Spoiler Alert! If you go down this rabbit hole, it will make you mad. But anger can be a good thing, desirable even, in our goal to get a 100% forensic audit of Iowa’s 2020 elections, in particular the voting machines.
Let’s talk about the “Timid Politicians” that infest the halls of Legislature across America and in particular Iowa. Remember, complacency doesn’t lead to change, you have to be upset enough to demand change.
Although the Constitution provides no assurance that any branch of government will make policy choices you like, the Constitution offers legitimacy to those choices and legitimate pathways to override any of those choices. The people who make those choices would have to stand for election, they would have to work with others who stand for election, and crucially, they would have to play by rules that we all agree to beforehand rather than making them up as they go along. Of course, the Constitution already does all of this. And thus it bears emphasis at the outset that the Constitution itself is not broken. What is broken is our Nation’s willingness to obey the Constitution and to hold our leaders accountable to it. All three branches of the federal government have wandered far from the roles that the Constitution sets out for them. For various reasons, “We the People” have allowed all three branches of government to get away with it. And with each power grab, the next somehow seems less objectionable. When measured by how far we have strayed from the Constitution we originally agreed to, the government’s flagrant and repeated violations of the Rule Of Law amount to a wholesale abdication of the Constitution’s design.
Chp 1. Election Integrity
Of course, all of this means nothing, if we cannot be assured that our vote counts. That only AUTHORIZED and ALIVE voters get one vote each. And that WHO we vote for will be accurately tabulated. If you have been following the election fraud issue, you will be aware that Diebold, Dominion, ES&S and Smartmatic are designed to use fractional tabulation to ensure that the selected candidate is “elected”. Right now we are watching Maricopa, AZ forensic audit and like dominoes, if Maricopa fails the audit, the rest of the states and counties that use the suspect tabulation machines will also fall. In Iowa we need to insist on, and be ready for a 100% forensic audit, based on this map from the Iowa Secretary of State.
Patel Patriot’s Devolution Part 5 is a must read for everyone to understand that ALL voting machines are compromised and that it was “knowingly” done so under the aegis of the 2002 Homeland Security Act and the special charter that guarantees the makers can do whatever they deem to be best WITHOUT government oversight nor interference. A license to effect election fraud. This is why CISA could assure us that the 2020 election was the most secure ever, because the voting machine consortium told them so.
You can also read more on this site here at Computer fraud goes back to 2004.
Sadly, I don’t see politics anymore. I see both democrats and republicans colluding with each other, as one big happy UNIPARTY, pretending to be in opposition while taking their turn at the teat of American taxpayers. Which brings us to the curious case of the Congressional District 2 race, Miller-Meeks vs. Hart. Why did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi decide to keep Republican Representative Miller-Meeks? Is it because Miller-Meeks is more useful in urging Iowans to take the jab and is/was aligned with Representative Liz Cheney?
Enquiring minds want to know… That was then when I first drafted this article around the middle of May 2021. Now I know beyond a shadow of doubt that Meeks’ role is to facilitate another DC Swamp attack vector on all Americans, and more egregiously the Iowan’s liberties we cherish and the rights we strive to maintain, even as DC continues to whittle away at them.
And I have the receipt! Just last Sunday, 25 Jul 2021, I received Meeks’ newsletter, in which she proudly announced her new bill which just passed Nancy Pelosi’s House. Meeks wrote the bill which was passed on 20 Jul 2021; DHS Medical Countermeasures Act passed the House of Representatives. This legislation would support and protect the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) workforce and Department mission continuity by requiring the Secretary to establish a medical countermeasures program to protect employees and working animals in the event of a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive attack; or naturally occurring disease outbreaks or pandemics. (my emphasis). It’s understandable if my gentle reader thinks; “sounds reasonable in this day and age”. What’s the issue?
The issue is her narrative for this bill:
This legislation would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to establish a medical countermeasures program in DHS. Oversight of the countermeasures program would be under the Chief Medical Officer (CMO) who would be required to: maintain a stockpile of medical countermeasures, develop Department-wide standards for storage, security, placement, dispensing, and documentation of countermeasures; preposition countermeasures in strategic locations; ensure rapid deployment and dispensing of countermeasures; and support dispensing exercises.
The bill requires the establishment of a medical countermeasures working group comprised of representatives from relevant DHS components and offices to ensure medical countermeasures standards are maintained and guidance is consistent. Finally, the CMO would be required to develop an integrated logistics support plan for medical countermeasures that includes a methodology for determining types and quantities of countermeasures, inventory tracking, and a replenishment plan for existing stockpiles.
The Department of Homeland Security has over 240,000 employees tasked with jobs ranging from border and aviation security to emergency response and cybersecurity with one, common goal: keeping America safe.
Sooooo, Dr. Meeks! “Ensure rapid deployment and dispensing of countermeasures“??? Eek!
It’s not a conspiracy theory when it’s a spoiler alert that this bill authorizes the DHS CMO to prescribe mandatory vaccines nationwide to counter muh pandemic; Experimental Use Authorization (EUA) notwithstanding. To see where the government and Big Pharma gets their “License to Jab” without our consent or cooperation, we only have to look back to Patel Patriot’s Devolution Part 5 article to see how swell the DHS’ efforts to secure election integrity worked out for America over the past 2 decades. And coincidentally, Dr Meeks tacked her “Medical Countermeasures” onto the 2002 Homeland Security Act for which she got the “Election Security” template to draft her bill. That is why Pelosi shoved her would-be colleague Rita Hart (D) aside and kept Miller-Meeks (R).
Besides, Dr Meeks’ resume looked more impressive…
She enlisted in the United States Army at the age of 18 and served for 24 years, including as a nurse, physician, and member of the United States Army Reserve. She retired at the rank of lieutenant colonel. From Private to LTC–impressive indeed
Miller-Meeks earned a Bachelor of Science in Nursing degree from Texas Christian University, a Master of Science in education from University of Southern California, and a Doctor of Medicine from University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.
Miller-Meeks operated a private ophthalmology practice in Ottumwa, Iowa, until 2008. She also served as the first female president of the Iowa Medical Society. She was the first woman on the faculty of the University of Iowa’s department of ophthalmology and visual sciences, and worked as a representative from Iowa to the American Academy of Ophthalmology. In 2010, Governor Terry Branstad appointed Miller-Meeks director of the Iowa Department of Public Health; she resigned in 2014 to run for Congress.
Lah-De-Dah! What does an eye doctor know about pandemics and viruses? Isn’t that what Fauci basically accused Sen Rand Paul, an eye doctor, of, when they got into a heated argument over viral gain of function during a recent hearing? “You don’t know what you’re talking about,” Fauci yelled, “You are a liar!!!” Can’t have it both ways… Yet every time she’s back in Iowa from DC, she out giving jabs to anyone who will take them. I should wonder why she’s giving jabs to random strangers without any knowledge of their medical history.
But I digress.
With regards to the voter fraud we witnessed in the wee hours of 04 Nov 2020, and the subsequent attempts to have the Courts hear the evidence up until when Antrim County, Michigan, Maricopa County, Arizona, and Windham Hill, New Hampshire initiated forensic audits of their votes, America is awake and closely watching our elected.
Will they do the right thing and defend voter integrity or will they duck and hide? It remains to be seen, but we must hold them all accountable and if any RINOs be found, driven out. Not out of spite but because our rule of law, quality of life and liberty hangs in the balance. Enough is enough and we are taking back control of our runaway government.
A joint session of Congress was presided over by Vice President Mike Pence voted between Wednesday, 06 Jan 21 at 1pm and through early Thursday morning on 07 Jan 21 to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s win against President Donald Trump. Every state’s votes were “verified” throughout the night; which gave enough votes to certify Biden’s win, notwithstanding the group of Congressional Republicans who objected against the certification of Arizona and Pennsylvania.
Chp 2. What Does The Constitution & Laws Have To Say About Election Fraud?
Going into the joint session of Congress to accept or object to the state-certified electors; the Republicans held 50 seats in the Senate and 211 seats in the House, while the opposition tied with 50 in the Senate and held a slim majority in the House with only 222 seats. An additional 2 seats were vacant but would eventually be captured by Republicans.
Altogether, 533 members of Congress were on hand for the joint session. Out of a total of 261 Republicans, only 114 Republicans decided beforehand to accept all state-certified electors while 147 reviewed all available source documents and research before committing themselves to object. While specific reasons for objection varies, the common legal themes are as follows, in order of legal precedence:
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Clause 2 Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Clause 3 [
The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President. Eliminated by the 12th Amendment, ratified 6/15/1804.]
Clause 4 The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
Clause 5 No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Clause 6 [
In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected. Modified by the 20th, ratified 1/23/1933 and 25th, ratified 2/10/1967, Amendments.]
Clause 7 The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
Clause 8 Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
12th Amendment, ratified 6/15/1804, supersedes Clause 3 of Article II, Section I:
The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;
The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.
The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.
According to Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute; “Although Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 seemingly vests complete discretion in the states, certain older cases had recognized a federal interest in protecting the integrity of the process. Thus, the Court upheld the power of Congress to protect the right of all citizens who are entitled to vote to lend aid and support in any legal manner to the election of any legally qualified person as a presidential elector. Its power to protect the choice of electors from fraud or corruption was sustained.” This leads us to the Guarantee Clause found in Article IV, Section 4.
Article IV, Section 4 – Guarantee Clause
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
As explained in this Conservative Treehouse article, “The Guarantee Clause” – “At its core, the Guarantee Clause provides for majority rule. A republican government is one in which the people govern through elections. This is the constant refrain of the Federalist Papers. Alexander Hamilton, for example, put it this way in The Federalist No. 57: “The elective mode of obtaining rulers is the characteristic policy of republican government.” “The Clause requires the United States to prevent any state from imposing rule by monarchy, dictatorship, aristocracy, or permanent military rule, even through majority vote. Instead, governing by electoral processes is constitutionally required.” The final piece of legislation with regards to elections, in particular, disputed election is the Electoral Count Act of 1887 as codified in Title 3 of the US Code, Chapter 1.
3 USC, Ch. 1 – Presidential Elections And Vacancies:
- 5. Determination of controversy as to appointment of electors
If any State shall have provided, by laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors, for its final determination of any controversy or contest concerning the appointment of all or any of the electors of such State, by judicial or other methods or procedures, and such determination shall have been made at least six days before the time fixed for the meeting of the electors, such determination made pursuant to such law so existing on said day, and made at least six days prior to said time of meeting of the electors, shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution, and as hereinafter regulated, so far as the ascertainment of the electors appointed by such State is concerned.
- 15. Counting electoral votes in Congress
Congress shall be in session on the sixth day of January succeeding every meeting of the electors. The Senate and House of Representatives shall meet in the Hall of the House of Representatives at the hour of 1 o’clock in the afternoon on that day, and the President of the Senate shall be their presiding officer. Two tellers shall be previously appointed on the part of the Senate and two on the part of the House of Representatives, to whom shall be handed, as they are opened by the President of the Senate, all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes, which certificates and papers shall be opened, presented, and acted upon in the alphabetical order of the States, beginning with the letter A; and said tellers, having then read the same in the presence and hearing of the two Houses, shall make a list of the votes as they shall appear from the said certificates; and the votes having been ascertained and counted according to the rules in this subchapter provided, the result of the same shall be delivered to the President of the Senate, who shall thereupon announce the state of the vote, which announcement shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of the persons, if any, elected President and Vice President of the United States, and, together with a list of the votes, be entered on the Journals of the two Houses. Upon such reading of any such certificate or paper, the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any. Every objection shall be made in writing, and shall state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof, and shall be signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received. When all objections so made to any vote or paper from a State shall have been received and read, the Senate shall thereupon withdraw, and such objections shall be submitted to the Senate for its decision; and the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, in like manner, submit such objections to the House of Representatives for its decision; and no electoral vote or votes from any State which shall have been regularly given by electors whose appointment has been lawfully certified to according to section 6 of this title from which but one return has been received shall be rejected, but the two Houses concurrently may reject the vote or votes when they agree that such vote or votes have not been so regularly given by electors whose appointment has been so certified. If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State. But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted. When the two Houses have voted, they shall immediately again meet, and the presiding officer shall then announce the decision of the questions submitted. No votes or papers from any other State shall be acted upon until the objections previously made to the votes or papers from any State shall have been finally disposed of.
Conservative Treehouse continues; “The Electoral Count Act of 1887 is a US federal law stating procedures for the counting of electoral votes by Congress following a presidential election. It was enacted in the aftermath of the disputed 1876 presidential election between Rutherford B Hayes and Samuel J Tilden. In that election, several states submitted competing slates of electors and a divided Congress was unable to resolve the deadlock.” So this isn’t the first time, nor will it be the last time we have dueling electors.
As if that wasn’t enough information for VP Mike Pence and Congress, there is also a comprehensive paper put out by the Congressional Research Committee (CRS) which prepared its report in the runup to certifying the electors in the contested 2016 race. This report, entitled “Counting Electoral Votes: An Overview of Procedures at the Joint Session, Including Objections by Members of Congress”, also addressed the process for handling dueling electors.
As reported by Epoch Times , 7 states did submit dueling electors. However, VP Mike Pence refused to recognize the alternates, instead of putting it up to both Houses for debate and resolution.
“… Vice President Mike Pence didn’t acknowledge that seven states sent two electoral vote certificates to Washington, one for President Donald Trump and one for President-elect Joe Biden, during the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6. The Electoral College Act, passed some 150 years ago, outlines a scenario in which a state sends “more than one return or paper purporting to be a return.” It calls on the vice president in his or her role as president of the Senate to open “all the certificates and papers purporting to be certificates of the electoral votes” during the joint session to count electoral votes…”
“What Pence said as he called out states differed from what vice presidents have said in previous sessions, Politico noted…” You’ll have to read it for yourself
“Republican electors in those states last month cast a ballot for Trump, planning to send it to Washington. Democratic electors cast a ballot for Biden. The situation is known as dueling electors.
In past joint sessions, vice presidents have read so-called alternative electors. For instance, Vice President Richard Nixon in 1961 was initially declared the winner of Hawaii, but candidate John F. Kennedy was later certified as the state’s winner, just two days before the joint session that year. Congress received certificates from Republican electors, Democratic electors, and a package from the archivist of the United States.
Nixon said: “The Chair has received three certificates from persons claiming to be the duly appointed electors from the State of Hawaii. The Chair will hand these certificates one at a time to the tellers who will read the certificates and the attached papers in full. After the first certificate has been read the Chair will then hand the second certificate to the tellers, and then the third.”
Nixon then suggested the electors named by Hawaii’s governor, or the electors for Kennedy, be considered the lawful objectors. No one objected, so the session moved forward.
Pence’s office didn’t return an inquiry on why he didn’t acknowledge alternate slates…”
Before we leave the Constitution and related laws, we need to circle around back to Article II, Section 1 that kicked off this chapter and focus on Clause 6, which was superseded by both the 20th Amendment and 25th Amendments. For sake of brevity, I won’t quote them in their entirety, but I do want to focus your attention on Clause 1 of the 20th .
Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
Let me close out this chapter on the Constitution and ask you this. What time did Joe Biden take the oath of office on 20 Jan 2021? When did his term begin, if ever? Why did Trump still have the football when he took off from Andrews Air Force Base for Mar-A-Lago, Florida? Devolution Part 1 anybody?
Chp 3: 147 Republicans Objected To The State-Certified Electors
The New York Times “exposed” the 147 Republicans who voted to “overturn the election” to shame them for wanting to disenfranchise the voters of the contested States. Any concern for the actual voters disenfranchised by fraud, are dismissed as a “Big Lie”. Sadly, only 147 Patriots out of 261 stood to be counted. Although they would have surely been overruled by the Demonrat majority, at least, they would have served notice that fraud is a serious matter and will be challenged again, and again, in the future.
Timid souls following conventional wisdom is not a virtue…
As you can see, not one Republican from Iowa is in that list… Not. A. One… Yet, at least one or more from each of our neighboring states, including so-called Blue State Illinois and Minnesota, stood up to be counted against the fraud. Even VP Mike Pence’s brother, Greg, stood up.
However, one Representative from Iowa, a Demonrat, did stand to protect voters from disenfranchisement. She stood against seating our “duly elected” Rep. Miller-Meeks, and supported Rita Hart taking her case to Nancy Pelosi, instead of to the Iowa Courts.
The key statements put out by each of Iowa’s 6 elected representation to DC can be found in their respective “The Good, The Bad and The Ugly” page. Judge for yourself whether they had the intellectual honesty to see through the Big Lie spun by the Uniparty and Fake News that the election was above board, and whether they had the integrity to uphold their oath to the Constitution in spite of pressure to just accept the results as presented and just move on.
Personally, I find it ironic that a group of people who like to consider themselves to be “leaders”; whereas none of them were elected to be leaders, but rather to represent the will of the voters that sent them to DC. When I went through Basic Training at Lackland Air Force Base, TX, our squadron motto was “Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way” A “leader” who lacks integrity is not a leader and really needs to get out of the way, as they are also unfit to follow.
There has been untold emails and phone calls to various Iowa politician asking them to attend Mike Lindell’s symposion. Almost without exception, they have feigned ignorance of the event, or claimed scheduling conflicts. A scheduling conflict is the refugee of a Timid Politician, overcome by events, rather than boldly overcoming events in service to his/her Constituents who want action and support. As their Constituents, we’re pretty sure that there is nothing in their schedule that trumps attending the Lindell Symposium, barring a family crisis, in which case they could send an aide to represent them.
It’s often been said that “integrity” is when you do the right thing when no one is looking? What about “when everyone is looking at you” and that integrity can and will cost you everything?