______________________________________________________
The Inherent Right of ALL People to Alter or Reform Government.
The Right Upon Which All Other Rights Depend
The South Dakota Election Re J.A.I.L. Was Fraudulent
and Should Be Declared
Null & Void
NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES ARE IRRELEVANT
By Ron Branson, CIC National J.A.I.L.
was sent
out Wednesday in
which Barbie started out by saying:
J.A.I.L. is
certainly meant to be out there, despite the fiasco that was
supposed to be an election in South Dakota. What happened on
November 7th in that state can't even be logically thought of
as an election at all for Amendment E (the J.A.I.L. Amendment),
since the voters were not even made aware of what precisely
they were voting for. The State did not provide them with the
wording of the Amendment, plus arguments pro and con, to
read and study before making an intelligent
vote.
All the voters had to go on was the so-called
"explanation" by Attorney General Larry Long, which, as we have
shown by evidence, was nothing more than an argument
against Amendment E. See South Dakota 2006 Ballot
Contaminated
written two days before
the election. With this fraud being perpetrated on the
South Dakota voters by their Attorney General, it doesn't
matter what the vote count is if the measure "lost" the
election. Whether Amendment E lost 89% to 11%, or 55% to
45%, or 100% to nothing, it "lost" by fraud, and
therefore was not a legitimate election. Even if J.A.I.L. had
"won" the election, nevertheless the fraud should not be
tolerated by the People.
On behalf of
National J.A.I.L., the November 7, 2022 election in South Dakota,
in which the J.A.I.L. Amendment appeared on the ballot only
as
"CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT E Title:
An Amendment to Article VI of the
South Dakota Constitution, relating to judicial
decisions," followed by the
further misrepresentation of the Amendment by South Dakota
Attorney General Larry Long, please be advised that the
J.A.I.L. organization cannot recognize that as a legitimate
election and it
should be declared null and void due to fraud, deception,
misrepresentation, and concealment from the voters of the
true Amendment, by the State of South Dakota. Sample
Ballot:
We stated in the
final paragraph of the JNJ titled South Dakota 2006 Ballot
Contaminated: Because of
this serious misrepresentation of Amendment E on the ballot by
the Attorney General of South Dakota, many voters will be
deceived, and by that deception will vote "No" for the Amendment
while they would otherwise vote "Yes." This is a serious
situation and will affect not only South Dakota, but the entire
country because this is of nationwide concern. South Dakota is
our pioneer state and will set the example for other states. That
is why it is important that each of you take the time to check
out the truth before voting this Tuesday. KNOW and BE INFORMED of
what you are voting for on all issues, and certainly
Amendment E.
The problem was
that the State did not provide the voters with the
information necessary for them to be informed of what they were
voting for on Amendment E. The truth of what Amendment E
officially states, with the wording as filed with the
Secretary of State when it qualified for the 2006 ballot, was
entirely omitted from the ballot; instead, the public was
presented a ballot containing a lie regarding what Amendment E
was about, purporting to be the "Attorney General
Explanation" on behalf of the State.
In California,
voters are mailed a "Voter's Guide" with their sample ballots,
containing the official wording of all issues to be voted on,
plus arguments pro and con equally on each issue. This
information provides voters with an opportunity to review and
study both sides of issues; and more importantly, the voters can
read the text of the material themselves before making that
important decision. This provision by the State should go without
saying, that it is necessary in order to provide a fair election.
If an election isn't fair, i.e., presenting both sides of an
issue plus its text as filed with the State, then it
isn't an election! The voters might as well
throw a dart in the dark at a phone directory. The only voters
that should be voting are INFORMED VOTERS; and that is the
responsibility of the State in providing fair
elections. The State of South Dakota
didn't extend that opportunity to its voters for the 2006
election.
Mr. Stegmeier,
the proponent of the J.A.I.L. Amendment in South Dakota, did what
he could to obtain relief from the fraudulent misrepresentation
about the Amendment appearing on the ballot. He
filed a petition, as acknowledged by the court in its Judgment and
Order, "This petition
for a writ of certiorari was filed by Stegmeier on August 14, 2022,
and was tried to the court on August 17, 2022, on an
expedited basis due to the exigent nature of the impending
election."
There was one
minor change to a term in the AG Explanation, but the fraud
was allowed to stand. In fact, Judge Gors embellished the
fraud by stating in the Order:
"The attorney general could have said
with a straight face that the real purpose and effect of the
proposed JAIL amendment is to destroy justice in South Dakota by harassment of public decisions
makers with lawsuits, but he did not. His actual description is
quite tame." Judge
Gors further quipped in the Order: "Ironically, Stegmeier wants a judge
to help him make it easier to sue judges. Stegmeier must have
more confidence in the courts than he lets on in his public
statements and his proposed constitutional
amendment." (The judge has recently decided to
retire from the
bench).
Mr. Stegmeier
then filed an expedited appeal from the Judgment and Order
resulting in a Judgment
of Affirmance by the South Dakota Supreme Court,
affirming the fraud appearing on the 2006 ballot for
Amendment E, making the courts and judges involved complicit in
that fraud.
The result is
that Amendment E purportedly "lost" the so-called "election"
causing damage and detriment to this cause nationally, and to Mr.
Stegmeier and his team after the hard work, time, and money
invested in the cause in South Dakota, which carried a
three-to-one favorable poll throughout the year-and-a-half
campaign. There is no way that a supposed 89% to 11% loss on
election day carries any credibility whatsoever. J.A.I.L. doesn't
mind losing, as long as it's an honest loss!
But when fraud is allowed to carry the day on this
election, it cannot be recognized as legitimate by
J.A.I.L.