Available on your computer, tablet or any mobile device

by Eileen Korby

“We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” – Joe Biden, 10/25/20.

So, what is your opinion? Do you believe that the election between Donald Trump and Joe Biden was the “most secure election in American history?” That’s what the Democrats, liberals, and a whole lot of Never-Trump Republicans want us to believe.

Dinesh D’Souza’s new documentary, “2000 Mules,” answers this question, with overwhelming evidence. Of the many ways election fraud can be accomplished, this film focuses on the use of drop boxes, and how “mules,” people who carried thousands of ballots from a ballot collection site to multiple drop boxes, were discovered and tracked.

As a big fan of the TV show NCIS, I have often seen the main characters use cell phone data to track and locate perpetrators and victims alike. I never gave it any thought; it’s just TV. But the truth is that intelligence agencies, the military, and law enforcement all use cell phones to track people. How? Each cell phone has a unique identity, as unique as a fingerprint or DNA. Over 300,000 phone apps gather data on each cell phone and sell it to brokers. The data can pinpoint the location of a cell phone by latitude, longitude, and elevation very precisely. And it is time-stamped. If you are on one block one minute, and on another block two minutes later, your movement can be tracked and monitored. Even if your cell phone is turned off! The CDC actually used this to monitor social distancing during Covid. A frightening thought!

The non-profit organization, True the Vote, bought vast amounts of this type of cell phone data for geo-tracking in five cities in the key swing states. They looked specifically at areas surrounding the drop boxes. Wanting the lowest margin of error, the researchers only investigated phones that went to a minimum of 10 drop boxes and five ballot collection sites. In one case, the cell phone traveled across six counties to 27 different drop boxes. Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips, working for True the Vote, tracked 2,000 cell phones making such patterns. Not included in their research were cell phones that traveled to fewer than 10 drop boxes, or fewer than five ballot collection sites. Therefore, the data presented in this film actually under-represents the amount of illegal ballot harvesting in the election.

There have been many questions and complaints about the film, mostly by so-called “fact-

checkers” who wanted either to have this documentary banned, or who wanted to discredit the information presented. Here are some:

• How do you know who had the phone?
• How do you know they weren’t just dropping off ballots for family members?
• How do you know they weren’t just walking by the drop box?
• Why isn’t there surveillance video footage of these people?
• Geo-tracking of cell phones isn’t valid evidence.

First, a cell phone does not travel from drop box to drop box by itself. It is carried by someone, usually the person who owns the phone. Frequently, these people took selfies of themselves at the drop boxes to verify that they actually did what they were being paid to do – at $10 per ballot.

Were these people, all 2,000 of them, just dropping off ballots for family members? Why would someone have to go to 10 or more drop boxes, between the hours of 1:00AM and 5:00AM, the time all of these phones were tracked, to drop off grandma’s ballot? Remember the case I cited above – 26 drop boxes across six counties? As Dinesh D’Souza asks, “Can you think of even one reasonable and innocent explanation for such behavior?” I can’t.

Furthermore, people were not “just walking by” the drop boxes. The tracking shows people going TO the drop boxes, staying there a few minutes while they stuffed ballots in the boxes, and then leaving away from the boxes. In order to get to the drop boxes, these “mules” had to drive from box to box to box, often crossing county lines, and sometimes even crossing state lines. In the wee small hours of the morning. All of that movement recorded. They were not “walking by.”

As for the all-important question about video footage, there are actually 4 million minutes of video footage. Some of it shows the mules at the drop boxes, and it matches up precisely with the cell phone data. Unfortunately, a lot of the footage is of low quality, or even non-existent – a big problem and a big question mark. In Arizona, the cameras were mysteriously, and conveniently, turned off when these drops were being made. In other places, like Wisconsin, cameras were never installed, even though they were supposed to be. And in other places, the cameras were angled at the ground, or the lenses were cracked, etc. Makes you wonder.

Geo-tracking of cell phones is as irrefutable evidence as fingerprints and DNA. It is used by intelligence, the military, and law enforcement to make arrests. In fact, geo-tracking was used extensively by the FBI in finding people who were at the capitol on January 6^th, 2021. In many cases, people were arrested in only a few days which indicates that the FBI had been tracking those people before January 6^th, before any alleged “crime.” How scary is that? In any case,

geo-tracking is certainly considered legally valid when the Democrats use it; it’s just not valid when conservatives use it.  A convenient double standard, as always.

No matter which side of the fence you’re on, there is so much evidence here that only someone with a vested interest in being willfully blind would refuse to see it.

Every American should see this film!

Okay. Where? The film had a limited release in 250 movie theaters around the country in early May, and it may be released again in theaters. In the meantime, you can buy the film, rent the film, or buy the DVD at SalemNow.com. You can also watch it on Locals.com (a subsidiary of Rumble.com).

What is important here is that there is evidence that enough ballots were dropped to change the outcome of the election. And this documentary only investigated five swing states. What about the rest of the country?

Might Trump have won NY?

According to RedVoiceMedia.com, on 5/10/22, an organization called NYCA filed 15 petitions against 15 counties in New York State with officials in Albany. They are claiming that there are over 2 million questionable registrations and votes in New York, where Biden won by 1,992,889 votes. NYCA claims that they have evidence of stolen votes, fake registrations, and over 10,000 people who were 170 years old when they voted! Imagine 170-year-olds getting out and voting!

What will come of their petitions? Considering that the NY Attorney General is Letitia James, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

The truth is that despite all the evidence presented in “2000 Mules,” if law enforcement refuses to investigate, we can yell and scream ‘til the cows come home, nothing will be done. Already, the Michigan Secretary of State’s Office has said that they saw “nothing illegal” in the film pertaining to Michigan. On the other hand, the Yuma County, AZ Sheriff’s Office has said that they will investigate.

Perhaps the most positive thing I can write is that “2000 Mules” has made over $10 million in just two weeks, which means people are seeing the movie, despite the fact that media is actively trying to suppress news of it. Even Tucker Carlson of Fox News, when interviewing

Catherine Engelbrecht, the main researcher of the cell phone data, forbade her to mention the movie on air. Nevertheless, word is getting out. It is perhaps the biggest trending hashtag on Twitter as I write this in mid-May.

Once again – everyone should see this film. Everyone should know what happened. We must be galvanized to fight for voter integrity laws and we must win. How? By putting people in office who support this fight. If we don’t, we will watch the demise of our beloved country!

Eileen Korby, along with her father, Sol Korby, is a candidate for a seat on the Republican County Committee.

There is a nationwide breakdown of law and order. The leaked draft opinion written by Supreme Court Justice Alito overturning Roe v. Wade, came just in time for the Democrats to use as a smokescreen for their base to cover up their failure to address the real problems in America.

Read moreLeave a comment

Any elected official or candidate who doesn’t uphold the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution, and our Judicial System should be voted out of office.

Read moreLeave a comment

By Stephen H. Weiner

Good evening fellow ARRT (American Revolution Round-Table of New York) Members and Guests. It is a pleasure to give a review of The Jewish World of Alexander Hamilton, by Andrew Porwancher.

Andrew Porwancher teaches at the University of Oklahoma.

This book includes 192 pages of text, and 48 pages of Notes. The subject of the book is the author’s remarkable claim that Alexander Hamilton was born and raised as a Jew, and how he, in contrast to other founders of the Republic, had good relations with Jews and was unsullied by antisemitic bias.

It’s an exaggeration to call the Jewish presence in the Western Hemisphere that the author describes as a “Jewish World.” Religious discrimination, and anti-Jewish sentiments and stereotypes were a part of life in the thirteen colonies.  When the Revolution began, there were around 2,000 Jews, of whom 250 lived in the city of New York, where there was one synagogue.¹ However, these Jews did something vital to the Jewish future in the United States.   According to the author, a majority of them supported the Revolution.

With respect to the theory of Hamilton’s Jewish origin, here is how the argument goes: Hamilton’s mother was Rachel Faucette, a Christian Englishwoman who grew up on the Island of Nevis in the Caribbean. Rachel moved to the Island of St.

Croix. While on St. Croix, she marries a merchant named Johan Levine, who probably was Jewish. Rachel, according to the author, must have converted to Judaism because they did not have their child Peter baptized.² Subsequently, their marriage ended badly due to her committing adultery.

Rachel then had two children out of wedlock with James Hamilton, Sr., a Scottish aristocrat. The children were James Hamilton, Jr., and Alexander Hamilton.

According to the author, because Rachel converted when she married Johan, and in Judaism the religion is passed by the mother to her children, that made Alexander Hamilton Jewish.

Subsequently, Rachel moved back to Nevis. While on Nevis, Rachel had a Jewish teacher tutor Alexander. Later in life, Alexander recalled learning the Ten Commandments in Hebrew.

When he was eleven years old, however, Rachel relocated back to St. Croix. Tragically, she died when Alexander was just thirteen. After a difficult few months, he was taken in by an affluent Christian Englishman, Thomas Stevens.

The first problem with the Jewish Origin theory is the absence of a Jewish community on St. Croix to convert Rachel. A woman’s Jewish conversion did not occur automatically by marriage, Under Jewish law, a conversion must be recognized by a panel of several Jewish men. There was no Jewish synagogue or school. The author found records that there were six Jewish men on St. Croix. This is less than the ten man quorum required for traditional Jewish prayer. The claim with no evidence that three of these six men living without a synagogue would sit as a religious panel and determine that Rachel converted is incredible. Anyway, what would be the meaning of a conversion on an island without a Jewish community?³

In contrast to St. Croix, the Nevis Jewish community included seventy persons in a section of Charlestown.  Here, the author goes too far in saying that there is proof that Alexander was accepted by a Jewish school. Rather, the evidence is that a Jewish woman tutored young Alexander on at least one occasion. However that is not evidence that Alexander was Jewish.   She might not have asked too many questions, or she could have acted out of compassion for a mother and a child.

Further, the fact that a Christian Englishman (who was unrelated to him), Thomas Stevens, became the teenager Hamilton’s guardian after his mother’s death, is evidence of the Hamilton’s lack of a connection to Judaism. The last thing a Jewish community would do is to abandon an orphan.

It is interesting that at this point (p.38) the author finally admits the absence of a St. Croix Jewish community. He states as follows:

Any identity as a Jew that Hamilton may have had almost certainly died with his mother. A plucky youth like him would have been disinclined to compound his troubles as an orphan with a second-class religious status. Had Hamilton still resided in Nevis at this point – with its Jewish community and the Jewish School that educated him–perhaps Rachel’s passing would have been less likely to occasion her son’s disaffection from the Jewish faith. But St. Croix was home to far fewer Jews than Nevis. If Hamilton ever laid claim to a Jewish identity, he was now bereft of a family or community that might have kept it alive.

To the author’s credit, he discusses an important piece of contrary evidence. When Hamilton is seventeen years old, he was called by his employer to testify in a financial dispute. To determine if he can testify, the Court questioned Hamilton about his religion, because only Christians could testify under oath. Hamilton said he was brought up in the Anglican Church. Professor Porwancher suggests that Hamilton lied to the Court about his religion.⁴

Young Hamilton had become friendly with a Reverend Knox, who helped him to get off the island and to get to New Jersey and start his education in an Academy there. Soon thereafter Hamilton attended King’s College, which is now Columbia University, just before the Revolution began.

Finally, in contrast to his treatment of Alexander Hamilton, while it is a subject for another day, I think the author gives too little credit to President George Washington’s enormous and history-making contribution to Jewish civil equality, and he is too critical of founders Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.

Thank you for the opportunity to present this review.

Stephen H. Weiner
April 5, 2022

_________________________________________

1. (P.56) .In contrast, he says, there were 25,000 Catholics in the colonies.
2. Johan was probably in control of the decision to not baptize his son as an infant. Subsequently, Peter had an adult baptism.
3. I want to thank my Rabbi Ron Wittenstein, whom I consulted about the conversion process.
4. It is odd that this author who praises Hamilton’s for affinity to Jews, here accuses him of lying in Court, and repeatedly attacks Hamilton’s sincerity later in life in publicly professing Christianity.