RedState: As reported earlier today by my RedState colleague Nick Armana, a state court judge in Pennsylvania ruled earlier today that Secretary of the Commonwealth Katherine Boockvar exceeded her authority when she issued “guidance” to County Boards of Elections to extend by three days the six-day period provided in Pennsylvania election law during which a voter could “cure” a defective ballot where the issue was a failure to provide identification at the polling place.
There are numerous lawsuits that have been filed in state and federal courts in Pennsylvania. Some challenge the vote outcome, while others challenge specific aspects of the voting procedures allowed by the Secretary of the Commonwealth that are alleged to have been in violation of Pennsylvania law.
Many of the latter problems go back to the decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to extend by three days the period within which “mailed-in” ballots could be received and counted as if timely cast. The Pennsylvania election statute says ballots must be in the possession of election officials no later than 8:00 pm on election day, but the Supreme Court extended that deadline to 5:00 pm on Nov. 6. Whether the Pennsylvania Supreme Court could lawfully do such a thing is the subject of a Petition now pending before the United States Supreme Court to invalidate that extension and not allow ballots received after 8:00 pm on election day to be counted.
Today’s decision is unrelated to that question — except to the extent that Boockvar justified the three-day extension she granted on the “curing” period based on the State Supreme Court’s three-day extension to the ballot receipt deadline.
This decision today involves provisional ballots cast by voters who could not provide a necessary form of identification at the polling place. Pennsylvania law requires that a voter appearing for the first time in a new election district must provide proof of identification. The requirement does not extend to voters who have voted in the district previously. So it is likely that you have a higher number of young voters who participated in an election for the first time included in this group of provisional ballots.
I’m just worried that they’re going to give Trump a few small beer wins which don’t affect the steal, while stonewalling the investigation of the massive frauds which could flip the election result. Just like they knew exactly how many votes to phony up, they know exactly how many they can give back, and still allow the fake news to bray about “no widespread fraud”.
OTOH, they’re being forced into limited hangouts, and those usually portend complete narrative collapse. Let’s see what happens in the Georgia audit. It better turn up more than peanuts, or I may have to assume the fix is in on the fix.
Anything performed outside the election statutes in effect in PA on November 3 2020 is fucking ILLEGAL. You can’t move deadlines or conditions OUTSIDE THE LAW. IT IS ILLEGAL TO DO SO.
What is so hard to understand about this?
This is like a small spark that will turn into a conflagration that will consume all of the corrupt thieves who tried to steal this election. It’s the first dent in the tin that will prove these fraudsters are not smart enough to fight this battle in real armor. All they will have to defend their fraudulent ballots will be high priced shysters, who cannot rewrite or amend the U.S. Constitution. One thing will lead to another. Rats will be ratting out other rodents. Someone will take a tumble. Someone will take a plea deal. The walls are finally closing in.
President-Elect Rudy Giuliani explains the lawsuits in his video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzHnlLxKhSc
.
Keep in mind, there are many other lawsuits against vote fraud filed by voters, too.