the deletion of the 
     scanned partial batches of ballots prior to each rescan was 
     quite disturbing.
       At about midnight I was assisting one of the counters with 
     a paper jam. I noticed his machine had a count of more than 
     400 ballots scanned in that particular batch. This was 
     unusual, to say the least, because only one lot of a batch is 
     processed at a time. This means that either the jammed batch 
     had been counted at least 8 times or the counting machine was 
     defective.
       I was so disturbed at this problem I brought it to the 
     attention of my Dominion manager, Nick--

  Whatever his last name is, however you say that.

       Nick stated we were there to assist with IT, but not to run 
     their election.
       Besides extreme counting irregularities, the adjudication 
     process volunteers watching the counting is supposed to be 
     witnessed by one Republican and one Democrat. The 
     conversations I overheard between those watching were usually 
     derogatory comments about Republicans, thus I concluded that 
     often there were two Democrat election volunteer poll 
     watchers at many of the machines and no Republican poll 
     watcher at all.
       I want to describe what occurred during shift change, which 
     commenced about 7 p.m. It was chaotic and stunningly 
     disorganized. It took about 2 hours for people to be assigned 
     an area. At one point perhaps 30 people came downstairs to 
     tabulation machines to be counters. At least four of them, 
     one of whom I have known for over 20 years, told me they 
     received absolutely no training for the counting area 
     whatsoever. Upon information and belief, none of these 
     workers transferred to the mail-in ballot counting section 
     knew how to fix a tabulation problem. I showed many of these 
     new counters how to cancel a partially scanned batch of 
     ballots before resubmitting that jammed batch of ballots to 
     be rescanned. Many of these new counters whom I helped with 
     jams admitted they had received no training.
       Prior to my first shift, I received an email from Dominion 
     that I would be issued a badge when I arrived at the TCF 
     Center. When I appeared for my first shift, it was difficult 
     to enter the TCF Center because I did not receive a badge and 
     could not prove my Dominion credentials. A Dominion employee 
     nicknamed Danielle came over and explained who I was. Only 
     then was I permitted to enter the building.
       When I asked my manager, Nick, for a badge, he replied that 
     I didn't need a badge. He stated we did not want our names to 
     be showing because the challengers would attempt to question 
     us while working. As a related aside, I recall a co-worker 
     taking off her Dominion badge when a challenger asked whether 
     or not the adjudication hardware was connected to the 
     internet. Finally, Samuel Challendes removed his Dominion 
     badge after a challenger took my picture and was escorted 
     from the TCF Center.
       Samuel Challendes, a top Dominion employee from Denver, 
     left the TCF Center midafternoon on November 3, 2020, to 
     assist at the warehouse.
       When Samuel returned about 3 hours later, I asked him where 
     the warehouse was and who owned it. I asked: Is it like an 
     Amazon warehouse?
       He said, no, then explained that we call it the Chicago 
     warehouse. It is where I had my pre-election training, the 
     city of Detroit elections building.
       During the nightshift everyone was free to come and go as 
     they pleased in and out of the counting room. Some people 
     left reportedly to smoke and returned later to the counting 
     room. I believe it is illegal to do this because boxes and 
     stacks of ballots were left unattended. Nobody was present to 
     verify that no ballots were removed or brought in, no one was 
     paying attention, no one logged people as they came and went. 
     When I returned to the TCF Center at 10 a.m. November 4, I 
     walked right into the building, nobody stopped me, security 
     was absent and nonexistent.
       Sometimes city workers asked me for the location of the 
     blank ballots. There was a white table of blank ballots left 
     unattended. When a worker had a ballot or ballots that they 
     deemed defective in some way, they would go to the white 
     table of blank ballots and complete one or some. I believe 
     they were supposed to complete the ballot to match exactly 
     what the voter intended. I saw city workers actually sign 
     names as this if they were the person who completed the 
     original ballot reportedly being replicated. Nobody was 
     present to verify if these newly completed replacement 
     ballots were identical.
       Dominion employee Samuel Challendes and a city worker who 
     looked to be in his mid-twenties were responsible for 
     submitting the final ballot numbers into the main computer. 
     They had absolutely no supervision or accuracy verification. 
     Dominion manager, Nick, was on the main floor assisting with 
     IT jams most of the time. There was no city of Detroit staff 
     present to witness the process.
       During the evening, I overheard Samuel talking to Nick 
     about losing tons of data. Then Samuel, Nick, and the city 
     worker all moved to the side of the stage and made calls on 
     their cellphones. I asked Nick what was going on. He replied 
     it was all taken care of and not to worry. I did not see 
     anyone approach the computer Samuel and the city worker 
     utilized. Nick went back to helping un-jam the tabulator 
     machines. It is my understanding this critical error remains 
     undocumented and unaddressed.

[[Page H6014]]

       Two vans pulled up to the garage of the counting room, one 
     on day shift and one on night shift. I do not know what these 
     vans contained, but I doubt it was food, because there was a 
     shockingly short supply of food for the workers and I never 
     saw food leave either of the vans. Coincidentally, the news 
     announced Michigan discovered 100,000 additional ballots less 
     than 2 hours after the last van left the building.

  She goes on to talk about she was the only Republican working for 
Dominion Voting Systems that she was aware of.
       There are more allegations and more statements, under oath.
       On November 5 I called the FBI to report the activity I 
     witnessed which I believed to be criminal activity. After my 
     initial report I was disconnected. When I called back and 
     explained the nature of my call, I was placed on hold for a 
     long time. Eventually I was able to explain my concerns, 
     provide my contact information. As of today, I have not been 
     contacted by the FBI over my concerns of massive voter fraud.
       But anyway, that is an affidavit, and affidavits are indeed 
     evidence.
       Here is an affidavit from another witness. It is sworn to. 
     He personally observed the absent voter counting boards in 
     Detroit at the TCF Center. He has attended the Wayne County 
     campus on an almost daily basis.

                              {time}  1330

       On November 17, there was a meeting of the board of 
     canvassers to determine whether to certify the results of 
     Wayne County. The meeting did not start until 5, supposed to 
     start at 3. We were told it was delayed so that 
     representatives of the Democrat board members could obtain 
     additional affidavits.
       At 5 p.m., an open meeting and discussion began to discuss 
     the issue of whether to certify the vote. In my review of the 
     results, I determined that approximately 71 percent of 
     Detroit's 134 absent voter counting boards were left 
     unbalanced and many unexplained. I informed the board members 
     of the discrepancies, but soon thereafter, a motion to 
     certify was made by Vice Chairman Jonathan Kinloch. After 
     further discussion, I renewed my concerns that the reason 
     that the numbers did not balance for the majority of the 
     AVCBs in Detroit and, importantly, could not be explained. If 
     the vote totals did not match, there should have been a 
     documented reason explaining why.
       The board considered the ultimate question of whether to 
     certify the vote, and the motion to certify failed 2-2.
       This vote was followed by public derision from our two 
     Democrat colleagues. I, and Monica Palmer, who also voted 
     against certification, were berated and ridiculed by members 
     of the public and other board members. This conduct included 
     specious claims that I was racially motivated in my decision. 
     This public ostracism continued for hours, during which time, 
     we were not provided an opportunity to break for dinner and 
     were not advised that we could depart and resume the hearing 
     on another date.
       I discussed a potential resolution with Vice Chair Kinloch 
     in confidence. Ms. Anderson-Davis told us that we must vote 
     to certify on that night. We were told that we could not 
     consider matters such as the unexplained reasons that most of 
     Detroit's AVCBs did not balance, and no one knew why.

  They were told they couldn't consider that.

       During the evening, Wayne County counsel, Ms. Janet 
     Anderson-Davis, and my colleagues on the board continued to 
     discuss irregularities. Ms. Anderson-Davis advised the board 
     that the discrepancies were not a reason to reject the 
     certification, and based on her explicit legal guidance, I 
     was under the belief that I could not exercise my independent 
     judgment in opposition to the certification. Therefore, I 
     voted to certify the results.
       Late in the evening, I was enticed to agree to certify 
     based on the promise that a full and independent audit would 
     take place. I would not have agreed to the certification but 
     for the promise of an audit.

  Then he goes on to explain the different promises he was made. But as 
pointed out:

       There are questions that need to be answered and can only 
     be answered if Wayne County's canvass is transparent and 
     provides information within its control. That information 
     includes:
       The logs indicating when drop box ballots were collected 
     and delivered, the log of persons who made these deliveries 
     and who had access to drop-box keys and when that access was 
     obtained.
       Similar concerns exist regarding the delivery of ballots to 
     the TCF Center during the night of November 3 and the morning 
     hours of November 4.
       I am also concerned about the use of private moneys 
     directing local officials regarding the management of the 
     elections, how these funds were used.

  He goes on:

       Why do the poll books, qualified voter files, and final 
     tallies not match or balance?
       Seventy-one percent of Detroit's did not balance. Why not?

  Anyway, great questions that need to be answered if we are going to 
ever get to a proper finding regarding the results in Wayne County.
  I have an affidavit from Monica Palmer that was just mentioned. So 
like I said, there are hundreds of affidavits and sworn testimony as to 
improprieties.
  It should be noted, a lot of people have heard about, this is the 
title, ``Dominion Part of Council That Disputed Election Integrity 
Concerns in DHS Statement.'' This is by Jeff Carlson with Epoch Times.
  But we now know--it has been blasted all over the news--that the 
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency headed by Christopher 
Krebs--he was fired. But before he was fired, his Agency issued a 
statement on November 12 disputing the allegation, saying: ``The 
November 3 election was the most secure in American history.''
  What that Agency failed to disclose, however, is that Dominion Voting 
Systems is a member of the cybersecurity agency CISA. They are a member 
of CISA's Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council, one of 
the two entities that authored the statement put out by CISA saying 
there is no fraud.
  The Agency didn't respond to requests for comment immediately, but 
this article goes on to point out both Dominion and Smartmatic are 
listed as members of CISA's Sector Coordinating Council and appear to 
be actively involved, as they are named as organizing members. Among 
the key objectives is to ``serve as primary liaison between the 
election subsector and Federal, State, and local agencies, including 
the Department of Homeland Security.''
  Let's face it, Mr. Krebs worked for Microsoft at one time. They are 
not big fans of President Trump, nor is Bill Gates. But this article 
says: ``As CISA notes, they do not have direct oversight or 
responsibility for the administration of our Nation's elections as that 
responsibility lies with State and local governments.''
  Yet, they had no problem issuing a statement promising everybody that 
these elections were totally free of fraud. Dominion used CISA to deny 
the allegations against Dominion.
  There is more in that article, but time is short.
  It is amazing. There was a judge, though. The judge didn't issue any 
order that cleaned up the problem. The judge noted that the case 
presented ``serious system security vulnerability and operational 
issues that may place plaintiffs and other voters at risk of 
deprivation of their fundamental right to cast an effective vote that 
is accurately counted.''

  That is kind of like John Roberts: Yep, the case is presented. Could 
be a lot of fraud here, but I am going to let the fraud go forward. I 
am not going to deal with it.
  This could be the last election where there is any hope of having a 
true two-party system for President. We saw what happened with the 
abuse by the FBI, Department of Justice, State Department, a certain 
individual or possibly individuals. Even the Department of Defense got 
involved, trying to frame President Trump's campaign, justified, 
according to some, originally, spying on the campaign. But we know a 
lot more now.
  But let me make clear to people that are a bit slow-witted, like 
somebody at the Dallas Morning News: I have never advocated for 
revolution. I have mentioned the American Revolution, but I have quoted 
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., including in the speech where I was said 
to have advocated for revolution. I said: We must follow his example, 
and that is a peaceful demonstration, that we can rise up, but it must 
be peaceful.
  How much clearer does it need to be?
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________