Leah And Stenstrom File RTK Request With Delco DA — Leah Hoopes and Greg Stenstrom submitted, Nov. 15, right-to-know requests to the Delaware County, Pa.’s District Attorney’s Office seeking all non-privileged records regarding criminal investigations pertaining to them initiated in November 2020.
They also want, among many other things, all sworn or non-sworn statements made pertaining to them by anyone involved with D.A.’s office
The D.A. responded by saying they needed until Dec. 28 to comply with the request.
More Details About Lansdowne Dropbox Incident courtesy of Greg Stenstrom’s Facebook page.Greg notes that the county Democrats are smearing the concerned citizen as an “election denier” when just a minute or two of calm explanation and a card with a contact number would have made the issue never happen.By the way, Delaware County, Pa. has more ballot dropboxes than Philadelphia and Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) combined.
We received a call regarding a gentleman who had reported two Delaware County employees stuffing the Lansdowne, PA, drop box with Mail in Ballots yesterday, and investigated.
In fact, it was a pick up of ballots, but it is clear why the gentleman saw it differently. When he was approaching in his car, what he saw was a female with two handfuls of envelopes in her hand putting them in a bag that was sitting on top of the drop box.
By the time he parked and got out of his vehicle, the drop box was closed, no ballots were in sight any longer, and the employees were walking away, and refused to even acknowledge him.
What he subsequently reported were handfuls of ballots disappearing into what appeared to be the top of the box, when they were going into the bag obscured from the gentleman’s view.
The narrative the Board of Elections has since crafted is that a crazy “election denier” threatened their employees, was screaming, and made false accusations regarding the Boy Scout and Girl Scout who were innocently “doing their job.”
What the video shows, and the interview I had with the gentleman revealed, was that he is retired, was driving to a spot to take his dog to walk, keeps an eye on his neighborhood, personally knows the police chief (and everyone else in Lansdowne, where he has lived his whole life), and saw an unidentified male and female at a drop box with what appeared to be ballots disappearing into the top of the box.
When he asked them what they were doing, they just turned their backs and insolently walked away from him without responding. He told them he had called the police, but that didn’t phase them, and the male finally responded by aggressively shoving his ID in the gentleman’s face, and then getting in the County van and leaving.
This is a prima facie example of the state of our government today. “Excuse me, what are you doing?”, with the response either being no response at all, or “F*** you” (read some of our court filings – the “F U” is not an overstatement).
Now, lets discuss what could have de-escalated and resolved the matter in a couple of minutes. “Excuse me, what are you doing?” “Hello sir, we’re County employees making a daily drop box pick up of Mail in Ballots.” “Were you putting ballots in, or taking them out?” “We were picking up. If you have any more questions, we have to rush to our next stop, but everything is on video camera (point to the camera), and you can call this number or let the responding officer call it, to sort things out.”
Instead, when the gentleman spoke to the police, and they in turn called the Board of Elections, the Director told them the gentleman would have to file a “Right to Know,” and that the police would only get the video after he “reviewed it.”
Then the harassment. The Director calls the gentleman and accuses him of threatening and intimidating “his” employees, interfering with them, tells him he checked with the police and that they told him the gentleman was a crank who regularly called them, told him they were considering further action against him, and that if he wanted the video, he would have to file a Right to Know request.
Two days later, the BOE finally releases the video, first to the news media “exonerating” the little angel who had shoved his ID in the gentleman’s face, without any mention that the same male was arraigned and released on $20,000 bail for assault and harassment charges the day before.
I have been dealing with 3 years of the same insolence, obstruction, contempt, and defiance by a handful of election officials and opposing lawyers who refuse to comply with law or even Court orders, and resulting (Pro Se) litigation.
Not a single RTK from either me, or the people I have worked with has been granted without a 2-6 months of delays, appeals, litigation, and even when finally ordered to comply with a records request, getting more defiance and litigation.
The gentleman that reported what he saw, which was reasonable, although in error (this time), had the courage to stand up for the rest of the People who remain silent, and demand accountability from “our government,” and should be applauded, not ridiculed.
I spoke to him this afternoon, and he was understandably a little rattled from the experience, which I told him was the entire point of the exercise, and thanking him for his vigilance service.
Attacking and gaslighting those brave enough to be counted is technically a tactic called ICD – “Isolate, Contain, and Destroy” – but otherwise known by most people as “bullying,” intimidation, and intentional chilling other citizens from exercising their rights.
It doesn’t work on me. I’m reserved and very deliberate in action, which is why I normally lay back before saying anything on a matter I don’t have all the facts for, to act on decisively.
And, that’s also why people call us. We help as many people as we can – regrettably too often more than we can handle – do the work we can do, as a civic duty (no charge) – and roll on.
Not a single material fact regarding election fraud that we have reported has been refuted or disproven since November 3rd, 2020 – not one. 6 wins, 0 losses, when sanctioned, and the only case remaining in PA for the Nov 2020 election, and cases for 2022 and 2023 elections still in progress.
New material facts of election law violations, and potential fraud that will require litigation will be coming out by Monday regarding the “little angels” in Delaware County.
Delco Dropbox Matter Resolved — Here’s some good news about a matter we reported yesterday regarding a Nov. 1 incident at a Lansdowne, Pa. ballot dropbox.
A citizen saw a Delaware County employee he thought behaving suspiciously at a dropbox on Highland Avenue and questioned him with his cell phone camera running.
Rather than offer an explanation, the employee waved his ID, said he was doing his job and drove off.
It now appears the employee was legitimately collecting ballots from the box and not shoving ballots into it as the citizen believed.
Don’t expect any garment rending for reporting this, and rather than condemn the guy who videotaped it, we are going to give him the highest praise.
We are going to chastise Delco, however, for its, expected, incompetence. Workers should be trained to make it obvious they are only removing ballots, not inserting them, and, if confronted, provide a calm explanation. This does not mean saying “I’m doin my job” and driving off.
They should also calmly pass on contact information to concerned citizens about making a report or getting details.
This isn’t rocket science. Telling employees to do this isn’t asking them to storm Omaha Beach.
The best solution, though, is to get rid of dropboxes.
Delaware County has much more than Philadelphia and Allegheny counties combined despite being smaller than both.
Mail-in ballots are meant to be used in US mailboxes and mailboxes don’t cost the county a penny.
Yes, the cost of dropbox maintenance is significant.
Mailboxes are accessible 24/7 and the county doesn’t have to pay anyone to collect from them.
“(George) Soros realized that you don’t need to change the laws, you just need to change how they are enforced,” Musk said. “If nobody chooses to enforce the laws or if the laws are differentially enforced it’s like changing laws”
Get out and vote Tuesday.
The higher the turnout, the harder it is going to be to steal the election.
Chesco Wipes Protected Count From Voting Machines is courtesy of ChescoUnited:
The Voter Services department in Chester County, Pennsylvania has wiped the “protected counts” off their voting machines, raising questions about their motives. This unexpected act was revealed to observers while voting machines were undergoing normal “logic and accuracy” testing in preparation for the upcoming November 7, 2023 Municipal Election.
As explained by Karen Barsoum, Chester County Director of Voter Services, the protected count on a voting machine should be the total number of ballots put into the machine over its lifetime, which accumulates up like a car’s odometer.
When thinking of a car, you can reset the trip odometer, but should not be able to roll back the lifetime odometer. Since the protected counts on voting machines are supposed to be “protected,” hence the name, why would the county eliminate this history? Why would county elections officials not want anyone to be able to see on the machine itself how many ballots went into it previously?
In the county’s defense, they stated that they made a log of all the protected counts recorded from each machine. This is according to an observer that was present. The concern is, did they have Democrat and Republican observers when they recorded the protected counts? Was it just the Voter Services staff present? Was it just the ES&S vendor? How can they prove the count they wrote down is accurate?
According to the same observer, another observer present asked why the change was made. At first, a Voter Services employee explained that the voting machine protected counts were wiped as part of a system upgrade that was performed in the summer, and that they had problems with the protected count in the past. This answer causes many questions to come to mind: What problems was this employee referring to? Where are the problems documented? What was the effect? These questions must be asked and answers must be provided by the county.
When Karen Barsoum explained the change, she also stated that the protected counts were cleared when there was a system upgrade over the summer. She said it was a state-certified upgrade to a new version of software (EVS 6300) – and that every county with ES&S machines in PA received this upgrade. As part of the upgrade, they removed the memory cards from the machines and replaced them with higher capacity memory cards. It was likened to changing a camera’s memory card. The question now is who has the old memory cards that were taken out of the voting machines? Are they in the possession of the county or does ES&S have them?
Chester County officials removing protected counts reminds the public of the problems uncovered in Mesa County, Colorado in 2021. This was when Dominion Voting Systems installed what they called a “Trusted Build” update on their Election Management System in May of 2021, which was ordered by the Colorado Secretary of State. According to the Mesa #3 report, this update destroyed critical election records on the EMS hard drive.
According to an additional, Mesa # 1 report, “Federal law requires the preservation of election records – which includes records in electronic or digital form – for twenty-two months after an election. Forensic examination found that election records, including data described in the Federal Election Commissions’ 2002 Voting System Standards (VSS) had been destroyed on Mesa County’s voting systems, by the system vendor. Because similar system modifications were reportedly performed upon county election servers across the state, it is possible, if not likely, that such destruction in violation of state and federal law has occurred in numerous other counties.”
This leads us to wonder if anything else was erased from the county’s voting machines, especially our Election Management System, that has not been disclosed to the public.
Other issues that must be addressed are the problems with the Chester County voter rolls and how the Board of Elections is going to eliminate the possibility of people casting fraudulent ballots using names listed in the voter rolls which are ineligible to vote.
Chesco Wipes Protected Count From Voting Machines is courtesy of ChescoUnited:
Delco Concedes Election Code Change Is Ambiguous In Hearing Before Judge Bradley — Judge James P. Bradley heard arguments this morning, Nov. 1, for a preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of changes to the election code passed by Delaware County Council, Jan. 18.
The Pennsylvania Election Code requires all county election boards to have a minority party member.
The law passed by the Democrat-controlled council requires the minority party to submit a list of three and allows them reject it if not satisfied with the choices restarting the process.
Attorney Wally Zimolong representing Delaware County GOP and GOP Chairman Frank Agovino, said that the state code says the county legislative body “shall” fill vacancies from a list provided by the chairman of the minority party leaving no ambiguity that the choice is the minority chairman’s.
The attorney representing the county argued that the request should be rejected as Agovino would no longer have standing if the Republicans should take control, Nov. 7.
Zimolong notes that Agovino has standing now which is all that matters and that the legality of the ordinance means it would be required to be addressed even if Agovino should become leader of the majority party.
Bradley asked the defense what would stop council from rejecting the minority lists in perpetuity or until they got someone who would be a true minority watchdog
The defense conceded that the law was ambiguous and maybe didn’t prevent that but council would never do that, well, because.
Judge Bradley did not promise a fast decision.
Democrat politicians and candidates have taken to smearing those concerned about election integrity as “election deniers” but the reason why so many have developed election skepticism is because of stunts like this.
Why change the election code to weaken minority oversight? Really, help us out. Give us an answer as to how that instill trust in government.
Monday, we attended a hearing before Judge John Capuzzi involving a suit by Robert Mancini of Media against Delco.
Mancini says the county is in violation of the state code because it fails to perform hash validation before each election.
The county argued that while it may be best practice to do so the county is only obliged to do so when installing new software.
If the county is right regarding the law, we expect the judge to rule in its favor.
But why isn’t it using best practices?
Mancini filed several right to know requests last year that the county rejected but that Mancini won on appeals to the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records.
Did the county concede things to put the issue to rest?
No, it appealed the appeal to Common Pleas Court.
Among the things that Mancini wants are the correspondence with Fort Orange Press of Albany, N.Y., which prints the county’s mail-in ballots.
Why the secrets?
Why isn’t Delaware County, Pa. making its elections as transparent as possible and doing everything it can to assuage all fears of fraud?
Motion For Reconsideration In Fayette County Case — A motion for reconsideration for Marrietta, Gallo, Stenstrom v. Fayette County, Pa. has been filed in Commonwealth Court, Greg Stenstrom has informed us.
Ballot Envelope Questions Lead To Demand For Trial In Delco— A trial is sought to resolve apparent discrepancies between mail-in ballot envelopes photographed, July 18- 19, by citizens, and Delaware County, Pa.’s official records.
The request was made yesterday, Oct. 16, by Greg Stenstrom, Leah Hoopes, Paul Rumley and Joy Schwartz.
All are county residents. Mrs. Schwartz is a Republican candidate for County Council.
The envelopes are from the May 16 election which mostly concerned primaries but included a special election for the 163rd Pennsylvania House race.
The county claims that 26,000 mail-in ballots were cast but less than 10,000 were observed counted at the Wharf center on Election Day, says the filing.
All ballots must be counted under observation after polls close on Election Day.
Delco claims all envelopes were processed on a single BlueCrest sorter, says the filing. The timestamp formatting varied, however. This means other machines were used.
BlueCrest uses the time stamp increments for billing.
Then there is the envelope images released by the county.
“It is a material fact that the majority of MIB (mail-in ballot) envelope images provided by defendants to plaintiffs inexplicably have no date time stamps, while a considerable number of envelope images do have date time stamps, and virtually none match the photographs of MIB envelopes taken by plaintiffs,” says the filing.
The filing also says that there are hundreds of discrepancies between the electronic records and spreadsheets provided by the defendants, and the physical records; that envelope images of November 2022 and May 2023 elections show identical or nearly identical signatures; and that there are substantial reconciliation issues between the spreadsheets and electronic documents with the envelopes, National Change of Address database and “verified” electors.
The request to check envelope signatures was made a short time after the election and was bitterly contested by the county before it caved in July.
Relief Request For Fayette Election Recount Filed In Commonwealth Court –A request for special relief filed with the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania this morning, Oct. 6, for a recount for the May 16 primary election Fayette County commissioner races.
Greg Stenstrom, John R. Marrietta Jr. and Geno Gallo are suing the county and its board of elections alleging that enough errors occurred that could have changed the outcome
Marrietta is a Republican candidate for county commissioner, and Gallo, a Democrat one.
Stenstrom is an election integrity specialist from Delaware County.
Marrietta’s tally fell short of qualifying for the Nov. 7 general election ballot.
Gallo, however, qualified for his party’s ballot.
Defendants have repeatedly said that there was just “one error” in the election. Stenstrom says, however, “a small sampling of precincts and ballots provided there were dozens, and in 187 mail in ballots alone, there were 17 votes attributed to the wrong candidate for JUST the Republican Commissioners race (a 9.09% error rate), and a 1.72% aggregate error rate when the the 1,487 in person mail in ballots error rate was computed. Election law requires a full recount when the error rate exceeds 0.5% (1 out of 200).”
Paxton Confirms Vote Fraud Cost Trump Election — Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton who weathered a vicious lawfare attack which ended with his Sept. 16 acquittal in an impeachment trial before his state’s Senate gave a 46-minute interview with Tucker Carlson that was posted yesterday, Sept. 20.
Paxton confirms vote fraud is real and widespread. He says Donald Trump would have lost Texas in 2020 if steps taken by his office to squelch the plan. He says Trump lost Georgia because what was stopped in Texas was not stopped there.
Paxton also says that the Republican establishment is every bit as corrupt as the Democrat.
He noted that the Bush family and Karl Rove were instrumental in the impeachment effort against him. Paxton shockingly says the Democrats basically control the Texas dispute the GOP’s overwhelming majority because the 65 Democrats vote as a body and can almost always find 11 Rs to buy off. He says that’s how Dade Phelan became Texas House Speaker.
Paxton hinted that he is considering primarying U.S. Senator John Cornyn, who he says is basically a tool of the globalists and the Bushes.
Here is the interview
Paxton Confirms Vote Fraud Cost Trump Election in 2020