Election Investigations

[Ken]

No, it is the opposite of the same thing.

If there are crimes happening you show the crimes, not endless tape of nothing. If someone robs a convenience store you show the 5 min period of time in which they committed the crime on camera, not the other 23:55 min period of time that day when someone wasn't robbing the store. And if there are multiple cameras, you show the one which shows the crime happening, not some footage from another camera in the back room where nothing was happening.

That analogy isn’t applicable with the capitol protests. A convenience store that is robbed is privately owned by a private individual.

The Capitol is NOT a private place and not owned by private people. It is often referred to as “the people's house” and is owned by the public. It was built and paid for with public funds collected from tax payers. It is maintained by the public’s taxes. The congress and others that use the building are working for the public.

Because the activities on Jan 6 were conducted on the public’s land, in the public’s building, against public workers who are paid by the public's taxes, etc, all the surveillance for that day should be released to the public and not just a few clips. Even the cameras that took the footage are owned by the public. It is very revealing and interesting that the Jan 6, committee is so against releasing what should be public information, to the public. It is about controlling their narrative/propaganda and the only way that can be done is hide the facts and information from the very people who pay their salaries, who pay for the facility they use, who pay their cushy perks, etc.

As far as I know we still live in a free Republic, not some socialistic/communist country that wants to control the people by only releasing the information that the government wants the people to know.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) governs what government information the public is entitled to and what it isn't entitled to. For example, your tax returns, your social security number, and your earnings history are all pieces of information maintained by taxpayer funded public agencies. But the public is not entitled to request and receive that information.

There are 9 different exemptions to FOIA and they include things like trade secrets but also information collected by law enforcement (i.e. Capitol Police) and information related to the security of Federal facilities and the Capitol is a Federal facility. https://www.foia.gov/faq.html

So while Speaker Johnson might choose to release this information, the law does not actually compel him to do so. And there are legitimate reasons for them not to do so, or at a minimum, carefully review and screen the material before releasing it.

And this isn't about the 1/6 committee. They were part of the last Congress and were disbanded after the 2022 midterm elections elected a new Congress. Several of those committee members are no longer even in Congress. So this would be about the decision-making of the current Sergeant of Arms and Capitol Police who are under the authority of Speaker Johnson.

[Grace]

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) governs what government information the public is entitled to and what it isn't entitled to. For example, your tax returns, your social security number, and your earnings history are all pieces of information maintained by taxpayer funded public agencies. But the public is not entitled to request and receive that information.

There are 9 different exemptions to FOIA and they include things like trade secrets but also information collected by law enforcement (i.e. Capitol Police) and information related to the security of Federal facilities and the Capitol is a Federal facility. https://www.foia.gov/faq.html

So while Speaker Johnson might choose to release this information, the law does not actually compel him to do so. And there are legitimate reasons for them not to do so, or at a minimum, carefully review and screen the material before releasing it.

And this isn't about the 1/6 committee. They were part of the last Congress and were disbanded after the 2022 midterm elections elected a new Congress. Several of those committee members are no longer even in Congress. So this would be about the decision-making of the current Sergeant of Arms and Capitol Police who are under the authority of Speaker Johnson.

Social security numbers, tax returns, and earnings history all have to do with private individuals. Those who entered the capitol did it at their own risk, and I am sure they knew they would have been on surveillance cameras, making them part of the public domain. None what was said in that post changes the fact that the public should have a right to see ALL the footage, in their tax funded facility, where their public servants work. And the Jan 6 Committee may have disbanded but I sure saw plenty of hissy fits from some of the former members of the committee, on twitter.

I guess they don't think the American people deserve transparency, accountability, and answers supported by facts instead of a predetermined political narrative, given by a select group of people.

[Robert]

Are you responding to something I actually said? If so, could you please quote what you are responding to? I don't know if you are reading anything I am writing.

I'm responding to your general excessive scepticism of this, with claims like, we can't trust these videos, they might have been edited, and on and on. Yet I didn't see you display the same scepctism for the 1/6 committee's release, which was very obviously edited.

Actually, no. You are responding to things you assume I must have said, not responding to things I actually said. Could you please stop that? It keeps you from actually taking the time to read what I say and respond to it. It's not a good faith discussion.

I have said some very specific things. Do you know what they were? Please quote them and respond to them. And please stop saying whatever and claiming that I said it. Better yet, let me express my opinion, and you can express your opinion. Provide the reasons for your views.

Videos are time stamped. Feel free to put together a timeline.

[RZehr]

She was caught. And he didn’t win.

The wife of an Iowa county supervisor was convicted of 52 counts of voter fraud Tuesday in a ballot-stuffing scheme to help her husband secure the Republican nomination to run for Congress in 2020.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/iowa-elected ... ing-scheme

[Robert]

[Ken]

This lawsuit in Georgia is not actually about the 2020 election.

It is a lawsuit by a good government group going back 2017 that challenged Georgia's touchscreen voting systems which, at that time, were 100% electronic and did not leave any paper trail. They have been challenging the Republican Secretary of State's office since 2017 for using these types of touchscreen machines. It has just taken this long for the legal process to play out.

And they are right. The state SHOULD be using a balloting system that generates an auditable paper trail.

[Szdfan]

Why did you post a screenshot of the story without a link to make it easier for the rest of us to look up the article? The fuller context of this story is that Judge Totenberg issued a ruling that ordered a trial for the lawsuit. It could inferred from the excerpt you posted that Totenberg had ruled in favor of the plaintiffs' lawsuit, which wasn't the case.

We'll have to wait for a trial, which is scheduled for January 9 for a verdict.

https://www.newsweek.com/mike-lindell-c ... cy-1844815

[Szdfan]

This lawsuit in Georgia is not actually about the 2020 election.

It is a lawsuit by a good government group going back 2017 that challenged Georgia's touchscreen voting systems which, at that time, were 100% electronic and did not leave any paper trail. They have been challenging the Republican Secretary of State's office since 2017 for using these types of touchscreen machines. It has just taken this long for the legal process to play out.

And they are right. The state SHOULD be using a balloting system that generates an auditable paper trail.

According to the article Robert posted, Mike Lindell is celebrating this ruling as vindication...which it really isn't (yet).

[Josh]

This lawsuit in Georgia is not actually about the 2020 election.

It is a lawsuit by a good government group going back 2017 that challenged Georgia's touchscreen voting systems which, at that time, were 100% electronic and did not leave any paper trail. They have been challenging the Republican Secretary of State's office since 2017 for using these types of touchscreen machines. It has just taken this long for the legal process to play out.

And they are right. The state SHOULD be using a balloting system that generates an auditable paper trail.

Republicans are actually responsible for a lot of this move to electronic voting machines, including promoting Diebold Election Systems and Republican legislatures and governors voting to pay for this stuff. Overall it’s been bipartisan: politicians usually like having more pork to dole out.

Georgia’s Republican Party I would dare say is basically corrupt and doesn’t seem to care very much about running honest elections. It’s a good old boys’ club.

[Ken]

This lawsuit in Georgia is not actually about the 2020 election.

It is a lawsuit by a good government group going back 2017 that challenged Georgia's touchscreen voting systems which, at that time, were 100% electronic and did not leave any paper trail. They have been challenging the Republican Secretary of State's office since 2017 for using these types of touchscreen machines. It has just taken this long for the legal process to play out.

And they are right. The state SHOULD be using a balloting system that generates an auditable paper trail.

According to the article Robert posted, Mike Lindell is celebrating this ruling as vindication...which it really isn't (yet).

It is a lawsuit dating back to 2017. Here is a 2019 article about the same exact lawsuit and same exact judge. https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regiona ... SOVfJyvyN/

It has nothing to do with evidence of fraud in the 2020 election. In fact, most of the Trump campaign challenges in Georgia were in Fulton County where they had paper ballots. Remember all these hand recounts?