Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tennmountainman
They can be viewed. The issue is waiting for them to be redacted, and paying for the redaction. The pollbooks are public records.

Three of the justices refused to endorse the outcome, because they had no record before them.

38 posted on 07/17/2014 12:29:58 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt

They are redacted by people loyal to Cochran-Barbour. There is already evidence of that. Clerks are on video record denouncing McDaniel and saying he should use the redacted records the same as Cochran. And Cochran’s campaign said they only found about 1000 irregularities.

Redacted ‘copies’ could never be trusted to reflect the real original materials. There is too much corruption in the background to ever allow redacted copies to be admittes as evidence.

Best to go with the more than 10,000 pages of documented fraud and at the same time move to join the TTV federal lawsuit to get access to the original poll books which tell unequivocally the story.

And note that the original poll books implicate potentially tens of thousands of democrat voters in vote fraud.


44 posted on 07/17/2014 12:37:51 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: Cboldt

No it is wrong to require money that people can’t afford to pay in order to preserve the integrity of an election. The offending information does not need to be copied. And all of it except the SN# is public record anyways. Did you here they want 14 thousand to redact one set of poll books. That is instability. It only preserves the ability to cheat and get away with it.


83 posted on 07/17/2014 7:47:14 PM PDT by Revel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson