ChatGPT Delco Vote Fraud Expose

ChatGPT Delco Vote Fraud Expose — We were challenged to have our newest correspondent do a piece on vote fraud in Delaware County, Pa.

Well, here it is:

Vote fraud in Delaware County, Pennsylvania is a major issue that has plagued the county for decades. Despite numerous attempts by the state and local governments to address the problem, it continues to exist. The issue is so pervasive that the county has been dubbed the “epicenter of vote fraud” and has earned the nickname “Delaware County, the Falsified Vote Factory.”

Delaware County has a long history of vote fraud. It was first documented in the late 1800s when political bosses controlled the county’s election process. The bosses would purchase votes with money, alcohol, and other bribes to influence the outcome of elections. In the 1920s, voting machines were introduced but were easily manipulated to produce fraudulent results. In the 1940s, the county began using optical scan voting machines, which also proved to be vulnerable to fraud.

In recent years, the issue of vote fraud in Delaware County has been exacerbated by the proliferation of absentee ballots. Since absentee ballots are much easier to manipulate, they have been the source of numerous voting irregularities. In addition, the county is known for its lax voter registration and ID laws, which have allowed non-citizens to register and vote illegally.

The state and local governments have taken steps to address the issue of vote fraud in Delaware County. The county has implemented measures such as requiring voters to show ID, cracking down on absentee ballot fraud, and conducting investigations into voting irregularities. However, these efforts have not been entirely effective, as the county continues to be plagued by vote fraud.

The issue of vote fraud in Delaware County is a serious one that must be addressed if the county is to have fair and honest elections. It is essential that the state and local governments take steps to ensure that all votes are cast legitimately and that the voting process is secure and trustworthy. Without these measures, the people of Delaware County will continue to suffer from the scourge of vote fraud.

We have to concede it does a better job than the Daily Times and Inquirer, although the claim that “state and local governments have taken steps to address the issue of vote fraud in Delaware County” made us laugh.

You can play with ChatGPT here.

ChatGPT Delco Vote Fraud Expose
ChatGPT Delco Vote Fraud Expose

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

Luzerne County Election Irregularities

Luzerne County Election Irregularities — Pennsylvania county officials described, during an interview with PA Real News, massive voter irregularities in the Nov. 8 election.

Alyssa Fusaro of the Luzerne County Election Board said poll workers — including five judges of elections — cancelled at several precincts almost causing them to be shut down, and that several printers ran out of ballot paper.

All these happened in Republican leaning places. No Democrat precincts were affected.

She said the initial tally sheets were wildly unreconcilable for several polling places with one having a thousand vote discrepancy.

Mrs. Fusaro said she had affidavits from people unable to vote and there were places that turned voters away.

She said she was ordered out of the Election Bureau office by sheriff’s deputies the day after the election while she was trying to supervise things while on the phone with a county councilman.

“There was illegal activity that I witnessed,” she said. “There’s all kinds of things that happened, and I wasn’t going to certify no matter what.”

Luzerne County delayed certification due to the seriousness of the issues with Republicans Mrs. Fusaro and James Mangan voting against; Democrats Audrey Serniak and Denise Williams voting in favor and Democrat Daniel Schramm abstaining.

Mrs. Fusaro said Schramm switched after intimidation from Democrat Party leaders especially Councilman Tim McGinley.

For what it’s worth, she said learned about partisan activist lawyer Marc Elias after being sent an article from the Federalist just before the interview.

Elias laughably took credit for Schramm’s change of mind.

Mrs. Fusaro also noted that during the primary many residents said that their party registration had been changed from Republican to Democrat dwere unable to vote. Pennsylvania has a closed primary system. Many of these people had been long-time Republicans.

Also appearing were former Luzerne County Councilman Harry Haas, who is a judge of elections in the county, and former Lackawanna County Commissioner Laureen Cummings who had also served on the Lackawanna Election Board.

Mrs. Cummings said mail-in ballots are a vector for vote fraud and Haas said that there have been election irregularities since Act 77 was passed in 2019.

The hosts were Stephen Gruen, Kim Kennedy and Bill Lawrence.

You can listen to the interview below:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CqiLOsL17UdtzkYTzanOJ3cCKTFeclxL/view

Only a fool thinks there is no problem with corruption and election in Pennsylvania, and Democrats better start to understand that those running things really don’t care about their concerns either.

Luzerne County Election Irregularities
Luzerne County Election Irregularities

Lycoming County Must Surrender Cast Vote File

Lycoming County Must Surrender Cast Vote File — Lycoming County Judge Eric R. Linhardt has ordered the county’s Office of Voter Services to release a digital copy of the cast vote record file for every precinct tabulator and central tabulator used in the 2020 General Election.

The request was made by researcher Heather Honey who says that there were 120,000 fewer registered voters in Pennsylvania in 2020 than there were ballots counted.

And why would Lycoming’s Office of Voter Service even fight the request? Give us another reason besides that they were trying to hide something.

A little tidbit from the Nov. 21 marathon hearing before Judge Barry Dozor regarding the 2022 election really should be more considered.

Gavin Lawn, an observer at the counting center, testified he was inspired to become involved in poll watching after receiving 13 mail-in ballots at his home in 2020. Granted it wasn’t germane to the case at hand but it something to throw at the next vote-fraud denier one should come across.

Lycoming County Must Surrender Cast Vote File
Lycoming County Must Surrender Cast Vote File

Delco Fights Dropbox Camera Request And Loses

Delco Fights Dropbox Camera Request And Loses — The Pennsylvania Office of Open Records has ruled that Delaware County must supply all video surveillance — including body cameras — of ballot drop boxes from the 2020 election.

The request was made by county resident Patricia Bleasdale.

Further, the county must provide the procedure for Board of Election review of video surveillance, and the name of the vendor of the software used to evaluate and identify repeat visitors to drop boxes across all locations.

Also required to be surrendered are the policy/procedure, manuals and memoranda addressing the video surveillance requirement — including verbal directions — governing the preparation and installation of the boxes along with the movement and storage of the boxes through midnight, Nov. 8, 2020.

Well done, Pat Bleasdale.

Now ask yourself all former teenagers, why would the county fight this?

Just a thing to make you go hmmmm.

And while on the subject of Delco drop boxes wouldn’t it be nice to see the surveillance logs from 2022? How many suspicious incidents were noted by those watching? How many times were patrol cars sent to investigate something?

Surely 42 locations watched 24/7 for a month would have warranted something noted as unusual.

Right?

Delco Fights Dropbox Camera Request And Loses
Well Delco make history again?
Delco Fights Dropbox Camera Request And Loses

Kari Lake Describes Arizona Lawsuit

Kari Lake Describes Arizona Lawsuit — Kari Lake, the Republican gubernatorial candidate in Arizona, explained to Tucker Carlson, Dec. 14, the lawsuit pending in Maricopa County in which she is seeking to overturn the election she allegedly lost by 17,000 votes.

She notes that her opponent, Katie Hobbs, oversaw the election as secretary of state.

Ms. Lake notes technical issues such as printers without tuner and malfunction tabulators started occurring in Republican precincts the moment polls opened. The wait to cast a vote was up to five hours in some places. Many were not able to vote.

She says the chaos was planned and the margin more than enough to change the results.

Watch it here:

Kari Lake Describes Arizona Lawsuit
Kari Lake Describes Arizona Lawsuit

Greg And Leah Give Update To PA Real News

Greg And Leah Give Update To PA Real News — The most recent episode of Pa Real News (Nov. 29) featured authors and Delco election integrity activists Leah Hoopes and Greg Stenstrom. Hosts were Kim Kennedy and Pastor Steve Gruen. Bill Lawrence of this site was a contributor.

Leah notes that updates of their activity can be found at Patriot.Online. Join today.

Here is the program:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/11gqct9Aezl124h7tJZc6LXBFju0MudZq/view?usp=drive_web

Greg And Leah Give Update To PA Real News
Greg And Leah Give Update To PA Real News

Dems Cook Elections With Phantom Voters

Dems Cook Elections With Phantom Voters — Jay Valentine writing in The Federalist notes how while Republican leaders are well aware of the voter registry, they are completely clueless regarding the records concerning the ballot, phantom and address inventories.

“NGOs, leftist entities like homeless shelters, churches, and other groups sponsor registration drives whose registrants are frequently people of no known address who will depart the area shortly after their registration is complete,” Valentine writes.

Valentine says his group ran the voter registration rolls against church addresses in a dozen states and found thousands of people registered at a church in which it was clear there was no place to sleep.

He says the goal of the leftists is to create an inventory of identities who never vote. 

“It’s important that they never vote — or if they do, their manager fills in the ballot,” he said.  “If one of our vagrants shows up at a polling place to cast a vote and is told “…sorry pal, you already voted!” it invites scrutiny.”

He notes the Ds and Rs see the same names on the voter list, but Ds know which ones are phantoms, i.e. people long gone from that address yet accumulating a ballot every election.

In close elections, the leftists vote them. 

And that is why the left always seems to win close elections.

Valentine offers a pretty good fix though.

Read the whole article here.

Hat tip Tom C

Dems Cook Elections With Phantom Voters
Dems Cook Elections With Phantom Voters

Supreme Court Dockets Delco Vote Fraud Case

Supreme Court Dockets Delco Vote Fraud Case — The United States Supreme Court has docketed the case of Greg Stenstrom and Leah Hoopes regarding vote fraud in Delaware County, Pa. from the 2020 election.

The Supreme Court docket is the list of cases that a particular session of the court has agreed to consider.

It should be noted that most docketed cases are denied before the plaintiffs can appear before the justices.

Greg and Leah’s case, 22-503, is appealing a decision by Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court and was filed Nov. 22.

They are representing themselves.

Greg and Leah note that the original case filed in Delaware County Common Pleas Court included Dasha Pruett the Republican candidate for Pennsylvania’s 5th Congressional District that year, and the Delco Republican Executive Committee.

Mrs. Pruett left the case when Common Pleas Court dismissed it on Jan. 13, 2021 and sanctioned Greg and Leah. This included fining them $50,000 and trying to get their lawyer, Deborah Silver, disbarred.

Supreme Court Dockets Delco Vote Fraud Case
Leah Hoopes, Emerald Robinson and Greg Stenstrom

The Delco GOP was excised from the case by the Commonwealth Court for not responding to any filing after the initial complaint.

Regarding the sanctions — which can be fairly called lawfare — noted attorney Bruce Castor successfully defended Greg, Leah and Ms. Silver in Commonwealth Court, which dismissed the fines and sanctions.

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).

Greg and Leah were interviewed by Emerald Robinson, yesterday, Dec. 6 regarding this. Check it out here.

Supreme Court Dockets Delco Vote Fraud Case

Delco Election Concerns Aired In 9-Hour Hearing Before Judge Dozor

Delco Election Concerns Aired In 9-Hour Hearing Before Judge DozorUpdate: Judge Dozor has ruled that certification can proceed. Delaware County Common Pleas Court Judge Barry Dozor presided over a remarkable nine-hour hearing, yesterday, Nov. 21, concerning the request by Leah Hoopes, Gregory Stenstrom and Nicole Missino that certification of the Pennsylvania county’s certification of votes from the Nov. 8 election be postponed until Nov. 28 so a hearing could be held at which evidence could be presented regarding election irregularities.

Well, the hearing was basically held but limited to specific allegations made in the plaintiffs filing, namely that 2,778 records of requests for mail-in ballots were deleted by the county; at least 194 voter registration records of individuals who voted were deleted; a partisan third-party was allowed to control and tabulate mail-in ballots; and the chain of custody was adulterated by detouring the election-night journey of the county’s physical ballots and v-drives for six hours into a closed building, where poll watchers were prohibited from entering, before continuing the delivery to the centralized counting center at the Wharf Building in Chester.

These claims were generally, and reasonably, explained by the County during the course of the day but other troubling points were brought up.

Delco Election Concerns Aired In 9-Hour Hearing Before Judge Dozor
Judge Barry Dozor, the patience of a saint

Judge Dozor, who deserves great praise, is expected to rule today.

Mrs. Hoopes and Stenstrom were certified poll watchers while Mrs. Missino was the Republican candidate for the 165th District in the State House.

They represented themselves. Attorneys are notably reluctant to take vote fraud cases in Delco for fear of repercussions. Deborah Silver, a previous attorney for Mrs. Hoopes and Stenstrom, faced an attempt to disbar her which reportedly cost her $20,000 to beat.

The plaintiffs lack of experience led them to make mistakes. They were unable to call expert witnesses including data expert Robert Martini, who was unable to present a report which we are including at the end of this article. Martini, as a fact witness, testified, however, that the machine tape in the 1st Precinct of Marple’s 7th Ward was missing a hashcode.

This is a legitimate concern. If it happened there it likely happened elsewhere and reveals a security issue.

Mrs. Missino was unable to get into the record the voters who told her that their votes were never tallied.

Joan Weber, an entrepreneur who had been director of finance for Conde Nast, was unable to testify regarding the strange shrinkage in the tally for mail-in ballot requests she recorded from the state’s OpenDataPa website.

Julie Yu, whose report of election day ballots being taken unexpectedly from the Springfield Library dropbox to the county-owned “Flagship Building” at 2 W Baltimore Pike, in Media, might have made the most significant claim. The ballots had been expected to go to the counting center at the Wharf in Chester. The change caused suspicion regarding the the chain of custody.

Delco Election Concerns Aired In 9-Hour Hearing Before Judge Dozor
Rally at the courthouse before the hearing

James Allen, the county director of election operations, testified the change was due to Act 88 that was passed by the state legislature in July.

To get funding provided by the act, the county had to agree to, among other things, that it post on its publicly accessible Internet website an unofficial number of absentee ballots and mail-in ballots received for the election by 12:01 a.m.

This required election night procedures for the collection of dropbox ballots to be changed for logistical reasons, Allen said.

In previous elections — and in the weeks before election night — dropbox ballots were and are collected by county employees using vans and taken directly to the counting center. The new constraints led to the election night dropboxes being collected by two-person teams using private cars, with at least one member of the team being a county employee, according to Allen. Rather than being taken directly to Chester these ballots were first gathered at the Flagship Building.

Mrs. Hoopes, in her cross-examination, got Allen to admit that the change was never made public and that the county guidelines actually called for the ballots to go to Rose Tree Park on election night.

Things like this are what causes suspicions to arise.

Laureen Hagan, chief clerk of the Bureau of Elections, testified that the county never deletes requests for mail-in ballots. It remained unanswered as to why 2,778 such requests appear to have been deleted.

Stenstrom testified that he saw a cart of between 20,000 and 30,000 pre-canvassed ballots without pedigree at the Wharf on Election Night and that at 8:05 p.m., about 25,000 votes almost immediately appeared with lopsided margin for Democrats.

The logic and accuracy testing for the scanning machines was a big issue throughout the day with attorneys Nick Centrella, representing the Election Board, and William Martin, representing the County, desperately trying to keep it out.

Mrs. Hoopes got it on record that Delco was not following state protocols in its testing. She also got it on record that the county followed directives from their information technology guy rather than what was prescribed by the Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Gavin Lawn, an observer at the counting center, testified he was inspired to become involved after receiving 13 mail-in ballots at his home in 2020. He said during his scheduled shift on Nov. 9, the door to the counting room was locked despite their being people inside.

Stenstrom said that he’d like the Judge to let him compare the ballot images from the scanner with the Department of State database to ease any concerns about the election being rigged. He said this could be done quickly and easily using off-the-shelf software without affecting the integrity of the machine.

There is no reason not to let citizens be allowed this access.

County solicitor Martin implied the plaintiffs and their supporters were merely sore losers motivated entirely by a dislike for mail-in ballots rather than legitimate concerns about the election.

About 40 people packed Courtroom 7 with another reported 80 in an overflow courtroom. About 20 stayed the whole nine hours.

Again kudos to Judge Dozor for the effort to address concerns.

And kudos to Stenstrom, Mrs. Hoopes, and Mrs. Missino and their supporters who — unlike Martin — were not paid for the nine hours.

And there remains, Mr. Martin, no reason — or state mandate — for the county to have unsupervised dropboxes accessible 24/7. Poorly monitored screens of images from solar-powered cameras do not cut it for supervision and the only reasons not restrict the boxes to government buildings during business hours are reasons that raise suspicions.

Here is the report Robert Martini prepared regarding voting issues in Delaware County:

Delco Election Concerns Aired In 9-Hour Hearing Before Judge Dozor
%d bloggers like this: