Please follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter
I saw this article yesterday about mail-in voting, and it's worth sharing an excerpt from My Journal Courier:
“Trump has remained consistent; even before the 2020 election, he warned: '“'There is a lot of dishonesty going on with mail-in voting.' Trump doesn’t need to hedge about voting rules abroad. Poland was the one other country that considered conducting its 2020 presidential election by mail during the pandemic, but even it abandoned the attempt. Countries don’t use the kind of mass mail-in voting now used in eight states – where states automatically send ballots to all registered voters, who then mail them back. That system differs from absentee ballots, which require a request and traditionally demanded a reason, such as being out of town on Election Day."
I read this after receiving a CEIR email about mail-in voting, with the usual suspects and their usual disinformation.
“As CEIR Executive Director David Becker told CBS News, getting rid of mail-in voting ‘would make our elections much less secure.’ Spreading voting over several days with options like mail-in voting allows additional time to recover from hiccups beyond election officials’ control, like power outages or disinformation. Flexible voting options limit inconvenience and help prevent the disenfranchisement of voters on Election Day.”
They claim that early and mail-in voting is required for secure elections…so that officials can recover from “disinformation” during the election period.
Wait, what?
Unexpected admission…
The single security control for vote by mail is signature verification — and that single control was how they sold it to the people: Don’t worry, we’ll know the ballot actually comes from the eligible voter because we’ll match the signature.
But the same people that push mail-in voting as a sacred right are now arguing in courts that signature verification is a poll tax, suppressive, and must be eliminated. If they accomplish that particular goal, then mail-in ballots would have ZERO security controls.
But security is secondary to access for the election cabal. Read that again. Every time the system’s champions make an assertion about election security, they support their argument with talking points about election access. Every single time.
It’s super sinister but easy to deconstruct — and once you notice it, you notice it every time. See if you can spot it in Jena's recent (Aug 20) appearance on MSNBC:
Watch the full interview by clicking the image above. It's hilarious.
Please follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter
They are all about access to ballots BEFORE voting, but AFTER voting, they want access completely restricted!
People need to understand: if I own something valuable, it is a good thing for me to lock it up away from everybody else. But if you and I own something valuable together, you'd better believe I DO NOT want you locking it up securely away from me!
When we all own something valuable (access to self-governance) together, the most secure situation is when we can all watch the valuables anytime.