JILL STEIN'S SECOND POISON PILL MAY BE HIDDEN IN PHILADELPHIA COUNTY APPEAL.

Don't blink, the Jill Stein Pennsylvania recount nightmare is about to get even more insidious and weird in Philadelphia County.

Earlier this week, I discussed that federal case as containing a poison dose of subterfuge, but earlier today I mentioned the forthcoming surprise lethal dose. And this one is simply brilliant in its camouflage.

Yesterday, this blog appeared to scoop the main stream media by announcing at 12:19 P.M. ET, that Judge Abbe Fletman had denied the appeal of "petitioners" regarding a Philadelphia Board of Elections decision not to allow petitioners access to the machines for a secondary "forensic examination", after their limited recanvass of 75 precincts failed to reveal any discrepancies.

I discussed in a comment to that post the strange event of my having been on a phone call with Phil. City Commisioner, Fred Voight, asking specifically about the petioners' appeal and asking how I could view the papers - when he suddenly informed me that the decision had just come down as we were talking, appeal denied, opinion to follow.

I asked for the exact caption, "Does it name the voter-petitioners?" He responded that the caption is "In The Matter of The Presidential Election of 2016".

He also confirmed for me that all of the papers were a matter of public record and would be available at http://courts.phila.gov - and he gave me the following "docket number: 16125000".

Fred Voight took my email and said he would send me the original petition submitted to the board of elections by the voters. We never discussed Jill Stein as being part of those petitions, because she was not a voter.

When I tried the docket number, and name of case, neither came up as valid. So I reported:

"I can't seem to find the docket number, so I haven't actually seen papers. Will add more as it comes in."

About an hour later, CBS PHILLY reported this headline:

Judge Denies Appeal By Jill Stein’s Lawyers For Forensic Examinations Of Philly Voting Machines

Their report cloaks the names of the petitioners, only mentioning that Stein's lawyers brought the appeal. And Voight never got back to me, so as of yesterday morning I still havr no names for the petitioners. I wanted to see if Stein's co-plaintiff in her federal Eastern District PA case - the mysterious Randall Reitz - was named in the petition.

Yesterday morning, I was searching for Judge Fletman's Opinion when I came across a report by Dave Davies at Newsworks.org posting Judge Fletman's five page Opinion.

Like Judge Goldsmith's opinion in Michigan's federal District Court that shut down Stein's appeal, Fletman's denial is mostly accurate to the law. But - wait for it - this appeal was not on behalf of the voter-petitioners.

This "partial-appeal" concerns an attempt by Stein to get into the voting machines on her own initiation earlier this week, and it contains a proper Case ID number as well, 161103335.

Here is a pdf of the DOCKET ENTRIES:


https://www.docdroid.net/Wp5NomO/civil-docket-report.pdf.html:

[SOMEBODY PLEASE PURCHASE THE 191 PAGE MEMORANDUM OF LAW + FIVE PAGE APPEAL + BRIEFS OF ELECTION BOARD and REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Upload pdf files and post in comments to this post. I am off the grid.]

Inside the case file at http://courts.phila.gov the number Voight gave me is there, listed  as "Docket Entry 16125000." That eight numeral number Voight gave me is not a case ID number, which is what you really need. Those contain nine numerals. So putting 161203335 in will bring up the case entries.

But Voight and I were discussing an appeal on behalf of the voter-petitioners, not a direct action by Stein. The caption in Case ID 161103555 is "Stein v. Philadelphia County Board of Elections".

What happened to "In the Matter of the Presidential Election of 2016"? I can't find it. The search at courts.phila.gov is not spitting it up, so I do not see an appeal on behalf of voter-petitioners...which does not mean one isn't still pending.

So, earlier this week, Stein instituted her own appeal from the County Board of Elections decision not to allow a forensic examination, and she lost...but not by much if you ask me.

Because if you look closer at the devious details, a few sinister blips have hit the radar screen:

Blip 1: Didn't the media tell everyone that Jill gave up on her Pennsylvania state activity? Didn't she hold a big press conference on Monday Dec. 5th announcing that she was filing a temper tantrum in Federal Court over the antiquated Pennsylvania Election Code? I don't recall any hullabaloo about her pending Philly appeal hearing the next day.

This quiet appeal shows cunning. Why? Because - unlike the big blustering Federal Court hype - this little appeal provides shade and distraction in a tighter space related to...

Blip 2: This was only a "partial appeal", so what else is going on then if this is just partial? What is the whole? Is there another part of this case still surviving? Judge Fletman's opinion seems to indicate that there is...

Blip 3: Check this bizarre intrigue from page five of Fletman's opinion:

"Similarly, in this case, appellants have raised no specter of fraud, bad faith, abuse of discretion, or arbitrariness. Accordingly, this court will not disturb the board's opinion... For all the foregoing reasons, the court affirms the decision of the Philadelphia County Board of Elections and dismisses the appeal of appellant Jill Stein."

The caption only mentions Jill Stein. So where are the other "appellants" ? Appellants who apparently failed to allege fraud and bad faith, that is.

You see, Stein latched on to voter-petitioners here - according to Fletman's opinion - as a candidate who was allowed to examine voting machines during a recount under P.S. 2650(c) of the Election Code.

However, Fletman held that "examination" of the machines does not equal surgical forensic analysis of the inner electronic voting system contained therein.

Hmm. I don't like it. This is sneaky as... Me no likey. Nope. Judge Fletman's argument against Stein on this point is murky, and I think - if going with my gut - intentionally so. In fact, I would expect an appeal to the Commonwealth Court is pending as we speak. I am just waking up to this, because I was clearly hoodwinked here. My bad.

This drop of poison is potentially lethal.

To me, it seems possible Stein could appeal this decision right up to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court...if her petitioners were before the Philadelphia County Election Board properly under 1404(e) of the Election Code.

But what about the other appellants? Was that just a typo? I seriously do not believe that. This looks insidious.

These guys/gals are good. Evil. Cunning. Deceptive. They own the media. I mean, c'mon, how is it even possible Lawrence Tabas is both, still a candidate-elector for Trump and not pending disciplinary action in front of the Pennsylvania bar.

And why did he not let the Commonwealth Court know he was an interested party, a candidate for the Office of Candidate Elector?

And why did Ron Hicks perform like a spastic buffoon before the Allegheny Court of Common Pleas, butchering the statute and especially the deadline? He is not a buffoon. And his deception was clever.

I am always reminded of Kashmir by Led Zeppelin in moments like this, "We are your overlords." They see us as  muggles.

To me, it seems possible Stein could appeal this decision right up to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court...if her petitioners were before the Philadelphia County Election Board properly under 1404(e) of the Election Code. My report earlier today proves they were not.

Stay vigilant, deplorables.

Stay classy, Philadelphia.


Ren Jander, J.D.