I volunteered as Election Worker and I have to agree to oral swabs, blood test and credit check. Thoughts?
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (34)
sorted by:
My position would be:
Stir up some trouble, and see what happens.
I recently had a traffic ticket dismissed because I challenged the authority of the court, and they couldn't figure out what to do other than dismiss. Note: They will NEVER agree that you are right, but in the end they should agree to do what you want, which in this case is be a volunteer election worker.
NOTE: If they fight back, there will come a point where they will make a claim that a drug test is "necessary" for some [arbitrary and undefined] reason. At that point, you tell them they must provide proof that there have been situations in the past were a non-drug tested volunteer election worker has caused harm to someone. They won't be able to do it, which proves their drug test is arbitrary and capritious, which means they are violating your rights.
It was very interesting.
The system is so corrupt that they almost never follow the law (Constitution, Supreme Court decisions, etc.).
So, on the first court hearing ("arraignment," supposedly), I verbally said that I motion the court to dismiss for lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction. There must be a charging document against someone, and it must be served on them, so they can respond. Again, a traffic ticket is NOT enough.
This is basic American law -- Due Process requires "Notice and Opportunity" be given a "defendant."
The traffic court "judge" was an idiot. She went ballistic, screaming and yelling. But it didn't mean anything. She denied my motion WITHOUT any input from the city attorney.
This is a BIG violation of Due Process. Once Subject Matter Jurisdiction is challenged, it MUST be (a) proven (b) on the record (c) by the party claiming that the court has it. A judge CANNOT arbitrarily claim to have SMJ.
In this case, NOBODY had claimed that THIS court had SMJ. There was only a piece of paper in the file -- a summary sheet, not signed by anyone, with nobody's name attached, and no penalty of perjury (or attorney's penalty of sanctions). Just a print out that some clerk did on a computer.
So, the "judge" denied my motion and set a trial date and time.
Fine.
When I showed up, a different judge had the case. While I was waiting around for a trial to start, I was told that the prosecutor "had a scheduling conflict" and could not proceed. Therefore, the case was dismissed.
I KNOW for a FACT that this is not true. The ONLY thing they do ALL DAY is process traffic ticket cases to collect money.
They will NEVER admit that a non-attorney is right about the LAW ... but they WILL do what they are legally required to do IF they think not doing so could cause a problem for themselves. In this case, I WOULD have not only appealed, but filed complaints with the judicial board and possibly filed a federal lawsuit for violation of rights (Due Process). I doubt they want a federal judge to take a serious look into how they railroad people on a daily basis, all to collect money in an unlawful way.
They got the hint and dismissed the case.
I believe they "cut corners" on Due Process ALL THE TIME because it is easier and saves them time. MOST people don't know what to do about it, and MOST attorneys play the game because it benefits the entire legal industry (plus, law schools are just as bad as medical schools when it comes to failing to teach the WHOLE truth about the subject, and instead directing the students towards beliefs that benefit the system -- like "the Consitution is a living document," and other nonsense).
Traffic court is the perfect opportunity to challenge them on their failure to follow the law, because they do it all the time. It is about collecting money, and has NOTHING to do with "public safety" or "upholding the law." Those claims are merely for show.
Next time you get one, let me know. I will tell you what I would do.
Now that I have had this experience, I see the sham that it is, and I would do things a little differently that would REALLY call them out -- but do so within the rules THEY are supposed to follow.
My brother used to do that in LA, he wore overalls with one suspender off and carried a briefcase. It got where when he came up in court, they would clear the room and dismiss all the charges. They knew he was having fun and they couldn't do a damn thing about it. He guzzled a beer while driving his truck towards some cops that had come on his property. Of course, they arrested him and put him in hand cuffs, he did not say anything except one time, "you are trespassing", he just kept a big smile on his face. When they got nervous and asked what he was smiling about, he answered " you might want to call your supervisor out. When he came out, he immediately let my brother go. He got a letter of apology from the police dept he framed and had on it his wall. You have to know what the laws really are before you do this or you can get into bigger problems.
Nice I played those federal laws about quarterly for rhe past couple years.
Every mask mandate was a violation of federal law when it was set by a private non agent person or company.