***The Iowa Standard is an independent media voice. We rely on the financial support of our readers to exist. Please consider a one-time sign of support or becoming a monthly supporter at $5, $10/month - whatever you think we're worth! If you’ve ever used the phrase “Fake News” — now YOU can actually DO something about it! You can also support us on PayPal at [email protected] or Venmo at Iowa-Standard-2018 or through the mail at: PO Box 112 Sioux Center, IA 51250

Election Day was nearly two weeks ago and there still isn’t an official winner, according to Fitton. Ongoing litigation in states such as Pennsylvania, where the Trump campaign has “….[made] allegations of voter fraud, voter misconduct and maladministration that call into question the results of the Pennsylvania election,” have raised serious concerns about the decision to call the 2020 presidential election for Joe Biden. As Fitton has regularly reiterated in reference to post-election day ballot counting, “3 USC Section 1 – raises questions about not only counting ballots that arrived after ballot day but counting ballots past election day in a way that changes the results after election day.” In fact, as the law states:

“The electors of President and Vice President shall be appointed, in each State, on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November, in every fourth year succeeding every election of a President and Vice President.”

Advertisement

“I encourage you to review the filing made by the campaign, not because I support the campaign but because they make important allegations that every American should be concerned about,” Fitton continued. From the court case brought forward by the Trump campaign it would appear that “600k mail in ballots, or ballots generally, were counted in Pennsylvania without the required observation by the Trump campaign. The law requires that both sides have the right to observe the ballot counting.” Fitton argued that the claims were “very substantial,” raising the question “of some votes being more equal than others in PA.” As Fitton explained, “what was happening in PA , as the lawsuit alleges, is that in Democratic counties they were trying to see if the ballots were ‘deficient’ in some way, and if they were, they were trying to get the ballots cured by communicating with voters.” This wasn’t the case in Republican-leaning counties, Fitton stated – meaning that “more ballot harvesting was going on in Democratic counties.”

Author: Judicial Watch

Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach. Visit Judicial Watch at https://www.judicialwatch.org/

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here