USACN is updating a recent editorial on election integrity: EDITORIAL: DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTION RESULTS ALARM SE PA VOTERS
A summary of the key points of Part 3 of this editorial:
1–The evidence in the pro se Hoopes Stenstrom case currently being litigated in Delaware county Pa under the oversight of a judicial rather than a jury trial is strong. This non lawyer team have litigated cases since the 2020 election. Previous editorials by USACN have assessed their evidence of voter fraud to be strong.
Nonetheless, the Republican party has not supported Hoopes and Stenstrom. Hoopes and Stenstrom have spent their life savings on their cases. Despite the strong evidence, in this, and, in their previous cases, that they have litigated, they do not have a judicial decision made in their favor.
2–In 2018, the Heritage foundation had a database of 1,132 proven instances of election fraud over 47 states. How can the media claim that election fraud is a rare event?
3-Why do state GOP backed election integrity units say that they find no systematic problems of voter fraud given the evidence cited in this and previous editorials?
4–Why has Democrat attorney, Clint Curtis, not been a frequent expert witness in court cases? Why does the mainstream media never cover his interviews ? Why do they rarely interview him?
5–The election validity battle in Nevada is heating up with another pro se case brought by a courageous citizen.
6–Voters favor Republicans over Democrats on major issues.
1–Fwd: PRO SE Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration Case No. 448 MD 2023
See inline note below and attached motion for reconsideration for Marrietta, Gallo, Stenstrom v. Fayette County, PA sent to Commonwealth Court of PA. It’s a hard shot at the Common Pleas Court President Judge misconduct, Governor Shapiro, and the malfeasance surrounding the May 2023 primary election regarding candidates for PA Supreme Court, PA Commonwealth Court, and PA Superior Court.
Still in the fight. More to come. Semper Fi.
Gregory Stenstrom, Pro Se, 856-264-5495
———- Forwarded message ———
From: Gregory Stenstrom
Date: Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 10:21 PM
Subject: PRO SE Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration Case No. 448 MD 2023
To: CommCourt Filing, CommCourt Prothonotary
Cc: Fayette County Solicitor Jack Purcell,
Jon Marietta, Geno Gallo, Gregory Stenstrom,
Dear Prothonatory Krimmel,
Please find attached Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration. I did my best to file via efile, but with case closed, there are no options for MFR. Tried it with Motion to Intervene to get it into your hands via efile and minimize email filing traffic, but no joy, as I could not get past the participant filer screen, although I did update and save participant info (all participants were listed as Pro Se).
Defendant counsel (solicitor), Jack Purcell, is cc’d here, Defendants will be served Monday morning by County Constable, and we will send USPS 1st Class certified mail to your attention as well.
We noted the case was rejected PER CURIAM per 42 Pa.C.S. 761, but we had filed per 42 Pa.C.S. 762 (1) and (2) under “Pennsylvania Election Code.” I apologize if that was unclear, but we have clarified in the attached Motion for Reconsideration.
Please file electronically on Plaintiffs behalf, or let us know how to proceed to notify PER CURIAM Judges.
Gregory Stenstrom, PRO SE
2–A a senior policy analyst in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation., Jason Snead, in 2018 published an articled entitled, Add These Voter Fraud Cases to the Growing List. He said, “Despite the lack of media coverage, evidence of election fraud continues to mount.
This week, The Heritage Foundation added 26 new entries to its election fraud database, bringing the searchable ledger to a total of 1,132 proven instances of election fraud. That includes 983 cases that ended in a criminal conviction, 48 that led to civil penalties, 79 where defendants were enrolled in a diversion program, and 22 cases of official or judicial findings of fraud. Americans should be alarmed. These entries represent irrefutable evidence that fraud has impacted elections in 47 states, and across all levels of government.”
3–State GOP-backed ‘election integrity’ units find few voter fraud cases after midterms. Paul Smith, a highly accomplished attorney and senior vice president of the Campaign Legal Center said ““I am not aware of any significant detection of fraud on Election Day, but that’s not surprising,”
We suggest that Jason Sead from the Heritage house contact attorney Smith and update him on the evidence for voter fraud. In addition, Attorney Smith should have a meeting with attorney David Clements or Clint Curtis and review the evidence together.
This meeting should be a serious debate in public so that voters can make up their own minds when a group of legal scholars on both sides of the issue have a debate rather than each one doing a monologue interview alone without another expert scholar counter the other scholars arguments.
Former Trump lawyers, prominent in their field, take plea deals in the Georgia Fulton County RICO case against President Trump and his lawyers regarding their claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election: John Eastman Could Be the Next Domino To Fall Against Donald Trump, Jenna Ellis’ lawyer says she rushed to land plea deal — and warns Giuliani “should be” worried
In contrast to the Republican party’s inability to find evidence of voter fraud, and for their attorneys, who once litigated cases alleging voter fraud, who, now, apologized in court for such pleadings, a Judge in Connecticut recently found “shocking” evidence of voter fraud in a local Democrat primary election.
In the article, Judge Overturns Primary Election, Calling Evidence of Fraud ‘Shocking’, the Judge rules in favor of a Democrat primary candidate against another Democrat candidate noting “shocking” evidence of voter fraud. This is a judicial ruling that occurred regarding the September 12th 2023 primary race.
The Judge ruled that “Both women were captured on video dropping off multiple absentee ballots, on multiple occasions, into drop boxes. They each declined to testify during the fraud trial, asserting their Fifth Amendment rights.
Connecticut Superior Court Judge William Clark said on Nov. 1 that the conduct on the video “represents multiple violations” of state law governing absentee voting.
Given the violations, the judge said he was “unable to determine the results of the primary.” He ordered a new primary election.”
We applaud this Judge’s ruling. But, similar evidence has been presented for elections from 2020 through recent elections in different states by Hoopes and Stenstrom, Englebrecht and Phillips and others. Dinesh Dsouza’s documentary 2000 mules describes this evidence.
Why is it that judges reject evidence of vote harvesting brought by Republican lawyers for Republican candidates and, in this case, accept it when it is in a race of Democrat candidates?
We hope this is a sign of a shift in overall judicial opinion regarding evidence of voter fraud rather than a bias towards one party.
4–When you review the evidence presented in parts 1 and 2 of this editorial, one wonders how have the Judges rarely ruled in favor of the evidence for election fraud?
Attorney Clint Curtis is an IT programmer, and whistleblower, who wrote some of the original code that creates an inserted victory of 51% to 49% for the candidate of their choice, and as he says, the illegal vote manipulation can not be observed as the machines carries it out.
While Hoopes and Stenstrom have gone to court multiple times, since the 2020 election, with evidence of illegal voting activity by Democrat candidates against Republican candidates in Delaware County, Pa, Republican officials in some other Pa Counties state there is no evidence of election fraud.
In an article entitled, “Robert Beadles tests Washoe County election fraud claims in court“, the journalist says “Representing himself in the lawsuit, Beadles says that bringing forward legal claims of widespread election fraud opens up attorneys to be targeted.
Like Hoopes and Stenstrom, “Plaintiff hereby represents himself pro se…”. But the reason Beadles chose to represent himself, “to save his lawyers from attacks on their livelihoods,” differed from the reason Hoopes and Stenstrom chose the pro se route.
Beadles’ quote regarding Republican lawyers was published in August 2023 and the following articles regarding Trump attorneys taking plea deals to avoid costly litigation that could result in long prison terms were published in November 2023: John Eastman Could Be the Next Domino To Fall Against Donald Trump, Jenna Ellis’ lawyer says she rushed to land plea deal — and warns Giuliani “should be” worried
6–A snapshot of surveys indicate that voters favor Republicans over Democrats on major issues such as:
GOP Holds Solid Advantage on Immigration: 49% of voters not affiliated with either party, trust Republicans more on immigration, and 28% trust Democrats.
In contrast to the Republican voters favoring Trump, wealthy Republican donors are not supporting Trump: Koch Network Raises Over $70 Million for Push to Sink Trump
Furthermore, a significant portion of Republican Senators have supported reckless Biden administration spending that is accelerating the pace of the loss of the dollar as the world’s currency: Full List of Republican Senators Who Voted to Pass $1.7T Omnibus Bill
And, despite the fact that most voters believe that there has been cheating in recent elections, there has been no significant election reform since the 2020 election.
The Republican party’s strategy has been to “look forward” and not “backward”. That is, the Republican party did not support adjudicating the evidence for election fraud and, hence, assessing the likelihood of a stolen election in 2020.
Recently, the national Republican party published a resolution calling for return to paper ballots, no voting machines, no mail in ballots (Appendix). To date, this resolution seems destined to be without action given the politics of the state legislatures and state supreme courts in swing states which are largely anti Trump despite their voters being pro Trump.
In conclusion, there are two pro se cases brought by citizens Hoopes and Stenstrom in Pa, and, Beadles in Nv, alleging voter fraud. USACN editorial board urges the Republican party to support these two cases in whatever way these litigants need.
The Republican voters are overwhelmingly in favor of Trump for President. The Republican party, unfortunately, is not, as evidenced by the Americans for Prosperity (AFP) investing over $70M to defeat Trump.
The Republican party seems to be more effective in beating itself. In the November 2022 elections, Republican strategist, Karl Rove, and his SuperPAC, supported left wing Democrat candidate for Governor of Pa, candidate Shapiro, who eventually beat Republican candidate Mastriano.
The Republican party seems willing to sacrifice the country to the Marxist wing of the Democrat party whose current policies are driving our country into bankruptcy with 18 Republican Senators allowing passage of the $1.7T Omnibus Bill.
There is evidence of voter fraud on both sides of the aisle, Democrats and Republicans have manipulated votes in a consequential manner that impacted the outcome of elections.
There is evidence of bias by Judges against Republican based voter fraud cases as compared to Democrat fraud cases.
There is evidence that Republican lawyers have been and will be punished by law firms and Bar associations if they litigate for Republican plaintiffs in voter fraud cases. Prominent Republican lawyers with outstanding accomplishments in the courtroom are at risk of losing their law licenses because they litigated voter fraud cases for Trump and other Republican candidates.
In the end, our country’s survival may come down to the outcome of the pro se case of Hoopes and Stenstrom in Delaware county, Pa. Their case is much further down the legal path then is the pro se case of Beadles.
What more evidence do you need to conclude that our legal system needs major reform, when the survival of our country comes down to two non lawyers, Hoopes and Stenstrom, spending all of their personal savings, with no legal training, defeating a mighty Democrat machine of lawyers and judges backed by unlimited funds
Leah Hoopes and Greg Stenstrom
Motion for Reconsideration Marietta Gallo Stenstrom v Fayette County 20OCT2023 FILED (1)
RESOLUTION URGING A “RETURN TO EXCELLENCE” IN AMERICAN VOTING