[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.
____________________