Actually, their thoughts are on the mark. “Let me ask you: if there is no problem with signature matching, then why have county and state officials in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Nevada refused to let signatures be matched? It depends if it has been codified into law. Basically, there are different philosophies about examining signatures. In Wisconsin, “You don’t need to worry about if your signature is going to match and making your signature perfect,” Magney explained. In North Carolina, the executive director of the North Carolina State Board of Elections, wrote in a memo to all local county boards that a voter’s signature “shall not be compared with the voter’s signature on file because this is not required by North Carolina law. County boards shall accept the voter’s signature on the container-return envelope if it appears to be made by the voter, meaning the signature on the envelope appears to be the name of the voter and not some other person.

Why did I illustrate North Carolina? Well, in Pennsylvania, the State Supreme Court concluded that there was no clause in the state’s election code that allowed ballots to be rejected based on signature comparisons, and if the state’s lawmakers wanted one, they would have included it. €œIt is not our role under our tripartite system of governance to engage in judicial legislation and to rewrite a statute in order to supply terms which are not present therein, and we will not do so in this instance,” the court wrote. What about Georgia? Well, under state law, the identification or signature of voters is checked twice during the absentee voting process, and an accepted ballot can’t be traced back to a signed envelope once the two are separated. The process protects ballot secrecy. In Nevada, “signature verification is performed on every ballot received. If the signature is missing or if the signature on the ballot return envelope does not match the signature on file for the voter, the ballot will not be counted until the voter verifies their signature.” But the state has procedures in place to rectify the problem, apparently allowing the voter to come down and handle the situation themselves.

A point to NOTICE-A political scientist at Carroll College found that 97 percent of rejected signatures are likely to be authentic—or, for every invalid ballot, 32 valid ones are thrown out. “And why, exactly, was it necessary for the Pennsylvania Secretary of State – in defiance of PA state law – to order counties to cure ballots, accept late ballots, accept unverified ballots, and commit various other infractions of that state’s laws? An accusation that has yet to be proven in a court of law. “Why did Democrats in Wayne County feel obliged to threaten officials who demanded an audit? Not Democrats, but radicals who are Democrats. There is a difference. I am certain you have the same level of disgust with similar threats made in Georgia, right, by Trump radicals towards two lifelong GOP officials there? Regarding the hereistheevidence site, here is one source found there. It is a news report about a woman who was concerned about “ballot envelopes visibly identify the voter’s party affiliation”.

Except it is a code to make sure the people get their ballots for the proper primary according to Florida State Law. There was no proof here that the ballots themselves were compromised or discarded by election officials. In other words, it is “suggested” that “possibly” there was some sort of malfeasance. So, while a concern about this labeling is legitimate, it does NOT constitute evidence in a court of law of voter suppression, tampering, or removal. Here is another source found there. It is an affidavit. The person says “I directly observed, on a daily basis, City of Detroit election workers and employees coaching and trying to coach voters to vote for Joe Biden and the Democrat party. I witnessed these workers and employees encouraging voters to do a straight Democrat ballot. This individual has made an accusation. That is NOT evidence. Had this person supplied audio or video recordings, then that would be proof. So, this person would be subject to cross examination in a court of law to determine her credibility.

“They did not work continuously. Right, it just took them a long time to finish. But that’s OK, because your side is going to win. Next week is HUGE. After all, Sidney Powell-who wasn’t let fired by the Trump team, but is just “doing her grrl pwr thang” on her own-told radio host Glenn Beck she heard that our forces confiscated the server of an electronic voting system company in Germany with alleged ties to the president’s voter fraud accusations. €œThe servers at Scytl in Germany were confiscated the other day,” Powell told Beck during a 15-minute conversation related to voter fraud claims made by President Trump. €œI’m hearing it was our forces that got those servers, so I think the government is now working on an investigation of what really happened.” And, of course, Trump won in a landslide by earning 410 electoral college votes, and even winning California and Minnesota! This rumor referenced a claim that computer servers belonging to the Dominion Voting Systems and/or Scytl Secure Electronic Voting companies had supposedly been seized by the U.S. Army in Frankfurt, Germany, and the served data showed that Trump had actually won a landslide victory in the Nov. 3 election. The rumor was one no reliable news outlet gave any credence to, but nonetheless, the far-right, pro-Donald Trump OANN cable channel devoted some airtime to it, as narrated by U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas…Indeed, the claim echoed by Gohmert was a completely fabricated one. In response to that rumor, Scytl noted that they had no servers or offices in Frankfurt, nor had anything of theirs been seized from them by the U.S.