April 02, 2024

First clear indication that the fix was in on election night of 2020: State Farm Arena

Fulton County, Georgia, is 70% Democrat, and like most Dem-ruled shitholes, is totally corrupt.  On election day of 2020, Democrat "election workers" were busy counting ballots at State Farm arena when someone reported a water leak in a men's restroom.

Every single Mainstream Media outlet reported that event as "a burst pipe."  That was a lie.  It was a urinal flush valve that wouldn't shut off, causing an overflow.  A total nothing.  And yet...ALL the wire services and Mainstream Media reported what they were told, which is that a "burst pipe" caused vote counting to be halted, and everyone to go home around 9:30 on election night.


 

Maintenance personnel reported the problem was fixed fairly quickly, with no damage.  The headline by Emily Shapiro at ABC "Newz" that there was a "4-hour delay in 'processing' ballots" was a lie.  There was no delay in ballot counting (or as Emily wrote, "processing," which is closer to the truth).

Instead, at around 9:30 that night the Democrats in charge of counting the ballots that would determine who won Georgia's electoral votes told "poll watchers" and the Media they were stopping counting due to the "burst pipe," and that everyone should go home.   

And on being told counting was being stopped, poll watchers and the Media dutifully obeyed and left, because they were told vote counting was stopped for the night.

Except not everyone went home, and vote counting ("tabulation") did NOT stop.  Surveillance video shows that the infamous Ruby Freeman and her daughter "Shaye" Moss [real name "Wandrea' ArShaye"] continued to feed thousands of un-creased, never-folded ballots into the "tabulators"--the machines that scan ballots and post the results to the official totals for each office.

Now: You'd think that in a defamation lawsuit by Ruby and her daughter Shaye, both women would have been ordered to give sworn depositions to explain why they stayed for hours after everyone was told counting was being stopped due to the alleged "burst pipe," and why they continued to feed ballots into the scanners.  But I can't find any record that either was ever ordered to give a sworn deposition in the case.  Yet last December, somehow they managed to win a defamation lawsuit against Rudi Giuliani that awarded the pair a $148 MILLION award, courtesy of Obozo-appointed DC judge Beryl Howell.

The case didn't even go to a DC jury:  Leftist judge Beryl Howell entered a "directed verdict" called a "default judgment" against Rudy.

Howell is as leftist as they come.  In my opinion her goal was to destroy Giuliani financially, thus firing a warning shot across the bow of anyone else to warn them not to defend Donald Trump.  And she did that perfectly.  Example:  In court filings, attorneys for Ruby and her daughter had asked for damages of $75,000.  Yet Beryl Howell awarded $148 MILLION--or perhaps a jury did, but only after a directed verdict.

For young Americans, "being deposed" means a judge orders you to answer questions by the other side under penalty of perjury, sworn to tell the truth.  And in a civil case--which this was--you CAN'T refuse to answer by claiming the Fifth Amendment!  The questioning can last for several hours, and if you're lying, a good plaintiff's attorney has a good chance of discovering that.  

So as you can imagine, corrupt people will go to any lengths to avoid being forced to sit for a deposition.

SO...try asking Google "were Ruby Freeman or her daughter ever deposed?"  You'll get 449,000 "responses" from that useless waste of electrons--not ONE of which answers the question.  You'd think if either Ruby or her daughter had been deposed, that information would have been reported somewhere.  Yet Google comes up with nothing.

I haven't been able to find the trial transcript (it probably hasn't been put online or has vanished), but what appears to have happened is that corrupt Democrat judge Howell ruled that despite surveillance video showing Freeman repeatedly scanning the same stack of pristine ballots--supposedly mailed in-- several times, neither woman did anything wrong.  

Now there may be a great explanation for what the surveillance video shows, but as far as I can tell they were never asked to explain the repeated scanning of the same stack of 500 or so never-folded, pristine mail-in ballots at a time.

Obama-appointed liberal Judge Beryl Howell may have relied on a report by corrupt Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger--the person charged with ensuring election integrity in Georgia--who said his office investigated and found no evidence of ANY questionable behavior.  But Raffensperger is a squirrel--totally goofy.  So a good question to ask is, did he order the two black women to give sworn depositions?

According to his ten-page report on "election integrity," there is no indication that he did.  Exhibits to his amateurish "report" state that the pair were "interviewed" by FBI agents and claimed to have done nothing wrong.  There is no indication that attorneys for Trump were allowed to cross-examine either woman.  

Without cross-examination, the vaunted FBI agents and state agents were like potted plants: It's as if they asked the two, "Did y'all do anything illegal?"  

Ruby and daughter: "Ohhhh nooo, we dindoo nuffin illegal!" 

"Investigators:"  "Okay, thanks for clearing that up for us!  You're sure you didn't do anything wrong?"

Ruby and daughter: "Absolutely."

"Investigators:"  "Okay, thanks again."

So the women were never asked to explain several suspicious events or acts.  For example, there's no indication in the "report" that Raffensperger's "investigators" ever asked Ruby or her daughter to explain why the surveillance video showed her scanning ballots in the tabulator, then taking the stack of scanned ballots out of the "completed" tray and immediately feeding 'em back into the "source" tray--not just once but several times.

Civilians found a social-media account captioned @rubyfreeman_georgia, in which the account owner writes that she and her daughter

    “did something to change history and we will not be silent and allow evil to control this country.” And “Thank God my baby had a plan and today we put that plan in action after those Trump supporting and Fox News thought they won and left the building.”

But later Raffensberger's people claimed to have found a person--name blacked out of the report--who admitted making a spoof or parody account posting the things the "Freeman" account said. 

So do ya think that settles the issue?  Did Ruby have an account on that same platform?  If so, did the "investigators" as her what its name was, or the dates when was it active?  Did the so-called "investigators" examine her laptop?  If so, that was never mentioned in the report.  Finally, social media doesn't permit different users to have the same account username.  Did the alleged "spoof account" claim to have the same name as Ruby Freeman's authentic account?

We don't know, because Raffensperger's "investigators" didn't ask any of those questions.  

But the real zinger here is that when investigators asked Ruby the first question about her account on that website, she declined to answer until she could consult an attorney.  Here's the language from the "report:"

Freeman was also questioned about her alleged social media posts; however, she wanted to speak with an attorney before proceeding any further on that issue.   She was asked to review some social media posts, but she declined to answer further questions until she retained an attorney.

Wait..."declined to answer"?  You normally can't do that in a civil trial, with three very limited exceptions, none of which seem to apply here.  Yet because no cross-ex was allowed--and indeed, no attorneys for the other side were even present!--Freeman was allowed to refuse to answer.  Curious.

Why did she refuse to answer?  We don't know, and the "report" carefully does NOT state the exemption she cited to decline to answer.  But of course this would only be required if this was a deposition.  Which again suggests it wasn't.  Not even close.

So IF corruptocrat [my opinion] leftist judge Beryl Howell relied on these "interviews"--with no cross and no attorneys for the other side present--to allow the conclusion that Ruby and daughter didn't commit vote fraud, the fix was clearly in to allow the judge to direct the verdict.

Now: If you're a Democrat, you couldn't care less.  You're not related to Rudy, and besides, he supported Trump, so...you're secretly delighted.  But the point is that as far as I've been able to determine, Ruby and her daughter have never been deposed about the events of that night.

Yet leftist judge Howell seems to have used Raffensperger's cursory whiff at an "investigation" to DECREE that the question of whether Ruby and Shaye had done anything wrong has been definitively answered in the negative.

Not even close.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home