The Tina Peters case will go to Closing Arguments today.  

What would I argue knowing everything that was not allowed in the trial?

Tina was being given information that computers are open to fraudulent activity in elections.  She was being questioned by county residents as to the results of the local election and its unexpected results.  She was responsible under law for protecting all election related records and equipment.  Believing that State political actors are potentially involved in stealing elections and that they are the lawmakers, who are blocking the forensic backup (with their laws) of her systems; what should she have done?  What would you have done in her place? 

 I’m not sure that any of this argument is even allowed?  If not what are we as a country full of citizens who can’t trust our voting systems to do?  

We have been pointing out these appearances of fraud within our system of elections for sometime without government reaction. Appearances, which have caused both sides to question our elections in the past.  Why is something not being done to make the election equipment open to audit. Because every case brought up thus far is being blocked by the laws and thus the courts.  And where there are adequate laws; then investigations are blocked by judges not following those laws already in place (many of these judges funded by George Soros).  How can one rich person be allowed to do so much damage in our country?

It is almost certain that there is a definite attempt being made to disrupt our form of government by both outside actors and more and more by inside actors.  If the lawmakers do not address these issues through impeachment of judges who do not follow State and federal laws, and through the passage of laws making protecting our elections uppermost at all cost; then we will surely lose this the greatest system of government known to the world.