Q: HOW DO YOU CERTIFY ELECTIONS THAT ARE UNLAWFULLY ADMINISTERED?
Illegally...Through a vast conspiracy of corrupt practices, fraud, official misconduct, breach of public trust and subversive activities.
What would you say if I showed you that at least 500K vote-by-mail ballots that should have been returned to Florida Supervisor of Elections Offices as undeliverable and non-forwardable (according to official USPS data), were (according to Florida State Official Data), instead showed as returned, cast, and counted in the August 20th Florida Primary Election?
To most anyone who is intellectually honest, and reasonably prudent, it would likely constitute significant evidence of widespread vote-by-mail ballot fraud. This scenario is grounds for overturning the election outcome, particularly if it can be shown that these ballots were fraudulent or improperly handled by election administrators.
In Florida, courts have established that strict compliance with election laws is crucial, especially in the context of absentee or vote-by-mail ballots, which are more vulnerable to fraud and irregularities.
For example, the Florida Supreme Court in Boardman v. Esteva emphasized the importance of ensuring the integrity of absentee ballots and ruled that even minor irregularities could warrant disqualification of ballots if they affect the overall fairness of the election.
For such a large number of ballots (468K+), the impact on the election results could be substantial. If the number of fraudulent ballots exceeds the margin of victory in the election, this could provide sufficient grounds for a court to invalidate the election results due to fraud or a failure to adhere to strict compliance with election laws.
The court would likely consider:
The Scale of the Irregularities: The large number of potentially fraudulent ballots (468+) could suggest systemic issues or deliberate misconduct.
The Impact on the Election Outcome: If the number of suspect ballots exceeds the margin of victory, it could be argued that the fraud altered the election results.
Evidence of Intent or Gross Negligence: Evidence that election administrators were either grossly negligent or willfully ignored legal requirements could strengthen the case for overturning the election.
The presence of such a significant number of potentially fraudulent ballots statewide would be a strong basis for challenging the election results, particularly under the strict compliance standard established by Florida law.
Here is a list of significant Florida Supreme Court cases that have dealt with election issues, particularly focusing on strict compliance with election law, the will of the voter, and the disqualification of ballots:
Boardman v. Esteva, 323 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 1976) - This is a landmark case where the Florida Supreme Court articulated a standard for determining the validity of absentee ballots. The Court considered the presence or absence of fraud, whether there was substantial compliance with essential requirements, and whether the irregularities affected the sanctity of the ballot and the integrity of the election.
Beckstrom v. Volusia County Canvassing Board, 707 So. 2d 720 (Fla. 1998) - In this case, the Court applied the principles from Boardman and found that certain procedural issues, such as absentee ballots lacking voter signatures, compromised the integrity of the election.
Wadhams v. Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County, 567 So. 2d 414 (Fla. 1990) - This case involved the invalidation of county charter amendments adopted by referendum because the ballots did not include a required explanatory statement of the chief purpose, illustrating strict compliance with statutory requirements.
Spradley v. Bailey, 292 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) - The Court held that absentee ballots returned by campaign workers instead of by the electors themselves were invalid, emphasizing the necessity of strict compliance with statutory requirements for absentee voting.
In Re: The Matter of the Protest of Election Returns and Absentee Ballots in the November 4, 1997 Election for the City of Miami, 707 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) - This case involved extensive absentee ballot fraud, leading the Court to invalidate absentee ballots and uphold the precinct vote as the legitimate result.
McLean v. Bellamy, 437 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) - The court ruled on the issue of substantial compliance versus strict compliance, concluding that substantial compliance could suffice, but only in the absence of fraud or gross negligence.
State ex rel. Whitley v. Rhinehart, 192 So. 818 (Fla. 1939) - This older case reinforced the principle that absentee voting laws, being in derogation of common law, must be strictly construed. This case is often cited to support the argument for strict compliance in absentee voting.
These cases are central to understanding how Florida courts approach issues of strict compliance with election laws, the sanctity of the ballot, and the will of the voter.
Did You Know That Fraud via Vote-By-Mail Ballot is a serious election fraud method that Julie Marcus and her co-conspirators used to rig the August 20, 2024 Primary Election, the Nov 2022 General Election, the August 2022 Primary Election and the Nov 2020 General Election…?
Just in Pinellas County, we have identified 219,695, illegally requested vote by mail ballots. Each request made by someone other than the voter is a separate felony charge.
These vote by mail ballots were all requested on a Sunday, June 23, 2024.
Julie Marcus and her co-conspirators Dustin Chase and Matt Smith and others have been working overtime to conceal and delay the communication of information related to the commission of these 219,695 felonies.
On August 20th I filed for an emergency injunction against Julie Marcus, Dustin Chase, Matt Smith and their co-conspirators.
The first hearing was on Thursday. They were represented by Pinellas County Attorneys. Having been involved with a previous lawsuit with these attorneys in a lawsuit against Marcus it was no surprise when they misrepresented the facts and the law before the court.
I set the records straight yesterday however…
Then prompt filed a motion for sanctions against the county attorney…
The Pinellas County Election Fraud Mafia is not just comprised of republicans, there are a fair share of democrats as well…
John Liccione, ran for U.S. Congress. He too agreed with the impossibility of 219,695 vote by mail ballots all being ordered on a Sunday. He filed his fraud complaint against Julie Marcus.
We have long suspected that the establishment republicans and establishment democrats rig the primary elections for their preferred candidates. Then whomever out steals the other in the general election is the winner…
We know for a fact that Julie Marcus and the Pinellas County Canvassing Board rushed their certification of the election, and their co-conspirators have aided in delaying public records unlawfully, in an effort to benefit themselves.
This is especially egregious as they were put on notice, legally, and the facts that the election night reporting for the entire state was breached and was brought down for every single county that VR Systems Inc has a contract with…
How bad is it?
I covered how bad VR Systems was previously… Their CEO Mindy Perkins has since refused to respond to no less than FOUR public records requests.
VR Systems had a vested interest in Julie Marcus and all the other incumbent SOEs winning the August 20th primary election. They know that if the slate of candidates running against the incumbent Supervisor of Elections won it would be the end of their fraudulent enterprise…
So did the Florida Election Fraud Mafia… So they pulled out all the stops…
Is this a clear indication of widespread election fraud via vote-by-mail ballot?
If approximately 500K out of the 1M vote by mail ballots that were sent out to mailing addresses that were undeliverable as addressed or non-forwardable, ended up being shown in official Florida State Election Records all across Florida, as being returned cast and counted…
Who do you think is responsible for this mess?
How do you feel about an election that was largely decided by:
a.) illegally requested vote by mail ballots
b.)Illegally returned, cast, then counted vote-by-mail ballots - (with no chain of custody)
c.) administered on voting machines connected to the internet
d.) then on election night as the voting machines transmitted election results the entire election night reporting system crashed in every single county VR Systems Inc was servicing…
Is this something that needs to be fully investigated prior to being certified?
Would you be even more concerned if election officials all across Florida were doing everything in their power to stop the certified audit logs from actually being inspected?
How about if the election officials who have been illegally administering elections for years tried to pass laws to hide the election data?
Why the rush to certify?
To hide the fraud and conceal the evidence…
https://x.com/JeffBuongiorno/status/1829979199832277329
The proper term for such an action is "timestamp manipulation" or "system clock tampering." This refers to the deliberate alteration of the system date and time settings on a computer to create false timestamps on files, reports, or other digital records, often with the intent to deceive or commit fraud. This can be a form of "digital forgery" if used to misrepresent the timing of events or the authenticity of documents.
Remember when I caught the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections altering election data to hide the fraud?
Then Miami-Dade…
https://miamiindependent.com/miami-dade-the-florida-election-fraud-cover-up/
Then Hillsborough County Supervisor of Election Craig Latimer claimed that they were hacked…
It’s apparent that the so called “Gold standard of Florida” is quite tarnished. It’s fools gold! Keep up the good investigative work, Christos.
I'm glad you are reporting the election fraud in detail. This article will help the public learn how totally corrupt are our election system and administrators. It's Florida Deep State all the way. If we can't get to paper ballots hand counted, then election results cannot be trusted.