Flying Monkeys
By Nobody
11 Mar 2011 1:42 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
24 Jun 2020 1:12 pm
Because he is the most corrupt person to ever run the DOJ.
Seems like even former Bush DOJ officials are testifying to that fact under oath today.
24 Jun 2020 1:15 pm
It was NOT a joke you gaping asshole, but you were sure quick to jump on that Trumplican talking point lie.Termin8tor » 23 Jun 2020, 12:35 pm » wrote: ↑Oh my gosh, Trump made another joke?Misty » 20 Jun 2020, 9:34 pm » wrote: ↑ This piece of **** actually said that he told his people to slow down the testing during a **** pandemic.
Orange Man Bad!
He is ending federal support for testing sites.
See my post # 21467.
24 Jun 2020 1:24 pm
24 Jun 2020 1:36 pm
Misty » 24 Jun 2020, 12:30 pm » wrote: ↑ Look at you being so proud of the corruption in this administration.
Wow, you're really working overtime to keep this a Fake Reality Thread.
Censoring all the truth.
24 Jun 2020 1:43 pm
Aunt Jemima was a fictional character.
The brand got its name from the minstrel song “Old Aunt Jemima,” which was composed by African American comedian and performer Billy Kersands.
Chris Rutt, who created the pancake flour in 1889, was inspired by the song after hearing it during a minstrel performance and decided to give the name to his pancake flour.
At the time, Aunt Jemima was seen as a “mammy” character, a racial stereotype of a slave happy to please her white masters.
Rutt then sold his company to a larger milling company, R.T. Davis Milling Co., after failing to sell the flour.
The milling company brought its mix to the 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago and hired Nancy Green, a former slave who was working as a cook for a judge, to act as Aunt Jemima and sell the pancake flour.
https://local12.com/news/around-the-web ... very-flour
24 Jun 2020 1:45 pm
Speaking of fake reality, tell me again how Trump was only joking about slowing down the testing for COVID-19.Termin8tor » 24 Jun 2020, 1:36 pm » wrote: ↑Wow, you're really working overtime to keep this a Fake Reality Thread.Misty » 24 Jun 2020, 12:30 pm » wrote: ↑ Look at you being so proud of the corruption in this administration.
Censoring all the truth.
Edit: Hello?!?!?!
Anybody home?
I hear crickets.
24 Jun 2020 3:32 pm
I wonder if this guy was at Trump's 'Students For Trump' super spreader event in Arizona yesterday?
Another fraud following in the footsteps of his Dear Leader.Students for Trump co-founder pleads guilty to $46,000 fraud scheme.
The co-founder of Students for Trump pleaded guilty Tuesday to scamming consumers and businesses out of $46,000 by posing as a lawyer online and dispensing legal advice, federal prosecutors said.
John Lambert, 23, went by "Eric Pope" and pretended to be a New York-based attorney at a law firm called "Pope and Dunn," the Justice Department said.
He pleaded guilty in a New York federal court to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud.
Authorities said he created a fake website and claimed to have 15 years' experience in corporate and patent law.
They also allege Lambert pretended to be a graduate of New York University's law school.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/students-for ... aud-scheme
24 Jun 2020 3:53 pm
24 Jun 2020 6:01 pm
Not so fast Precious.Termin8tor » 24 Jun 2020, 11:56 am » wrote: ↑Your predictions are never right!" lies little Miss Marxist.
JUDGE SULLIVAN ORDERED TO DISMISS FLYNN CASE
In a 2-1 opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has granted Michael Flynn’s petition for a writ of mandamus ordering Judge Emmet Sullivan to dismiss the case against General Flynn. I commented on the oral argument before the court here on June 12. I have embedded the panel opinion below along with the dissent.
Judge Rao’s opinion for the panel responds in detail to Judge Wilkins’s dissent. I think Judge Rao seeks to dissuade the D.C. Circuit from finding a way to rehear the case en banc under Rule 35 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
The Flynn case constitutes a sidebar to the biggest political scandal in American history by far. One can only hope that this is, as it should be, the end of the road for this utterly disgraceful case.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/ ... n-case.php
Judge delays all proceedings in Flynn case after appeals court sides with DOJ.
A federal judge halted all proceedings in the case against retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, who was appointed by former President Bill Clinton, issued a minute order Wednesday evening after an appeals court panel sided with the Justice Department in its effort to force the judge to allow it to drop its case against President Trump's first national security adviser.
"In light of the Opinion and Order issued by the Court of Appeals on Mr. Flynn's petition for writ of mandamus, the deadlines and hearing date set forth in the Minute Order of May 19, 2020 are HEREBY STAYED," the order by Sullivan said.
After the 2-1 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Sullivan could request a rehearing “en banc” before the full appeals court.
It is also possible that one of the other judges on the appeals court could request such a hearing “sua sponte” even if Sullivan does not request it himself.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... s-with-doj
24 Jun 2020 6:08 pm
Corrupt Party R
Corrupt Party D
lol....you loons are high-larious.
My team!!!
No! My team!!!
Durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp
Corrupt Party D
lol....you loons are high-larious.
My team!!!
No! My team!!!
Durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrp
25 Jun 2020 8:41 am
Termin8tor » 24 Jun 2020, 1:36 pm » wrote: ↑ Wow, you're really working overtime to keep this a Fake Reality Thread.
Censoring all the truth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI_U6znpVeI
25 Jun 2020 1:48 pm
25 Jun 2020 1:58 pm
This is why people are in the streets.
Cops like this need to be rooted out.
Cops like this need to be rooted out.
Three North Carolina police officers fired for racist comments calling for 'slaughtering' Black people.
WILMINGTON, N.C. – Three Wilmington Police Department officers have been fired after being caught on a police vehicle camera making racist comments about local Black citizens, fellow officers and the department’s newly appointed police chief.
The now-former officers – Michael Kevin Piner, Jesse E. Moore II and James B. Gilmore – were identified Wednesday afternoon at a news conference at Wilmington police headquarters.
Moore and Gilmore have worked for the department since 1997, and Piner was hired in 1998.
Police Chief Donny Williams, who was promoted to the department’s top position just a day earlier, said Wednesday that the video of the men’s conversations included “disrespectful language, hate-filled speech and referring to Black people as the n-word.”
“This is the most exceptional and difficult case I have encountered in my career,” said the 29-year Wilmington police veteran.
“We must establish new reforms for policing here at home and throughout this country.”
As part of the announcement, the department and the city council publicly released a slew of documents related to the terminations, including the former officers’ termination letters, a summary of the internal investigation and their complete work histories in the department.
“Why are we releasing this information in this way?” Williams said.
“It is because of the times we are in, and it is the right thing to do.
25 Jun 2020 4:02 pm
For the Trump followers who don't believe that their Dear Leader spends his days watching TV and Tweeting.
This goes on all day, every day.
This goes on all day, every day.
25 Jun 2020 4:25 pm
Wonder who typed all that for Old Alzy
25 Jun 2020 7:40 pm
https://mobile.twitter.com/RepKatiePort ... 3824984064
He knows exactly why he's getting that job.
Could not be clearer.
He's being put in charge of SDNY to protect Donald Trump and his brood from criminal investigations, period.
He knows exactly why he's getting that job.
Could not be clearer.
He's being put in charge of SDNY to protect Donald Trump and his brood from criminal investigations, period.
25 Jun 2020 7:45 pm
Old Alzy?
ROFL
Biden speaks in full sentences, and can drink a glass of water with one hand.
Trump spews a bunch of word salad and drinks like a toddler, which makes sense because he also wears diapers.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iks184i9FOI
25 Jun 2020 8:34 pm
Inside Barr’s Effort to Undermine Prosecutors in N.Y.
The firing of the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan was foreshadowed by a disagreement over a case linked to President Trump.
Shortly after he became attorney general last year, William P. Barr set out to challenge a signature criminal case that touched President Trump’s inner circle directly, and even the president’s own actions: the prosecution of Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s longtime fixer.
The debate between Mr. Barr and the federal prosecutors who brought the case against Mr. Cohen was one of the first signs of a tense relationship that culminated last weekend in the abrupt ouster of Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States attorney in Manhattan.
It also foreshadowed Mr. Barr’s intervention in the prosecutions of other associates of Mr. Trump.
By the time Mr. Barr was sworn into office in February, Mr. Cohen, who had paid hush money to an adult film star who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump, had already pleaded guilty and was set to begin a three-year prison sentence, all of which embarrassed and angered the president.
But Mr. Barr spent weeks in the spring of 2019 questioning the prosecutors over their decision to charge Mr. Cohen with violating campaign finance laws, according to people briefed on the matter.
At one point during the discussions, Mr. Barr instructed Justice Department officials in Washington to draft a memo outlining legal arguments that could have raised questions about Mr. Cohen’s conviction and undercut similar prosecutions in the future, according to the people briefed on the matter.
The prosecutors in New York resisted the effort, the people said, and a Justice Department official said Mr. Barr did not instruct them to withdraw the case.
The department official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter, noted that Mr. Cohen was convicted and sentenced in December 2018, before Mr. Barr was sworn in, so there was little he could do to change the outcome of the case.
Still, Mr. Barr’s unexpected involvement in such a politically sensitive case suggested that he planned to exert influence over prosecutors in the United States attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, long known for operating independently of Washington.
Mr. Barr and other officials have told aides and other United States attorneys that the Southern District needs to be reined in.
Ultimately, Mr. Berman was ousted in a dizzying series of events, heightening criticism that Mr. Trump and Mr. Barr were purging the government of people perceived as disloyal to the White House.
In an interview with NPR on Thursday, Mr. Barr said Mr. Berman was “living on borrowed time from the beginning” because the president had not appointed him.
And when Jay Clayton, the Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, indicated an interest in running the Manhattan office, Mr. Barr said, it created “an opportunity to put in a very strong person as a presidential appointment to that office.”
“I certainly was aware that given the current environment, anytime you make a personnel move, conspiracy theorists will suggest that there’s some ulterior motive involved,” Mr. Barr said.
More than any other federal prosecutor’s office, the Manhattan office had pursued investigations that angered Mr. Trump.
During the case against Mr. Cohen, for instance, prosecutors had indicated that Mr. Trump directed the hush money payments, although the office was not seeking charges against the president.In addition to prosecuting Mr. Cohen, the president’s former personal lawyer, the office has also been investigating his current one, Rudolph W. Giuliani,y over his actions in Ukraine.
Other points of contention included how to proceed against a state-owned Turkish bank that was eventually indicted in an alleged scheme to avoid U.S. sanctions on Iran, and the Justice Department’s decision to assign the United States attorney in Brooklyn to oversee all investigations into matters related to Ukraine. Mr. Berman’s office successfully fended off that oversight.
The conflict erupted publicly last Friday, when Mr. Barr announced that Mr. Berman was stepping down and would be replaced temporarily by an ally of the administration.
Mr. Berman then issued his own statement saying he had no intention of resigning.
By Saturday afternoon, amid the unusual standoff, Mr. Barr informed Mr. Berman that Mr. Trump had fired him and that he would be replaced temporarily with Mr. Berman’s own deputy.
Mr. Barr’s role in the Cohen case also presaged his involvement in two other high-profile prosecutions of Trump associates: Michael T. Flynn, the president’s former national security adviser, and Roger J. Stone Jr., a political operative close to Mr. Trump who was convicted of lying to Congress and other crimes.
Last month, Mr. Barr ordered that prosecutors in Washington drop the case against Mr. Flynn, who had twice pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. about phone calls with the Russian ambassador.
Mr. Barr also overruled a sentencing recommendation from career prosecutors in Washington for Mr. Stone, which he viewed as excessive, prompting the office to backtrack.
Even before he became the attorney general, Mr. Barr had criticized the special counsel’s inquiry into whether Mr. Trump had obstructed justice, submitting an unsolicited memo to the Justice Department attacking what he called a “novel and legally insupportable reading of the law.”
Mr. Berman had been recused from the case against Mr. Cohen for undisclosed reasons, leaving it in the hands of other senior prosecutors in his office.
In August 2018, facing the threat of an indictment, Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to personal financial crimes and campaign finance violations, one of which stemmed from a $130,000 payment to the adult film star, Stormy Daniels.
In pleading guilty, Mr. Cohen pointed the finger at the president, saying he had acted at Mr. Trump’s direction.
The New York Times reported previously that Mr. Barr had questioned the legal theory of the campaign finance charges against Mr. Cohen, but it was not known that the attorney general went so far as to ask for the draft memo or had raised his concerns more than once.
The memo, written by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, addressed the Southern District’s somewhat novel use of campaign finance laws to charge Mr. Cohen.
Before Mr. Cohen’s guilty plea, the only person known to face criminal charges for payments meant to keep negative information buried during a political campaign was the former senator and Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, who was not convicted.
Mr. Barr argued, among other things, that such cases might be better suited to civil resolutions by the Federal Election Commission than to criminal prosecutions, according to people with knowledge of the discussions.
Mr. Cohen, who reported to prison in May 2019, was recently released on furlough and is currently serving his sentence at his Manhattan home, after citing health concerns related to the coronavirus.
There is no indication that the Justice Department planned to issue a formal opinion on the campaign finances charges.
Such a step, if taken, might have raised questions about the validity of the case against Mr. Cohen and affected any future effort to investigate Mr. Trump or others in his circle for similar conduct.
Although the Southern District referred to the president as “Individual-1” in court papers and said he directed Mr. Cohen to pay the hush money, longstanding Justice Department policy prevents federal prosecutors from pursuing criminal charges against a sitting president.
In July 2019, the Southern District disclosed in court papers that it had “effectively concluded” the hush money inquiry and had ended an investigation into whether “certain individuals” lied to investigators or tried to obstruct the inquiry.
At least one of those individuals included a senior executive at Mr. Trump’s company, according to people with knowledge of that investigation.
A spokesman for the Southern District declined to comment on Mr. Barr’s involvement in the case involving Mr. Cohen, as did a spokeswoman for the Justice Department.
Mr. Barr’s maneuvering in the Cohen case was not his only attempt to insert himself in Southern District cases.
After Mr. Barr was sworn in, one of his first actions was to seek briefings on politically sensitive investigations in the office and elsewhere, people briefed on the discussions said.
One matter that Mr. Berman’s office described to Mr. Barr early on was the growing investigation into 9Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two Soviet-born businessmen who were helping Mr. Giuliani unearth potentially damaging information in Ukraine about Mr. Trump’s political rivals.
Mr. Berman eventually announced charges against the two men, in October 2019, and the Southern District has continued to investigate whether some of Mr. Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine violated lobbying laws.
Mr. Giuliani has not been accused of wrongdoing and he has said he acted appropriately on behalf of the president.
For months, the Southern District prosecutors have been consulting officials in Washington about major investigative steps in the inquiry, according to two people briefed on those discussions.
The arrival of the coronavirus in New York forced Southern District prosecutors to cancel interviews with witnesses in the investigation into Mr. Giuliani and his former associates, people briefed on the matter said.
The pandemic also forced a delay in the trial of Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman from this October until next February, putting off what could have been an embarrassing spectacle for the president until after the election.
The firing of the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan was foreshadowed by a disagreement over a case linked to President Trump.
Shortly after he became attorney general last year, William P. Barr set out to challenge a signature criminal case that touched President Trump’s inner circle directly, and even the president’s own actions: the prosecution of Michael D. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s longtime fixer.
The debate between Mr. Barr and the federal prosecutors who brought the case against Mr. Cohen was one of the first signs of a tense relationship that culminated last weekend in the abrupt ouster of Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States attorney in Manhattan.
It also foreshadowed Mr. Barr’s intervention in the prosecutions of other associates of Mr. Trump.
By the time Mr. Barr was sworn into office in February, Mr. Cohen, who had paid hush money to an adult film star who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump, had already pleaded guilty and was set to begin a three-year prison sentence, all of which embarrassed and angered the president.
But Mr. Barr spent weeks in the spring of 2019 questioning the prosecutors over their decision to charge Mr. Cohen with violating campaign finance laws, according to people briefed on the matter.
At one point during the discussions, Mr. Barr instructed Justice Department officials in Washington to draft a memo outlining legal arguments that could have raised questions about Mr. Cohen’s conviction and undercut similar prosecutions in the future, according to the people briefed on the matter.
The prosecutors in New York resisted the effort, the people said, and a Justice Department official said Mr. Barr did not instruct them to withdraw the case.
The department official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter, noted that Mr. Cohen was convicted and sentenced in December 2018, before Mr. Barr was sworn in, so there was little he could do to change the outcome of the case.
Still, Mr. Barr’s unexpected involvement in such a politically sensitive case suggested that he planned to exert influence over prosecutors in the United States attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, long known for operating independently of Washington.
Mr. Barr and other officials have told aides and other United States attorneys that the Southern District needs to be reined in.
Ultimately, Mr. Berman was ousted in a dizzying series of events, heightening criticism that Mr. Trump and Mr. Barr were purging the government of people perceived as disloyal to the White House.
In an interview with NPR on Thursday, Mr. Barr said Mr. Berman was “living on borrowed time from the beginning” because the president had not appointed him.
And when Jay Clayton, the Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, indicated an interest in running the Manhattan office, Mr. Barr said, it created “an opportunity to put in a very strong person as a presidential appointment to that office.”
“I certainly was aware that given the current environment, anytime you make a personnel move, conspiracy theorists will suggest that there’s some ulterior motive involved,” Mr. Barr said.
More than any other federal prosecutor’s office, the Manhattan office had pursued investigations that angered Mr. Trump.
During the case against Mr. Cohen, for instance, prosecutors had indicated that Mr. Trump directed the hush money payments, although the office was not seeking charges against the president.In addition to prosecuting Mr. Cohen, the president’s former personal lawyer, the office has also been investigating his current one, Rudolph W. Giuliani,y over his actions in Ukraine.
Other points of contention included how to proceed against a state-owned Turkish bank that was eventually indicted in an alleged scheme to avoid U.S. sanctions on Iran, and the Justice Department’s decision to assign the United States attorney in Brooklyn to oversee all investigations into matters related to Ukraine. Mr. Berman’s office successfully fended off that oversight.
The conflict erupted publicly last Friday, when Mr. Barr announced that Mr. Berman was stepping down and would be replaced temporarily by an ally of the administration.
Mr. Berman then issued his own statement saying he had no intention of resigning.
By Saturday afternoon, amid the unusual standoff, Mr. Barr informed Mr. Berman that Mr. Trump had fired him and that he would be replaced temporarily with Mr. Berman’s own deputy.
Mr. Barr’s role in the Cohen case also presaged his involvement in two other high-profile prosecutions of Trump associates: Michael T. Flynn, the president’s former national security adviser, and Roger J. Stone Jr., a political operative close to Mr. Trump who was convicted of lying to Congress and other crimes.
Last month, Mr. Barr ordered that prosecutors in Washington drop the case against Mr. Flynn, who had twice pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. about phone calls with the Russian ambassador.
Mr. Barr also overruled a sentencing recommendation from career prosecutors in Washington for Mr. Stone, which he viewed as excessive, prompting the office to backtrack.
Even before he became the attorney general, Mr. Barr had criticized the special counsel’s inquiry into whether Mr. Trump had obstructed justice, submitting an unsolicited memo to the Justice Department attacking what he called a “novel and legally insupportable reading of the law.”
Mr. Berman had been recused from the case against Mr. Cohen for undisclosed reasons, leaving it in the hands of other senior prosecutors in his office.
In August 2018, facing the threat of an indictment, Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty to personal financial crimes and campaign finance violations, one of which stemmed from a $130,000 payment to the adult film star, Stormy Daniels.
In pleading guilty, Mr. Cohen pointed the finger at the president, saying he had acted at Mr. Trump’s direction.
The New York Times reported previously that Mr. Barr had questioned the legal theory of the campaign finance charges against Mr. Cohen, but it was not known that the attorney general went so far as to ask for the draft memo or had raised his concerns more than once.
The memo, written by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, addressed the Southern District’s somewhat novel use of campaign finance laws to charge Mr. Cohen.
Before Mr. Cohen’s guilty plea, the only person known to face criminal charges for payments meant to keep negative information buried during a political campaign was the former senator and Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, who was not convicted.
Mr. Barr argued, among other things, that such cases might be better suited to civil resolutions by the Federal Election Commission than to criminal prosecutions, according to people with knowledge of the discussions.
Mr. Cohen, who reported to prison in May 2019, was recently released on furlough and is currently serving his sentence at his Manhattan home, after citing health concerns related to the coronavirus.
There is no indication that the Justice Department planned to issue a formal opinion on the campaign finances charges.
Such a step, if taken, might have raised questions about the validity of the case against Mr. Cohen and affected any future effort to investigate Mr. Trump or others in his circle for similar conduct.
Although the Southern District referred to the president as “Individual-1” in court papers and said he directed Mr. Cohen to pay the hush money, longstanding Justice Department policy prevents federal prosecutors from pursuing criminal charges against a sitting president.
In July 2019, the Southern District disclosed in court papers that it had “effectively concluded” the hush money inquiry and had ended an investigation into whether “certain individuals” lied to investigators or tried to obstruct the inquiry.
At least one of those individuals included a senior executive at Mr. Trump’s company, according to people with knowledge of that investigation.
A spokesman for the Southern District declined to comment on Mr. Barr’s involvement in the case involving Mr. Cohen, as did a spokeswoman for the Justice Department.
Mr. Barr’s maneuvering in the Cohen case was not his only attempt to insert himself in Southern District cases.
After Mr. Barr was sworn in, one of his first actions was to seek briefings on politically sensitive investigations in the office and elsewhere, people briefed on the discussions said.
One matter that Mr. Berman’s office described to Mr. Barr early on was the growing investigation into 9Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, two Soviet-born businessmen who were helping Mr. Giuliani unearth potentially damaging information in Ukraine about Mr. Trump’s political rivals.
Mr. Berman eventually announced charges against the two men, in October 2019, and the Southern District has continued to investigate whether some of Mr. Giuliani’s efforts in Ukraine violated lobbying laws.
Mr. Giuliani has not been accused of wrongdoing and he has said he acted appropriately on behalf of the president.
For months, the Southern District prosecutors have been consulting officials in Washington about major investigative steps in the inquiry, according to two people briefed on those discussions.
The arrival of the coronavirus in New York forced Southern District prosecutors to cancel interviews with witnesses in the investigation into Mr. Giuliani and his former associates, people briefed on the matter said.
The pandemic also forced a delay in the trial of Mr. Parnas and Mr. Fruman from this October until next February, putting off what could have been an embarrassing spectacle for the president until after the election.
26 Jun 2020 9:10 am
More stunningly important information little Miss Marxist will censor.
.
.
1 in 5 Ballots Rejected as Fraud Is Charged in N.J. Mail-In Election
.By Mark HemingwayJune 26, 2020
1 in 5 Ballots Rejected as Fraud Is Charged in N.J. Mail-In ElectionJoe Lamberti/Camden Courier-Post via AP
Following accusations of widespread fraud, voter intimidation, and ballot theft in the May 12 municipal elections in Paterson, N.J., state Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal (pictured) announced Thursday he is charging four men with voter fraud – including the vice president of the City Council and a candidate for that body.
With races still undecided, control of the council hangs in the balance. Paterson is New Jersey’s third largest city and the election will decide the fate of a municipal budget in excess of $300 million, in addition to hundreds of millions more in education spending and state aid.
In the City Council election, 16,747 vote-by-mail ballots were received, but only 13,557 votes were counted. More than 3,190 votes, 19% of the total ballots cast, were disqualified by the board of elections. Due to the pandemic, Paterson’s election was done through vote-by-mail. Community organizations, such as the city’s NAACP chapter, are calling for the entire election to be invalidated.
Mail-in ballots have long been acknowledged by voting experts to be more susceptible to fraud and irregularities than in-person voting. This has raised concerns from President Trump and other Republicans about the integrity of national elections in November, which are expected to include a dramatic increase in mail-in ballots. If Paterson is any guide, it ought to concern Democrats as well.
Over 800 ballots in Paterson were invalidated for appearing in mailboxes improperly bundled together – including a one mailbox where hundreds of ballots were in a single packet. The bundles were turned over to law enforcement to investigate potential criminal activity related to the collection of the ballots.
The board of elections disqualified another 2,300 ballots after concluding that the signatures on them did not match the signatures on voter records.
Reporting by NBC further uncovered citizens of Paterson who are listed as having voted, but who told the news outlet they never received a ballot and did not vote. One woman, Ramona Javier, after being shown the list of people on her block who allegedly voted, told the outlet she knew of eight family members and neighbors who were wrongly listed. “We did not receive vote-by-mail ballots and thus we did not vote,” she said. “This is corruption. This is fraud.”
There were multiple reports that large numbers of mail-in ballots were left on the lobby floors of apartment buildings and not delivered to residents’ individual mailboxes, further casting doubt on the integrity of the election.
Two of the election results in Paterson were particularly close. Initially, challenger Shahin Khalique defeated incumbent Mohammed Akhtaruzzaman by 1,729 votes to 1,721. After a second recount on June 19, that race is now tied 1,730-1,730. In that race, a video posted to Snapchat has surfaced that appears to show a man named Abu Razyen unlawfully handling a large stack of ballots he indicates are votes for Khalique. Khalique’s brother, Shelim, and Razyen have been charged by the state attorney general for crimes including fraud in casting mail-in votes, tampering, and unauthorized possession of ballots.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/artic ... 43551.html
26 Jun 2020 10:25 am
You know full well you are embarrassed by Biden..he is like your 8th choice.Misty » 25 Jun 2020, 7:45 pm » wrote: ↑ Old Alzy?
ROFL
Biden speaks in full sentences, and can drink a glass of water with one hand.
Trump spews a bunch of word salad and drinks like a toddler, which makes sense because he also wears diapers.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iks184i9FOI
It hurts - I get it. Yer a great Establishment Team Player - I will give you that
Who is online
In total there are 4922 users online :: 5 registered, 14 bots, and 4903 guests
Bots: facebookexternalhit, Bolt, Kinza, oBot, CriteoBot, ADmantX, YandexBot, Mediapartners-Google, Baiduspider, DuckDuckGo, Applebot, bingbot, Googlebot, curl/7