#NY22: Brindisi Wants Court to Only Count Rejected Democrat Votes in Oneida County
Republican challenger Claudia Tenney leads Brindisi by 29 votes.
Believe it or not, New York’s 22nd Congressional District still does not have a representative in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Right now Republican challenger Claudia Tenney leads incumbent Democrat Rep. Anthony Brindisi by 29 votes.
So two weeks ago we found out that the Oneida Board of Elections (OBE) did not “process 2,418 applications from voters who applied via the Department of Motor Vehicles before the state deadline.”
More than likely the people at the polls told the voters “they weren’t registered” when they went to vote. They walked away without voting, but some “went on to file affidavit ballots that were also not counted.”
New York State Supreme Court Justice Scott DelConte ordered the OBE to review 1,028 rejected ballots “that could be from voters who applied on time via the DMV.”
New in #NY22: Brindisi is appealing to the state's highest court to stop another review of rejected affidavit ballots in Oneida County in search of voters who applied on time via the DMV but were tossed anyway.
They want the 69 (Dem votes) they contested to count, but no others
— Patrick Lohmann (@PatLohmann) January 23, 2021
Including people like:
Benjamin, of Utica, whose ballot was rejected this year despite him voting without issue in 3/18.
His affidavit and others like it were part of Brindisi's appeal and would mean a new group of voters disenfranchised through no fault of their own in #NY22. pic.twitter.com/NNfGVUPl1S
— Patrick Lohmann (@PatLohmann) January 23, 2021
Brindisi’s appeal, if granted, would stop the review, at least to give Oneida County time to determine how to review all of the ballots that could be affected, not just the DMV records.
It would also mean more delay in the last undecided House race in the country.
— Patrick Lohmann (@PatLohmann) January 23, 2021
Brindisi only wants 69 Democrat votes to count. Tenney said this is not up to DelConte.
DelConte did not rule for either candidate:
There are 1,028 rejected affidavit ballots in Oneida County that could be from voters who applied on time via the DMV, according to DelConte’s ruling. He’s ordered the county elections staff to review all of them to determine how many fit in that category.
Those that do fit will be counted, the judge ruled.
—
Neither candidate asked the judge to do what he ultimately ordered: A full review of the 10,28 possible ballots from these voters.
“Both candidates press this Court to disregard either some, or all, of the potentially valid ballots because it is strategically advantageous for them in this election,” he wrote. “…Both of these arguments ignore the fact that this problem only exists because…the Oneida County Board of Elections failed to comply with (election law) and review its records.”
OBE must give the court its report by January 27th.
Here are statements from Brindisi and Tenney:
Unfortunately, this is a long process. But I am hopeful that at the end of it we will come out on top. Our campaign's statement on the ongoing #NY22 ballot count: pic.twitter.com/CmUScceXMA
— Anthony Brindisi (@ABrindisiNY) January 22, 2021
Our campaign statement on the state of the #NY22 election proceedings. pic.twitter.com/EjfRm4inD1
— Claudia Tenney (@claudiatenney) January 22, 2021
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
How in the fuck can something as “unimportant” as this drag on for months on end but checking that every vote caste in the Presidential election was legal couldn’t be done because it all had to be wound up in 5 minutes (after dragging out counting for a week or so just to make sure enough Democrat votes were generated in the right places) ??
Because we now live in Banana Republic Inc.
Ron Coleman suggests something much more sinister, a Soviet style system run by Bolsheviks. At least a Banana Republic conjures up images of the tropics. The soviet thing brings to mind, as Ron said, the gulag archipelago. The bottom line, either way, we are in for a world of hurt.
Because there was a LOT of money riding on Biden getting in to the oval office. And not just Chinese money. There’s union money, Soros money, and lots and lots of hangers on looking for cushy, high paying jobs. The thing HAD to come to an end to serve them.
By contrast, what’s riding on some little congressional district contest? Pretty much nothing. The democrats are still fighting this one more from habit than because anyone cares.
And it would have been a damn shame to waste all that effort to steal the election and not win. (I am fairly well convinced that Hillary was as bent out of shape as she was after her 2016 loss in part because they cheated then, just not enough, so the steal that was supposed to seal her victory ultimately failed. I’d be pissed off too.)
Obviously because, unlike the Presidential election, the Democrat is losing the ballot count.
As soon as he pulls ahead it will be over and done with, time to move on.
Mailman, I like your “French”!!
For one thing, because there is a fixed deadline for the electors to vote, and for their votes to be counted. The electors had to vote on Dec 14. If someone was later determined to have been validly chosen as an elector, but he didn’t show up and vote on Dec 14, tough luck. That date is fixed in law and no court can change it.
So in some states the Republican would-be electors assembled unofficially and voted, just in case they would eventually turn out to be the real electors. OK, very well, but that determination had to be made by Jan 6, another date fixed in law that no court can change. On Jan 6 Mike Pence had the duty to count the votes that were cast on Dec 14, and no other. He could not count votes from people who had not yet been determined to be electors.
So yes, any process that would necessarily take longer than that could not be initiated. Just as in 2000, when the Supreme Court voted 7-2 that the recount the state court had ordered was unconstitutional, two of those seven wanted a proper recount to be attempted, but the other five said that since there was no time before the deadline there should not even be an attempt.
Whereas for a house seat there’s no rush. They can go on counting until they finally figure out who is the rightful member, even if it takes two years. In the meantime, as I understand it, the House has decided to provisionally seat Tenney and allow her to vote.
Easy. They will keep finding ballots until the Democrat wins.
The facts seem to be against you. They just found a whole lot of ballots that may not be for the Democrat, which is why he wanted them not to be counted. The judge didn’t fall for it.
So, I finally get it now.
When Democrats contest elections they drag on for months and every possible contest to the election is made available and every frivolous argument is given great consideration. But when Republicans contest an election result – it’s deemed to not have standing or latches apply – basically any way to avoid a review on merits.
And when Congressional Democrats object to presidential election results in Congress – it’s a patriotic exercise of their constitutional duty – but when Congressional Republicans do the same – its a treasonous insurrection.
Now I see. UNITY = One Party Rule.
There’s no disunity when the BORG has assimilated everyone.
> Resistance is futile ?
BORG = Breakup Opposition from Republicans by Gaslighting
At this point we should take both candidates, tie their left arms together at the wrist and give them brass knuckles on their right hands.
Whoever is conscious at the end is the winner.
I’m actually surprised that this is STILL going on.
Why the surprise? If you were the judge, what would you do? I can’t see any other choice than what this judge is doing. Especially once this utter incompetence was discovered.
Huh? Last I heard Pelosi said she was going to provisionally seat Tenney, and if it eventually turns out that Brindisi won then he will take over from then.
While this is of local interest, it is largely irrelevant to the current political scene. Yet we are still discussing it, as if it were important. On the other hand, people in the conservative media, seem quite content to ignore the highly suspicious charges of vote fraud, as well as the documented instances of election law violations, in the last Presidential election. They seem content to wring their hands over the obvious damage the current administration is doing to this nation, while ignoring the fact that is the Presidency was acquired illegally, then all of the actions of the President are void. THAT is of enormous consequence.
And, if those actions harm the people of this country directly, how do the people protect themselves from a harmful criminal enterprise? Do they go to the elections officials for investigation? The same officials who were likely involved? The officials who refused to investigate the complaints? How about law enforcement officials? What to do if those officials refuse to investigate? Go to the courts? What happens when the courts embark on flights of fancy to generate technical reasons to not take action, without ever critically examining the evidence presented? To the media, which not only ignores the charges, but actively discourage investigation of the charges? Take to social media, where they will be censored and deplatformed for even discussing the subject?
There are important things in the world. And then here is worthless static. The NY22 case is nothing more than white noise.
The election law violations have already been litigated and the courts rejected them, and there’s nothing more to be done about them except to resolve the situation for next time.
The actual fraud has to be proven case by case, before any court will take notice of it; almost none of that has been done yet, and it would have been impossible to prove enough cases to change the result before the deadline.
Now it’s up to state authorities to investigate each possible case; even so the vast majority of them will never be able to be proven, because the system is designed to make it extremely difficult to do so, but each case that can be proven should be prosecuted.
Of course Democrat DAs will just decide not to investigate and not to prosecute, but Republican DAs should do so. But none of that changes the outcome. His Fraudulence is the president, duly if fraudulently elected and sworn in, and nothing can change that.
“The election law violations have already been litigated and the courts rejected them, and there’s nothing more to be done about them except to resolve the situation for next time.”
Incorrect. NONE of the documented and observed election law violations have been litigated. Various motions for injunctive relief have been heard. To date, none have been adjudicated based upon evidence of election law violations. They have been dismissed for a number of suspect and outright spurious reasons, but they have not been adjudicated based upon the evidence presented.
“The actual fraud has to be proven case by case, before any court will take notice of it; almost none of that has been done yet, and it would have been impossible to prove enough cases to change the result before the deadline.”
Are you even an attorney? Court are where a case is PROVEN. All that is necessary for a court hearing is probable cause that a charge may be factual [in the case of a criminal trial] or a reasonable belief that the position of the plaintiff is accurate. Also, the deadline is moot, if the results of the election were altered through fraud, especially criminal fraud.
“Now it’s up to state authorities to investigate each possible case; even so the vast majority of them will never be able to be proven, because the system is designed to make it extremely difficult to do so, but each case that can be proven should be prosecuted.”
Again, inaccurate. In the first place, we have documented evidence of flagrant violation of both state and federal laws. While some of them may turn out to be difficult to prove, many of them are a slamdunk, in an honest system. The problem is that, in virtually all cases, local and federal LEAs refuse to investigate them. Even though much more than reasonable suspicion exists that they occurred.
“Of course Democrat DAs will just decide not to investigate and not to prosecute, but Republican DAs should do so. But none of that changes the outcome. His Fraudulence is the president, duly if fraudulently elected and sworn in, and nothing can change that.”
Total BS and the reason why we are in this predicament to begin with. If Biden was elected due to fraud, then he was NOT duly elected under the various laws of the US and the several states. And, if it is proven that fraud was present, then various remedies can be imposed, including invalidating a certain number ballots, ordering a new election, etc. It happens all the time in court cases.
The problem here is that this is the ultimate Catch-22 for our country. If the fraud is investigated and likely proven to have occurred, then the courts have to take action or continue to ignore it. Either way, it would cause extreme problems for survival of the Union. If the charges continue to be ignored, and evidence continues to mount that sufficient fraud occurred to change the results of a Presidential election, and nothing is done, this causes extreme problems for the survival of the Union. What to do?
Well, the Progressives counted on the law abiding members of the citizenry to simply do nothing, as they have in the past, to preserve the Union. Now, if we were simply facing a continuation of the status quo, we might be able to sit and wait, trusting to the authorities to bolster the safeguards on our electoral system. But, as the current safeguards were essentially by-passed and then these violations were ignored by the various governmental and civil institutions charged with enforcing the laws safeguarding the elections and then refusing take action to correct the situation. I other words, the rules of our society have been rewritten. It is ow permissible to ignore any law which you do not like, agree with, or wish to follow. Ignoring the situation will not make it disappear. Established rules have to be followed, enforced and judicial remedy applied for violations. Otherwise, we have no law and without law, no society.
You’re wrong. There are two categories of things that went wrong in the election: violations of state law by the state authorities, and actual fraud in the casting of ballots.
The former was litigated and lost. The courts that considered it decided that the remedy being asked for was not appropriate, and that is that.
The latter category must be proven case by case, and it has not been. Almost no cases of fraud have been proven yet. It’s not a matter of getting them into court; the evidence just does not exist. Instead we were treated to a farcical cock-and-bull story about Dominion, based on no evidence whatsoever, and some statistical hypothesizing that didn’t even purport to prove anything.
And yes, Biden was duly elected, no matter what evidence is discovered later. The election happened on Dec 14, and the electors voted for him. How they came to be electors is no longer relevant. Their states appointed them, and they voted, and that is all that matters.
Again, the November election, and all the fraud that happened then, is irrelevant to who is president, because that was not the election. That was only the election for the election. Even if we could prove with 100% certainty that there was enough fraud to have changed the result there is literally no remedy. The electors voted, their votes were counted, the president was sworn in, and that is the end of the matter.
I have to disagree.
There was overwhelming evidence of election law violations by STATE officials. The problem was that the courts DID NOT LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED. Most of the courts based their decisions on such things as “standing”, “damages”, and “timing”. A few were based upon the spurious idea that vote fraud does not disenfranchise those who have their vote nullified by illegal votes. Just because a court issues a “decision” this foes not mean that the decision is correct or justified.
Now, individual cases of vote fraud do have to be proven. This requires two things; evidence of fraud and some venue where that evidence s heard and adjudged. And, that did not happen. In the first place, NO LEA did a comprehensive investigation of the charges of vote fraud. Even if they did do investigations, such investigation takes time. And, there was NO court which granted any additional time for gathering and presenting additional evidence of fraud. If these two things had occurred, then there is a good chance that sufficient cases of vote fraud or election law violations would have been proven to grant Trump the win.
Now, as to your INCREDIBLE position that fraudulently elected or appointed electors are somehow legitimate. Counterfeit electors are like counterfeit bills. If they are presented and accepted by a merchant, the merchant does not relinquish his ability to reposes the illegally obtained property. Unlike the NFL, where a challenge to a call can not be issued after the next play starts, there is NO clause in the US Constitution, federal or state law which stipulates that an election can not be challenged after a certain date. And, state and federal authorities have a duty to make a good faith effort to investigate charges of illegal activity.
Presidential Electors have to be appointed in accordance with existing state and federal laws, in order for the electors to have the AUTHORITY to elect a President. Just as a LEO has to be authorized under law to make an arrest, so to does an elector’s authority devolve from the law.
To recap, blatant evidence existed of election law violations and strong reasonable suspicion of actual vote fraud and neither was investigated, in any meaningful way, bu authorities. The courts refused to address the problem of improperly or illegally counted ballots, thereby disenfranchising an unknown number of voters who cast votes properly and legally. By doing so, these authorities have placed the nation in the position of creating a Constitutional Crisis whether or not they investigate charges of fraud or not. The video evidence exists. The documentary evidence exists. The eye witnesses exist. And, even though they have been ignored, they still exist. And, to make things worse, more evidence is surfacing to support the charges of fraud. And, the situation will have to be redressed sooner or later. The question is, how? If a significant number of people demand such, and no official avenues are open, where do they go for redress? Of the law and the compact under which this nation was founded do not protect their interests, what do they do? Do they just roll over and accept it? Or do they force the issue? I don’t know. And, I’m really afraid that we are going to find out it is not what we would really prefer.