This transcript is taken from a Stand in the Gap Today program originally aired on Feb. 17 2022. to listen to the program, please click HERE.
Sam Rohrer: Well, without disputes, all Americans are aware of the heated debate surrounding the issue of voter fraud into 2020 election. I will going to say that certainly not all are in agreement as to the extent of this problem or equally share an understanding of the actual problem without doubt.
Most certainly are not aware at all of the imminent structural damage to the freedom that stares our representative republic right now by this issue right in the face. Well, hello and welcome to Stand in the Gap. Today, the title of this program, the title is this: Stealing the Vote, Defrauding the Citizen, Kicking the Can.
I’m putting this in the context of a Pennsylvania update. Now, it’s important to realize that the issue of cheating and voter fraud existed in the 2016 election and the 2012 election, and the 2008 elections. In fact, cheating has occurred in many elections for a long time.
I’ve addressed this issue and shared multiple examples many times on this program over the past several years, yet this immoral, unconstitutional, and evil practice was generally localized within a given city, say for instance like Chicago or Philadelphia, perhaps some smaller jurisdiction.
Not a corruptive practice that had become actually perfected and officially enabled by legislative and judicial sanctioning as it is today in many states, including right here in Pennsylvania. Now, the 2020 election simply made visible the extent of the abuse, and literally everyone knows that there is a problem.
Still to this day, there remains a near coverup and an amazing denial and shifting of blame from the legislature to the judicial, or from the judicial to the executive, or the executive to the legislature. In the end, nothing has really changed. Guaranteeing that the problems manifested in 2020 without some major acceptance of responsibility and forceful commitment to transparency by our elected representatives.
This is going to become institutionalized in 2022 and 2024, totally destroying our two-party system. Hence, stealing the vote and defrauding the citizens. Today on this program, I’ve asked Sam Faddis, veteran, retired CIA Operations Officer, senior partner with Artemis LLC, and published author and the senior editor for AND Magazine to be with me.
Sam’s done a tremendous amount of work here in Pennsylvania. I’m going to put this out there because I know we have listeners across the country, literally in every state. I believe that what we will share today on Stealing the Vote, Defrauding the Citizen, Kicking the Can, focusing here in Pennsylvania, I think it’s going to be instructive for all listening today, no matter where you live.
We’re going to be direct. We’ll share the facts and to the best of our ability present objective truth, identify the problem, assess the risk, describe the cause, and then last but not least, present out solution, and there is a solution. With that, let me welcome to the program right now, Sam Faddis. Sam, thanks for being back with us.
Sam Faddis: Thank you for having me. Pleasure as always.
Sam Rohrer: Sam, for the sake of discussion today, like I do many times in this program, I like to start with defining what is meant. I’m just going to put out a number of words and I’ll put in something here myself, but voter fraud, I’ve used that, or stealing the vote, if I were to use that, those words people see.
I know that there are some specific legal distinctions with the words like voter fraud is something different than other aspects of voter impropriety, but we’re not getting into that specific. In general, we’re talking about legitimate people casting a vote but whose vote is either not counted or counted in a way different than that person expected.
Perhaps people not qualified under the law to vote actually casting a vote, which then distorts the election and defrauds every person who casts a legitimate vote. Now, Sam, I just put a general simplified form on there hopefully for people. Take that to what I just said, if you would, and then define the problem that we’re facing, express it in what you believe to be the extent of this problem facing us right now.
Sam Faddis: Well, what we’re facing is you and your introduction touched on the fact that this makes now another, we have had voter fraud or issues with election speaking very generally for a long time. What we’re facing now is a challenge to, a threat to the entire electoral system as we know it. This is not just a matter of stuffing some ballot boxes, which is not to diminish that or make that seem like that’s okay.
This is not things that are happening around the edges of otherwise fundamentally fair system. What we’re talking about is a very deliberate, concerted effort. You’re absolutely right, it’s not just Pennsylvania, it’s the whole country as where this effort has taken place to completely remake our electoral system.
It has one very explicit objective in my view, and that is to guarantee one party rule that be Democratic party rule for the rest of time. We’re not talking about just getting away with a few things, we’re talking about fundamentally changing the rules of the game with the very deliberate intention to be able to, in effect, steal every election that ever happens thereafter.
Sam Rohrer: That’s a sad thing to take into consideration and certainly is of great concern. Sam, since the process of voting is legally defined and is a joint effort between the citizen and civil government officials, both on the national state as well as the local jurisdictions, can you identify for our listeners the participants in the voting process who are actually responsible to institute, oversee, and assure integrity in the election process?
Sam Faddis: Well, from the standpoint of the folks that we’re talking about that are responsible for this effort to steal the election, what we’re talking about is a democratic party objective. It operates on a national level. There are a number of extremely well-funded organizations pushing this with very clearly defined objectives.
This is literally a formal national strategy with all sorts of components that include letting felons vote, getting rid of ID entirely, every component that we can talk about more linked as we go forward. Then unfortunately, aided and embedded by Republicans who either are cooperating or are at best complicit in the sense that they’re just oblivious and drifting along with this.
Pennsylvania is a classic example of that. We moved to mail-in voting in 2019, which was a disaster and then that was made worse by court decisions, and so forth after that.
Sam Rohrer: Sam, I’m just going to hold you right there, we’re into a break here. You’re beginning to set it up. Ladies and gentlemen, we are looking today at this, Stealing the Vote, Defrauding the Citizen, Kicking the Can, all of these elements are involved in this thing we call election theft. What do you want call? There’s a number of names.
We’re going to go further into assessing the risk. We’ve already just said, it’s not fixed. You’ve got one party rule forever, major. We’re going to come back. We’re talking about the cause. Identifying the cause of how we got here.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Sam Rohrer: As we’ve been emphasizing so clearly on this program through our 11 principles for national renewal series, the necessity for a thorough understanding of a biblical worldview as the basis for freedom and the foundational pillar of our constitutional Republic is essential. Now, the Bible emphasizes very clearly. We’ve commented many times that William Penn right here in Pennsylvania asserted it as well.
They’ve said this, “Without an understanding of the character and the nature of God and absolute truth combined with the recognition of the sinful nature of the heart of man, the purpose for law, government, and justice, without that governments will always become corrupt and will yield to tyrannical despotism and lawlessness.”
Now, as you recall, we said and as Penn asserted, and I go back to that often because he was referred by many of the others as the Father of the Founders, because of the work that he did and laying down the basic precepts of what was required for a government that would be free. He said the Bible states that only a commitment to integrity, honesty, and truth can in fact preserve a republic.
It should not surprise us, therefore, that the problems we face right now are the ones which compromise personal integrity, governmental integrity, media integrity, and yes, voter integrity. Same in simple terms, let’s again, assess the risk of not restoring the integrity of the vote and the voting process.
We use the word on the other side about a one party rule, but what’s really at stake, build that out just a little bit more. If you can, name a couple of those who are specifically behind pushing this destruction of our system of voting integrity.
Sam Faddis: As I indicated earlier, what we are talking about here is a complete remaking of the system. We’re not talking about just getting away with stuffing ballot boxes in the middle of the night, not that that’s okay. We’re talking about changing the rules by which the game has played with the deliberate intention of having one-party rule in perpetuity.
That’s not exaggeration, that’s not hyperbole. We’re talking about no-excuse mail-in voting. We’re talking about going through every state database that includes any name and address of anybody for whom the state has a name and address. No idea whether they’re legal, illegal, alive, dead, and mailing ballots to them, without them even asking.
We’re talking about no voter ID requirement. All you have to do is affirm that you are who you say you are and your word must be taken. We’re talking about felons voting. We’re talking about non-citizens voting. This is not my fantasy. This is laid out in black and by the groups pushing this. What you’re talking about is a deliberate effort to allow you to steal elections for the rest of time.
The stakes cannot possibly be higher if you allow this to go forward, you will conduct elections, but they will be meaningless. You won’t be able to trust the result. The result will be preordained as much as it was in the old Soviet Union. The party pushing this, which is the democratic party, will never lose an election again.
To touch on something we were talking about just before the break, we should be clear here. It is a democratic party objective, but many cases abetted by the republican party. In Harrisburg, in Pennsylvania, in 2019, we moved to mail-in voting. The legislature passed that bill, both houses and legislature are under Republican control.
The Republicans introduced that legislation and passed that legislation to move us to no-excuse mail-in voting and scrap a system we had had for 200 plus years. Only, I think a grand total of two people in the legislature voted against that bill. Certainly, a democratic agenda, but anybody on the Republican side, that’s pretending they’ve been fighting it tooth-and-nail and somehow were defeated is being disingenuous at best. You created this problem in Pennsylvania.
Sam Rohrer: We’re going to go further into that here a little bit, Sam, but you set it up. Gary, you want to direct a question here at Sam?
Gary Dull: Well, I was just thinking about what he was saying there. Maybe we can dig a bit deeper down into the primary area of the abuse that’s been undercutting the voting integrity. As you answer that and dig into that just a little bit deeper.
Sam, why is it that you think that generally speaking, the democratic party is basically leading this voting fraud, not only here in Pennsylvania, but even beyond and around the country?
Sam Faddis: Well, it is a deliberate well-funded nationwide effort, and why? It’s going to allow them to never lose an election again. They’re literally going to take control of the electoral system at every level. The governor just brought in a new Secretary of State in Pennsylvania. Theoretically, as the Secretary of State, her job is to ensure as a nonpartisan official ensure the integrity of elections and that everybody can trust the result.
She came to this job from the democratic party and her entire life’s work has been pushing this agenda that I’ve been talking about. You have one of the primary architects and movers and shakers in a nationwide effort to completely change the way we conduct elections was just brought in, and installed in this theoretically nonpartisan position.
Now, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why she was brought here. She was here to be the point person for this effort. In other words, 2020 was the beginning of this effort. That is not the full scope of this effort. You have barely seen the agenda and she is here to move with all speed to push that agenda.
As I’ve suggested a couple of times already, meanwhile, the Republicans, if they’re not complicit are at best absent. They’re doing nothing in 14 months since the last election, they’ve done nothing.
Sam Rohrer: That’s right, Sam. We’re going to get into that. Let me go ahead a little bit further because people are probably listening, saying, “Well, wow. I can understand this so far, but I didn’t know that for instance Republicans as a whole, I was Republican. I was in the legislature. I know what things are like, but they’re saying, how did that happen?”
Really, which brings us to the point of what’s taking place now. Just a question, any serious attempt to correct an injustice or to solve a crime or unravel corruption, there is, ladies and gentlemen, an issue whether it’s called you use the word culpability. Somebody is responsible.
Now, one of the things that’s most greatly bothered me in this entire discussion is who’s responsible for this and they are. What we’re describing is immoral, it is unconstitutional, it is a violation of voting integrity. Now, don’t we all observe this? Political campaigns for instance, are blaming voting machine manufacturers, as an example.
Legislatures are blaming left-wing state courts. Federal courts dismiss evidence at will and shift the blame to some legal infraction of lawsuit filing. In the end, the problem is uncorrected. Everybody blames someone else and the system stands ready to collapse as Sam’s just describing.
Sam, let’s go to the heart of this from your perspective and evaluation, which one entity in this process is primarily responsible for where we are? You’ve already said it, but make it clear one that must accept responsibility. The one who really holds the answers for a cure?
Sam Faddis: Well, the legislature obviously and you’re absolutely correct in putting your finger on that because that’s at the heart of this and what everybody seems to want to avoid saying. In 2019, the legislature created mail-in voting in Pennsylvania. They created this beast. They created the disaster.
They have had 14 months since then to take very straightforward action and take us back to where we were or if the governor wants to get in the way at least to vote and go on the record as wanting to do that. Yet, having created the problem for 14 months, they’ve talked about audits and investigations and oh my God, all sorts of things.
They actually have not physically done a single thing to correct the problem. Yes, they want to bob, weave the judiciary. It’s on the governor, it’s on anybody, but us. No, you created the problem. You’re in charge of elections. You own this, stand up and do your job.
Sam Rohrer: Ladies and gentlemen, we’re emphasizing this. We’ll get into it a little bit more in the next segment, but understand this. When we’re talking about the process of an election, it is an outs springing of a set of law. Well, who makes the law? Well, that’s why we just went to where we did right there.
The only ones who can make a law is the legislature. They’re the law makers. That’s where it comes from representing the people. Then it goes to, and yes, then before it becomes official, then the governor, the executive branch must sign it. Then it has met the requirements of the constitution and it becomes a law, but the governor cannot create the law.
Now, he can try to, but there’s a way to redress that. The judicial branch, we all know, tries to create law from time to time, but they can’t. There is a way in fact to correct that, but that is the legislature. As we look at this Pennsylvania and we’ll build it out a little bit more specifically, what happened in this Act 77, and a little bit more specificity.
It’s the legislature that brings the concept of a change in law before the body, the house, and the Senate must vote on it. If there’s a majority vote, then win and passes, it goes to the governor. That’s what happened. This Act 77 here in Pennsylvania, and believe it or not November 2019, just in time to be in place for the 2020 elections.
____________________________________________________________________________________
We’re going to continue and go more into now saying why the denial and we’ll ultimately get to a solution. Our theme today is we’re calling it, Stealing the Vote, Defrauding the Citizen, Kicking the Can. We’re talking about the matter of voting integrity. I’ve dealt with this on this program, if you’ve been listening for end length of time, we talked and presented many, many illustrations.
Sam Rohrer: Talked about the significance of this problem years before 2020. We’re making clear in this program and my special guest, Sam Faddis, who was the senior editor for AND magazine. He’s a veteran and retired CIA operations officer as well, has done a lot of work in this. We’re looking and trying to net together what has become extraordinarily complicated unnecessarily, I think, and very distracting for many people.
Everybody knows that fundamentally, there’s something wrong, but as the media does and others tries to get everybody all confused, we’re trying to bring it down a little bit. We’re looking at Pennsylvania because the Pennsylvania’s in the eyes of the entire nation. We all know what happened here to the extent that it impacts the nation.
We’re looking at this because of what we know here and saying by application it really is to a greater or lesser degree, the same kind of thing that’s happening all over the country. Now, let’s go here next. When it comes to a free society, us right now, where we have constitutional freedoms that underpin our liberty and the rule of law prevails.
There’s a simple principle and it is this: the law is the foundation. See, without the law, there can be no enforcement of a law. Without a law, there can be no judicial interpretation of that law. Laws can be moral or immoral. There is no amoral law. Laws can be constitutional or they can be in violation of the constitution.
Laws can be ignored or wrongly enforced by the executive branch, and then that is tyranny. Courts can rule immorally and constitutionally, as we see repeatedly and therefore become unjust. Activist courts, we call them, that also is the definition of tyranny from the bench. Laws can be corrupted by bribery, by intimidation, by acts of commission, or acts of omission.
No lawlessness, abuse, or acts of tyranny of injustice can ever occur if people of integrity honor their oath of office. Now, I’m just going to share it with you the oath of office, that all of those in the office in Pennsylvania take. It’s very similar to most other states. I did this many times when I was in office. Now, let me share it with you, here it goes.
“I do solemnly swear that I will support, obey, and defend the constitution of the United States and the constitution of this Commonwealth. That I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity.” Yes, ladies and gentlemen, by the way, that oath is taken with the person’s left hand on the Bible. You see that’s what takes and converts a simple promise into an oath before God.
Makes the response of that person not just a matter of the constitution and a promise to people, but actually something that’ll make them accountable to God himself. It’s serious business. Sam, now back in to lay a little bit of a foundation, so people understand what’s really at stake. We got to go to the heart of this issue, too.
We talked already that at the heart of the matter here in Pennsylvania was Act 77, a Pennsylvania election code bill passed by a Republican majority house and Senate and signed by our socialist Democrat Governor Wolf in 2019. This law, as we said to set the stage for the conditions in place during 2020.
Build out, again, just very briefly so people understand what did this law actually do? What did it change that made the circumstances in 2020 so ripe for vote theft and so forth?
Sam Faddis: Prior to Act 77, which you have as a system, which is effectively the system and with some slight variations in every state that we’d had since well, even before the republic. You vote in person and there are very, very limited exceptions for absentee ballots at this time.
Other than that, you got to show up and you got to show ID and you have to vote in person. What Act 77 does is it completely guts that system and moves us to no-excuse mail-in voting. You don’t have to show up to the polls. You can send in a ballot. With the practical impact of that is dramatic because you no longer have a person appearing.
You’re no longer asking for ID. You’ve got a piece of paper that shows up from you don’t really know where, from you don’t really know who, and you’re counting that vote. Well, everybody that ever considered mail-in voting before this, including a bipartisan commission chaired by Jimmy Carter of all people had said prior to this, “Mail-in voting is the greatest gift you can ever give to anybody who wants to steal an election. Don’t ever do it.”
In fact, the teams that we send around the world to teach other democracies, how to run elections have forever told them mail-in voting is a disaster, don’t do it. It didn’t just do this and create a problem, it did this despite the fact that everybody knew long ago, what this would do. It would allow you to steal an election.
Gary Dull: It’s absolutely amazing to me, Sam, how this idea of mailing in your ballots, mailing in your votes has really grown and developed here recently because you’re right, this has been something that has been fought against and stood against down through the years. It’s amazing to me how rapidly this has grown.
As it relates to us here in Pennsylvania, some people including our legislative leaders have been blaming any problem that we’ve had here in the 2020 election by the Supreme Court extending the number of days in which mail-in ballots could be counted. Now, we realize that has been a problem, but what’s been the real problem in this whole situation, if you could explain that, please?
Sam Faddis: Look, everybody that wants to evade responsibility for voting for the bill now attempts to paint this as some version of Act 77 was fine, but the Supreme Court and the Secretary of State made it bad. There was a Supreme Court decision and there were actions by the Secretary of State that made it worse.
The bill itself was terrible. The bill itself is the problem. Without the bill, there would be nothing for anybody to interpret. You can’t effectively police, you can’t effectively determine the legitimacy. In the real world in practical terms for election, with hundreds of thousands of millions of people voting, there’s just really in the real world, no way to figure out whether all of these ballots that are appearing are real or not or legitimate or not.
There are too many holes to plug. This was foreseen long, long ago. That’s why the solution is very simple, you show up in person, you show ID, you vote on a paper ballot. We eliminate all these opportunities for fraud and theft, everybody knows that.
It’s very simple and state of Pennsylvania having created this problem, the legislature could return us to that system tomorrow by simply passing a law that said so.
Sam Rohrer: In fact, that is going to be part of the solution. Ladies and gentlemen, will build out a little bit more in the next segment. I will put before for all of us right now that here in Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth Court did hire and act upon a complaint by a county commissioner, a guy named Doug McLinko in the Western part of Pennsylvania, who said that this law passed by the legislature, in fact was a violation.
He sued. The Commonwealth court actually came back by majority and vote and said, yes, in fact it is correct that the legislature indeed did violate a section of our constitution Section 14, as I’m looking at which deals with the area of absentee ballot. I want to explain to say very briefly in the closing minutes here now.
Every state has an ability for people to vote absentee, but the constitutions are prescriptive. The assumption is, you will be there in-person, as Sam just said, and the courts have in the past, even in Pennsylvania have rule that. In fact, it is an in person vote, but there are times when a person can’t be there physically, maybe they’re sick in the hospital.
Maybe they are away on business. There are a list of things that are called out in the constitution because of their duties, occupation, or business require them to be elsewhere or who on the occurrence of any election are unable to attend at their proper polling places because of illness or physical disability.
It lays it out, may apply for and vote so they’re not deprived of vote, but vote absentee. The absentee voting provision is established. It is there to help that person who can’t be there for a legitimate reason. Those prescriptions in place to assure that person is that person are in place, and you don’t have the abuse in your absentee ballots.
The mail-in ballots we’re talking about here is what Act 77 did and what is being put in place across the country, because with that, you can just mail in anybody for any reason, and you don’t have to go. That’s the fundamental reason why Act 77 was unconstitutional, but the legislature passed it. The governor was more than glad to sign it.
That’s the heart of the majority of the voter integrity issues across the country. Now, when we come back, we’ll lay out some solutions, it is fixable.
Sam Rohrer: We’re going to go into the final segment here now. Like we try to do, present a problem, explain the cause, how’d we get to where we are and then provide a solution.
We on this program are not ever about presenting something to be sensational. It’s not our intent to actually bring up an issue and let you hang, it needs to be resolved. Why do we do that? The Bible speaks to every issue of life. We believe that.
Well, since it does, there can be a conclusion, a roadmap back to restoration. A roadmap back to reconciliation. We believe that because that’s what God says. That’s what the Bible says. That’s what frankly our founders believed. And that is the basis of law. God ordained government that leads to freedom based on liberty. It’s all wrapped together.
That is in fact, a biblical world view. That’s why we go over this and say, no matter how you combat it, everything that we deal with can be brought back through this grid. Here’s the solution, let’s think about this. Up to this point in this voting issue around the nation, the real cause regarding the defrauding of the lawfully abiding citizens rates to expect an honest election process, has not been solved, just lot of talk.
There’s been no solution, really. In fact, I have viewed this like a squabble between feuding children who have been caught perhaps in an act of stealing candy. You remember, we’ve all been there. We’ve maybe dealt with our own kids at some point. All of a sudden everybody’s fingers pointing at the other. No, it was him who did it.
Everybody blames the other child, so it is today, if you think about it. The difference is that we’re not dealing with stealing candy and we’re not talking about six or seven-year-old children. We’re talking about whether our freedom will continue or collapse into a one-party despotic rule.
We’re really talking about whether or not the rule of law will prevail or tyranny will prevail. We’re talking about whether integrity in the person and in the process will endure. Whether leaders will emerge to defend and uphold their oath of office before God, and the people or those in office will capitulate, violate their oath, and besmirch the office they hold.
This is serious business. That’s why we’re dealing with it today and saying that just as you would deal with a child, if you’re going to bring them to the point of confession and apology and restoration, is it any different for the adult? No, it’s not. Sam, let’s go back. You’ve already laid out a little bit of a solution.
We said the legislature, the law making body holds the greatest responsibility for where we are in this state and anywhere else where mail-in ballots are the rule, it came out of law somewhere. The legislature was responsible for opening the door. They’re also the ones who have the greatest ability to close the door, and to make right what was in fact wrong.
Lay out a couple of very specific things that people listening could approach their Senator, their house member with and saying, “Here is what should be done. Here is what you must do to fix this problem.” Make a couple of simple bullet points here, if you don’t mind.
Sam Faddis: Well, really at the heart of this is something that’s very straightforward as you’ve suggested, and I’ve touched on, we’ve got a lot of double speak smoke mirrors, what I call parlor tricks that have been trotted out for 14 months. We have no action. A legislature in Harrisburg and Pennsylvania created the problem.
The legislature in Harrisburg could push through a bill and vote essentially any time. If leadership is on board to take us back to in-person voting with ID and paper ballots, et cetera, they could do that right now. Nothing stands in their way. If the governor wants to veto that and fine, we can talk about getting sufficient votes to override the veto.
At a minimum, we would know that they mean what they say they stand with the people and they stand for voting integrity. They have done none of that in 14 months. They bob, they weave, as you say, they act like children avoiding responsibility. You mentioned Doug McLinko, he’s a good friend of mine. He has an organization called ballotsecuritynow.org with which I’ve been helping.
One of the things that group is doing is pushing a pledge to everybody in elected office in Pennsylvania, saying commit to the following things, which boils down to what I just said. Take us back to voting in-person, hard copy ballots, et cetera. Make every rep and Senator in Pennsylvania stand up, either sign the pledge or explain why they stand against the people.
The bottom line is whether you do it via that site or anything else, demand that they take action. Stop talking to me about fantasy investigations, audits that never happen. You can vote. You created the monster, kill it tomorrow. Take us back to in-person voting. Nothing stands in your way. Jake Corman president [inaudible 00:34:21] could get that bill to a vote in almost no time as you know, given his position in the legislature.
They could go on record right now as doing the right thing. The bottom line is you have to demand action. Honestly, every patriot group in the state of which there are hundreds come together with one voice and say, “There’s a line here on the ground. Get on one side or the other. You’re with us or you’re against us. We’re done waiting and I don’t want to hear any more excuses. Just do it right now.”
Sam Rohrer: Sam, I think you laid that out very, very clearly. That’s exactly what needs to take place. I’m looking right now. I see one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. There are 14 house members right now. A couple were not there. Others were there, voted for it. They have come out and said, “We made a major mistake.”
They signed on with Doug McLinko that you mentioned onto his lawsuit with the Commonwealth Court. Ladies and gentlemen, it’s possible if you’re in Pennsylvania that you or representative perhaps has already acknowledged what was wrong, and maybe have indicated they want to make it right. It makes no difference what state you’re in as you’re listening to me.
You have the same kind of problem to one degree or another we’re explaining here in Pennsylvania. Remember this, mail-in ballots are the problem not voting in-person is a problem, not having a paper ballot that which you can track it back and identify and prove is a problem. Mail-in ballots is they’re not the same as absentee.
Mail-in are not the same as absentee and there’s no reason for them unless you want a problem, and an open door to abuse, as Sam said. Even came out of when there was a study under president Carter himself. It’s not something new, but it is now developed. Can I just say this later, Jim, I just was thinking of something.
If we’re talking about this fundamental, we’re talking about a matter of integrity, but corruption and the lack of integrity in the system of government always starts with corruption and the lack of integrity in the people in government. Let me state it again, corruption and the lack of integrity and the system of government always starts with corruption, and the lack of integrity in the people in government.
That’s why it comes right back to what we’re talking from the beginning, a person’s character. Do they mean what they say when they took that oath? They took it before God. Well, that is where you appeal, I would say, as someone who’s been in the office, you appeal to someone’s conscience.
This is a matter they must do, whether you’re in Pennsylvania or any other state where this is taking place. Hopefully, we’ve given a little bit of a response. The solution is not difficult, but there has to be an admittance, a confession, repentance, and really going back and put it in the bill and vote it right, and then go from there.
Thank you for listening today. Thank you, Sam Faddis for being with us, and Gary. We hope that all of you will be back with us tomorrow. Just 23 hours from now.
Recent Comments