NYTimes Exposed “Massive Scheme” By Democrats In Pennslyvania's Election System… In 1994

NYTimes Exposed "Massive Scheme" By Democrats In
Pennslyvania's Election System... In 1994 1

As Trump’s solid lead on election night in Pennsylvania leaked away overnight (in mysterious and allegedly nefarious ways), many were left wondering just what happened. Well, there was no fraud, that’s for sure, according to the establishment leftists and rightists and the media… it’s all a vast right wing conspiracy.

Headline-writers and talking-heads were quick to dismiss any allegations, 100s of affadavits, and video evidence of fraud, proclaiming any and all suggestions of fraud are “baseless claims” and an “unprecedented” attack on Democracy… etc…

NYTimes Exposed "Massive Scheme" By Democrats In
Pennslyvania's Election System... In 1994 2

However, this kind of systemic fraud is anything but unprecedented in Pennsylvania. As none other than The New York Times wrote in February 1994

“Saying Philadelphia’s election system had collapsed under “a massive scheme” by Democrats to steal a State Senate election in November, a Federal judge today took the rare step of invalidating the vote and ordered the seat filled by the Republican candidate.”

Judge Newcomer ruled that the Democratic campaign of William G. Stinson had stolen the election from Bruce S. Marks in North Philadelphia’s Second Senatorial District through an elaborate fraud in which hundreds of residents were encouraged to vote by absentee ballot even though they had no legal reason — like a physical disability or a scheduled trip outside the city — to do so… (emphasis ours)

In many instances, according to Republicans who testified during a four-day civil trial last week, Democratic campaign workers forged absentee ballots. On many of the ballots, they used the names of people who were living in Puerto Rico or serving time in prison, and in one case, the voter had been dead for some time.

“Substantial evidence was presented establishing massive absentee ballot fraud, deception, intimidation, harassment and forgery,” Judge Newcomer wrote in a decision made public today.

The district, which includes white, black and Hispanic neighborhoods, is overwhelmingly Democratic by registration. Nonetheless, campaign workers testified that widespread voter apathy had prompted them to promote a “new way to vote” to insure a victory.

Indeed, the two Democrats on the three-member board of elections, an elected body, testified that they were aware of the voter fraud, had intentionally failed to enforce the election law and had later tried to conceal their activities by hurriedly certifying the Democratic candidate as the winner.

Judge Newcomer ordered that Mr. Stinson, a 49-year-old former assistant deputy mayor of Philadelphia, be removed from his State Senate office and that Mr. Marks, a 36-year-old lawyer and former aide to United States Senator Arlen Specter, be certified the winner within 72 hours.

“This is extraordinary relief,” Judge Newcomer wrote. “However, it is appropriate because extraordinary conduct by the Stinson campaign and the board tainted the entirety of the absentee ballots.”

… some election experts noted today that there have been many larger cases of voter fraud in Chicago and Louisiana in the 1970’s and Alabama in the 1980’s.

The case involving the Philadelphia seat, however, may be the largest example involving fraudulent absentee ballots.

Read more here…

So, is this where the Democrats got the idea to swamp the nation with mail-in ballots? It worked (for a while) in 1994, why not try it again now… and this time, Dems have the entire media at their behest to whitewash/censor/ban any dissent of a free- and fair-election.

Read the Full Article

Election Witnesses: Kanye’s Michigan Votes Were Stolen by Joe Biden
Massive Crowds of People March in DC to Show Support for Trump, Demand Election Integrity

You might also like