Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Why did California and other States "Deter" Disabled Voters from voting in the Presidential Election?

 


 

The below (2016) Election Stats speak for themselves and you ask yourself how are States including, California, able to interfere with "Disabled Voters" fundamental rights? 

 

Because, no State shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protections of the laws.”    The principle of equal protection is a fundamental right, that applies to "Disabled Voters," because, at its core, equal protection laws  also protects "Disabled Voters," who are  protected class members from arbitrary discrimination at the hands of States, inclusive (“CALIFORNIA”).

 

(2016) STATES THAT “DETERRED” DISABLED OR PERSONS ILL FROM VOTING

AT WHAT PERCENTAGE % did each state perform during (2016) Election?

(2016) CITED SOURCES –

 

DATA RESERACHED BY:

 

MIT.EDU

ALABAMA

22.29%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=AL&year=2016

ALASKA

12.19%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=AK&year=2016

ARIZONA

8.29%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=AZ&year=2016

ARKANSAS*

20.19%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=AR&year=2016

CALIFORNIA

11.56%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=CA&year=2016

COLORADO

7.06%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=CO&year=2016

CONNECTICUT*

20.21%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=CT&year=2016

DELAWARE

17.92%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=DE&year=2016

FLORIDA

13.16%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=FL&year=2016

GEORGIA

14.85%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=GA&year=2016

HAWAII

10%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=HI&year=2016

IDAHO*

11.97%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=ID&year=2018

ILLINOIS

12.52%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=IL&year=2018

INDIANA

17.44%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=IN&year=2016

IOWA*

9.00%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=IA&year=2016

KANSAS

13.78%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=KS&year=2016

KENTUCKY

16.85%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=KY&year=2016

LOUISIANA*

18.31%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=LA&year=2016

MAINE

14.26%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=ME&year=2016

MARYLAND

16.13%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=MD&year=2016

MASSACHUSETTS*

19.43%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=MA&year=2016

Michigan

13.58%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=MI&year=2016

MISSISSIPPI*

18.74%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=MS&year=2016

MISSOURI*

17.09%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=MO&year=2016

MONTANA

8.46%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=MT&year=2016

NEBRASKA*

10.42%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=NE&year=2016

NEVADA*

12.05%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=NV&year=2016

NEW HAMPSHIRE

15.51%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=NH&year=2016

NEW JERSEY

16.54%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=NJ&year=2016

NEW MEXICO*

14.92%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=NM&year=2016

NEW YORK

14.65%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=NY&year=2016

NORTH CAROLINA

16.48%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=NC&year=2016

NORTH DAKOTA*

10.07%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=ND&year=2016

OHIO*

12.38%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=OH&year=2016

OKLAHOMA*

15.39%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=OK&year=2016

OREGON*

8.96%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=OR&year=2016

PENNSYLVANIA*

15.44%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=PA&year=2016

RHODE ISLAND*

18.51%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=RI&year=2016

SOUTH CAROLINA

17.46

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=SC&year=2016

SOUTH DAKOTA

10.00%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=SD&year=2016

TENNESSEE

14.36%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=TN&year=2016

TEXAS

11.84%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=TX&year=2016

UTAH*

12.13%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=UT&year=2016

VERMONT*

7.33%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=VT&year=2016

VIRGINIA*

16.85%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=VA&year=2016

WASHINGTON*

3.42%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=WA&year=2016

WEST VIRGINIA*

21.79%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=WV&year=2016

WISCONSIN

15.93%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=WI&year=2016

WYOMING

7.84%

https://elections.mit.edu/#/data/map?view=state-profile&state=WY&year=2016

 

Source: MIT.EDU

Stat Table: 11/25/20, Wednesday 

 Pending (2020) Stats for comparison. 

Posted by at

Friday, November 20, 2020

Justice High Jacked ("Corruption Exposed") by Star Moffatt, Author and Jeffrey Moffatt, Co-Author


Jeff and I are proud to say we took the time to write our first book.

Book launch dated on Star's B-Day June 20, 2021 and continue to follow us so you can attend our upcoming Launch Party!

We did it and so can you!

 

Posted by at

Tuesday, October 27, 2020

"Injustice(s)"

 


Posted by at

Monday, October 26, 2020

Sheriff Villanueva:  What an honor to have spent some time early today with Los Angeles County "Sheriff Villanueva.".... 

What an honor to have spoken with Sheriff Villanueva, on this GOD given historic day (October 26, 2020, Monday).   

 

Additionally, it is always an honor to be in the same presence with Sharis Rhodes, Millennial Activist and Community Liaison, see her  at the top left hand corner.  


Contrary to several fake news articles I have read in the past about Sheriff Villanueva, is opposite from my observation and that he really seems to care about "We the People, We the Taxpayers and We the Majority!" 

 

And yet, what won't surprise me if the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, does in fact attempt to remove Sheriff Villanueva from his elected seat voted in (2018) by "We the People," We the Taxpayers and We the Majority!"   

 

Above also featured on Facebook - 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=916954462166801&id=100015567678937&anchor_composer=false

 

Stay tuned for updates!

 


 

Posted by at

Thursday, October 22, 2020

How Big Tech is Working on Stealing...

 


How Big Tech is Working on Stealing the Presidential Election From Trump

Credit Author - Rachel Alexander - 

Originally Posted: Oct 19, 2020, 12:01 AM - 
Republished with Permission 10/22/2020

"Allum Bokhari, an investigative tech writer for Breitbart, published a book last month explaining how Big Tech intends to defeat Trump. If anyone should know, it’s him, having written about Big Tech’s attacks on conservatives for years. And it’s important to read this book, because the censorship is now so vast"...

Click on the below Link to Read more at:

SOURCE:  https://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2020/10/19/how-big-tech-is-working-on-stealing-the-presidential-election-from-trump-n2578324



Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)