Margot Cleveland has done it again, this time by digging deep into a detailed whistleblower complaint about “concerning behavior” among Pennsylvania election officials. The complaint runs 90-plus pages, it includes a “bevy” of exhibits, and, yes, there’s video.

The video appears to show election officials from Delaware County, Pennsylvania, destroying records from the November 2020 election. As in, tearing up records, tossing them in the trash, and talking about what a big bonfire they’re gonna have.

As Cleveland reports, this complaint presents detailed alleged violations of state law during the election, as well as claims of a conspiracy afterwards “to hide the numerous problems and illegalities that occurred during the last presidential election” by conspiring to destroy or alter election data “to prevent the discovery of the fraudulent results of the November 3, 2020, election, and the violation of various state and federal election laws.”

Pennsylvania has what they call a Right To Know law, and when Delaware County got a request on May 21, 2021, for election data, this appears to have sparked the alleged conspiracy and cover-up, with the apparent goal of turning evidence of malfeasance into thousands of tiny charcoal briquets.

In a video provided to The Federalist of an alleged conversation that took place a week after that request, the director of election operations for Delaware County, James Allen, is heard speaking with chief custodian/voting machine warehouse supervisor, Jim Savage.

Allen: “Then get rid of the pads and the second scanners.”

Savage: “We can’t talk about it any more.”

Allen: “Why?

Savage: “It’s a felony.” According to the complaint, Savage encouraged a private conversation about this later because other employees were there at the time.

Video from the following month appears to show another Delaware County official, James ("Ziggy") Ziegelhofer, talking with the whistleblower. Ziggy was “Judge of the Election” for the Western Precinct of the Media Borough.

Ziggy: “What we have evidence, right? Let them figure that out.”

Whistle: “Yes, but what I don’t understand, and this makes --- honestly, this makes me nervous. Is why tapes were being thrown away?”

Ziggy: “No, no, tapes were---”

Whistle: “No, you guys have been throwing away tapes...So, what tapes are you throwing away? Like, why?”

Ziggy: “They’re all unidentifiable.”

Whistle: “But it’s been that way since the November elections, so why would you throw anything away? Because you have to save it for 22 months.”

Ziggy: “Yes, there are tapes that are being tossed. But they are of no audit value.”

A third conversation allegedly captures the whistleblower talking with Delaware County lawyer Tom Gallager, who is tearing tapes from voting machines and discarding them. Ziggy is there, too.

Whistle: “Tom, why do you have to rip it up? Make you feel better?”

Gallager: “At this point, I don’t want anybody to pick it up, and thinking we threw stuff away.”

Ziggy: “We’re gonna have a little campfire going.”

The complainants in the case allege that Ziegelhofer and Gallager set up a long table with 2020 election data and “selectively destroyed” the proof tapes from the machines and other evidence by tearing it into pieces and placing it in the trash, saying they’d make a campfire with it.

Contract employee Regina Miller became nervous abut what was going on, complainants allege, and told the men they were violating numerous state and federal laws. (So it appears we have our whistleblower: Miller.)

Miller allegedly was threatened. She says that in July of 2021, Allen said he’d consider a complaint made to anyone but him as “a second and final violation of chain of command,” and that Savage told her “that he would have someone killed if he was ever betrayed by someone at work and described a story that he heard regarding someone from the county that someone ‘ratted on.’”

The complaint presents five legal theories for recovery, but Cleveland doesn’t think any of them are a “close fit” with the facts presented to the court. She says the allegations “seem to scream of violations of the law,” but she doesn’t grasp the remedy the complainants seek. If it’s fraud, the remedy is typically money damages, but how would a court assess that here? Meaning, if you’re disenfranchised, just how much is your lost vote worth?

Cleveland tried to contact Allen, Savage, Gallager and Ziegelhofer for her story but didn’t hear back from any of them.

I’m not a lawyer, but it seems to me the complainants wouldn’t be looking for a legal remedy in the form of compensation, but rather to make it clear that these people broke the law. And that seems to be Cleveland’s interpretation as well. She believes their purpose is to expose this conspiracy, find out what these people were covering up, and avoid a repeat performance of election fraud. But Cleveland’s not optimistic that even video evidence will be enough for people “blinded by their distaste for Trump.” She's correct in thinking that Trump Derangement Syndrome really is that bad. In their desire to destroy him, they don’t even care if the system --- and our trust in it --- is collateral damage.

We found a report from a local news outlet, the Delaware County Daily Times, with more details on the complaint and the players involved, as well as specifics on the relief complainants are seeking. (They want a jury trial.) Ruth Moton, a former Republican candidate for the state legislature, is filing the suit along with several other local residents. Their complaint names 38 people (!), including former Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and numerous local election officials. It says they have documented evidence of a conspiracy to “destroy, delete, secrete, alter, hide and/or obscure election data and materials, equipment and/or the product of same, and/or the results reflected thereby...”

So there.

One thing Cleveland didn’t mention: They’re also asking Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro and U.S. Attorney William McSwain to investigate for possible fraud and election law violations. So far, no criminal charges have been filed against any election official, but complainants also want a protective order to stop them from destroying or altering any records or machines used in the November 3 election --- make that any MORE records --- and an order to produce all machines, hard drives, software, etc., required for the independent and non-partisan forensic audit that they undoubtedly need to do.

Acesse a minha HOME PAGE, para assistir meus vídeos e ler meus livros:

4 views0 comments