Delco Vote Fraud Case Still Alive; Supreme Court Distributes It For Conference, Jan. 20

Delco Vote Fraud Case Still Alive; Supreme Court Distributes It For Conference, Jan. 20 — Greg Stenstrom and Leah Hoopes case before the Supreme Court concerning 2020 vote fraud in Delaware County, Pa. has been scheduled to be distributed for conference on Jan. 20.

“The conference is a private meeting held by the justices each day during argument week,” as per Jay Stephens on Quora. “At the conference, the justices meet, discuss the arguments held, take an initial vote on the merits of the appeal; and the chief justice then assigns one justice the task of writing the opinion reflecting the decisions made in conference.”

Here’s another explanation.

In other words, Greg and Leah’s case is not dead.

The case number is 22-503 and can be tracked here.

It is appealing a decision by Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court and was filed Nov. 22.

The points Greg and Leah are asking the court to address are:

  • Is the spoliation of election materials and evidence, required to be maintained by federal and state law, by election officials to perfect massive election fraud, evidence of said fraud by itself, and/or sufficient to infer adverse verdict?
  • Do duly appointed, certified poll watchers, who have taken an oath to fulfill their lawful duties as intervenors for both the candidates they represent, and the citizenry, have standing to petition the Courts on their own behalf to remedy grievous violations of election law, election fraud, and associated civil law?
  • Does the Court of first remedy in considering alleged grievous election and civil violations (in this case, the Common Pleas Court of Delaware County, Pennsylvania), have a duty to have an evidentiary hearing, and be presented evidence of allegations of massive election fraud that could change the outcome of an election, before ruling there isn’t a “scintilla of evidence” and otherwise ruling on facts not in evidence?
  • Does immediate notification of spoliation and destruction of election materials required to be maintained by federal and state law for 22 months (or as long as litigative controversy is pending), that proves massive election fraud that could change the outcome of an election, require the Court of first remedy to intervene to secure said evidence, as the lawful arbiter to preserve the integrity of the election system?
  • Are lawyers and “esquires” a special class that can unilaterally decide the outcome of litigative controversy without transparency, input, acknowledgement, or permission of petitioners, plaintiffs, and defendants and the citizenry, without public hearing, transcript or accountability?
  • Should both candidates for election represented by counsel, and Pro Se citizen litigants, be afforded the latitude and grace of the Supreme Court of the United States, as final arbiters of the Republic, to curate technically deficient but meritorious cases regarding the most sacred right of voting by the citizenry of the United States in their selection of their elected representatives, given the Court has repeatedly done so for other cases?
  • Is it lawful for public officials to intimidate, harass, and demand civil and criminal sanctions, and against lawful intervenors, candidates, citizens, and their attorneys for having the temerity to challenge grievous election law violations that would change the outcome of elections?
  • Should petitioners lawsuit(s), who hold hard physical evidence, sworn affidavits, whistleblower videos and audio admissions of election officials committing criminal election fraud, documentation, unreconciled returns, and a literal mountain of evidence that approximately 327,000 votes were fraudulently certified in Delaware County, PA, in a presidential election that Joseph Biden allegedly “won” by approximately 80,000 votes, and undercard statewide elections of lesser margins, be considered for public remediation by the United States Supreme Court, or returned to the Court of first remedy (Common Pleas Court of Delaware County, PA)?
  • Is it lawful for the beneficiary(ies) of alleged election fraud to unilaterally investigate and adjudicate said fraud (i.eThe Pennsylvania Attorney General, Josh Shapiro and District Attorney Jack Stollsteimer).
Delco Vote Fraud Case Still Alive; Supreme Court Distributes It For Conference, Jan. 20

John Lawrence Wants Another Barrier For School Board Candidates

John Lawrence Wants Another Barrier For School Board Candidates — Lois Kaneshiki, who was a Hollidaysburg school director from 2015-2019, has let us know that one of our Pennsylvania GOP favorite LOLs State Rep. John Lawrence (R-13) is trying to place more barriers up for ordinary citizens running for school board.

He announced he is will be sponsoring a bill that will require Background Checks for School Board Candidates.

These background checks are simply unnecessary for candidates.

They are time-consuming and costly to comply with, and require getting fingerprinted by the FBI.

For candidates?  Really?

This is simply a tactic to further discourage community members who want to participate in the governance of their local schools to get involved.

Even once elected, school directors almost never have direct contact with students.  Most of their activity involves attending official meetings and occasional school functions just like the general public).

Why should they all have to get background checks, unless they are going inside the schools?

Everyone who cares about making elected school board positions available to ordinary citizens should contact their state legislators and ask them to oppose to this bill.

John Lawrence Wants Another Barrier For School Board Candidates
Don’t forget the LOL
John Lawrence Wants Another Barrier For School Board Candidates

Swarthmore Murder 68th Anniversary Approaches

Swarthmore Murder 68th Anniversary Approaches

By Bob Small

On Tuesday, Jan. 11, 1955, Robert E. Bechtel, then a junior at Swarthmore College, shot fellow student Francis Holmes Strozier. 

As we arrive at the 68th anniversary of this event, the last murder to happen within the borders of Swarthmore, Pa., many details remain to ponder. A 2015 review in MyCityPaper concerning the premiere of the documentary “Blood Ties” notes:

On the night of Jan 11, Bechtel drove home to his mother’s house in Pottstown, where he collected guns and a slice of coconut cake. He returned and, even though he was planning a mass murder because he felt he had been the victim of “bullying”, he ended up only shooting one person.

Bechtel was a proctor (resident advisor) at the time of the shooting.

He was found not competent to stand trial and was committed to the Farview State Hospital for The Criminally Insane for life.  After four years and five months, Bechtel was released in January 1960. He underwent a trial, which found him not guilty by reason of insanity. 

After the trial, Bechtel went to Susquehanna University in Pennsylvania, and then to the University of Kansas, receiving his doctorate in 1967. He never mentioned the shooting.

When he applied to teach at the University of Arizona, Bechtel similarly neglected to mention the shooting.

In 2005, Bechtel planned to attend his 50th class reunion at Swarthmore College, despite never having graduated and the antipathy of many of his fellow students.

He first revealed the murder in 2004, in a class that he taught entitled “The Psychology of Happiness”.

With all of that, he’s still the second most famous student in that class, the most famous being Michael Dukakis.

Pondering this story, one wonders whether the good Bechtel did in his life, as a teacher and as a family man, overrides the evil.

Swarthmore Murder 68th Anniversary Approaches

Alert and fully sober William Lawrence Sr Cryptowit 1-9-23

Alert and fully sober William Lawrence Sr Cryptowit 1-9-23

T atgwlhfx anlutgw bl vhffhg ikhixkmr.
Chag Jnbzz

Alert and fully sober William Lawrence Sr Cryptowit 1-9-23Answer to yesterday’s William Lawrence Sr Cryptowit quote puzzle: Therefore, with minds that are alert and fully sober, set your hope on the grace to be brought to you when Jesus Christ is revealed at his coming.
1 Peter 1:13

Alert and fully sober William Lawrence Sr Cryptowit 1-9-23
%d bloggers like this: