Voting errors / election integrity

I saw a video at the Our Country Our Choice youtube channel the other night, and the first part addressed election integrity.

BLUF: 'Selected not elected' might be more accurate than we thought. Our election integrity is probably worse off than many of us thought, with error rates that are disturbing. Based on percentages being reported, we may not have anything close to a true representation of the People. When you ask, "how'd this person get elected?", it's not just rhetorical. As usual the courts have failed to assist in rectifying this problem.



One of the guests was Marly Hornik, her organization looks at election integrity, unite4freedom.com

- She mentions Art1 Sec2 in that the People (meaning citizens) are to choose their representatives and says that this is not happening.
- Her organization has found error rates ranging from 12% to 27%, and I believe this was all from the 2022 midterms. Errors meaning improper ballots, people that can't be traced or tracked down, etc.
- Constitutional mandate in Art1 Sec2 (Members chosen by the People) yet elections are getting certified with profound amounts of error. So there's no regard for accuracy.
- Many elections are decided by very small margins so no one truly knows who is winning many of these elections.
- She said that "millions of votes don't look like they're from real people".
- Said the databases that contain all the voting information are related to national security and civil rights - so they're a big deal. She says that election integrity must be proven, not assumed or presumed. We have a right to choose our Members of Congress, and this is explicitly stated in the Constitution. She quotes Marbury v Madison in that a right without a remedy is not a right, or is not being treated as one. Thus, there must be proof that the People are truly selecting office holders which cannot be done with so many errors.
- Said they often see more votes than voters.
- Other guest, Judge Napolitano, said the courts put the burden on the voter/plaintiff to show that the wrong person got elected and that without that showing, they won't let cases proceed. This is usually an impossible burden due to lack of transparency.
- Marly counters with a SCOTUS case that stated the 'evil intent of an election worker is demonstrated when he violates the law'.
- Another guest brought up the fact that in Arizona, they don't follow their own laws. (my comment: remember that the current governor was the Secretary of State and ran the 2020 presidential election, then ran the election in which she was elected governor)
- Marly says that given the data, if the same voting systems are in place for 2024, it will constitute irreparable harm to the People.
- Napolitano pointed out how the courts look at these things, but their outlook is erroneous. They want you to show the wrong candidate was elected, yet there is a lack of transparency out there to demonstrate that, and courts want you to show harm/injury and are ignoring the obvious harm from losing confidence in the system, the failure to uphold the mandate of the Constitution, and to comply with laws like the Help America Vote Act which stipulates error rates cannot exceed something around 0.008%.
- Summary: this is bad and it's going to take massive numbers of the population to demand action from Congress, the Courts, and to elect new people to implement change and overcome errors.