Aaron Crews

Lawyer, technologist, Jiu-Jitsu competitor, father. Bridging the worlds of law and tech. I post on LinkedIn and use Twitter as a news aggregator.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@RoKhanna @JenSiebelNewsom

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@WSJ @WSJ for the record, she just pled guilty to the charges. 🫤

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@WSJ @WSJ and this. Still “no evidence?”

https://t.co/0VWaXdveBT

[James O'Keefe @JamesOKeefeIII]

🚨For those who say there is NO election fraud in California:

The DOJ just prosecuted Brenda Brown for paying homeless people to register to vote under FALSE addresses.

OMG caught her on hidden camera doing this illegal activity in LA.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@WSJ @WSJ I’ll add this

https://t.co/W5Y1dQti2o

[Wall Street Apes @WallStreetApes]

WOAH 🚨 Homeless women living on Skid Row in Los Angeles says someone came and had her fill out a ballot for Karen Bass

They told her who to vote for and then paid her $2 for the vote

She says “they come out here all the time” to get votes for Democrats

“They told you to vote for Karen?”

“Yeah, had to sign a little thing”

“And how much they pay you?”

“Just like $2”

“$2 to sign off on a thing to vote for her?”

“Yeah. All right, so they do this for everybody out here?”

“Yeah, they come out here all the time.”

This is exactly what James O’Keefe and Cam Higby have been exposing

Democrats have a massive voter fraud network in California

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@WSJ Hey @WSJ in light of what I posted above, is this at all interesting?

https://t.co/FtKoX3SjOG

[nicolas, 30 ans @nic_carter]

here are some facts about California. some of this is hard to believe.

first of all, it's important to understand the concept of "ballot harvesting," which is perfectly legal in CA. this refers to a situation where someone completely unaffiliated with the voter can collect and submit their ballot for them.

this flow is completely legal:

- a homeless person arrives in LA, where they are eligible for cash assistance, SSI, food stamps, healthcare through medical, and an array of other taxpayer-funded services
- they are registered to vote by an NGO (many such NGOs exist and explicitly do this).
- they do not have to provide a residential address or any proof of residency to vote. they only have to provide a mailing address, which can be anywhere (church, NGO HQ, homeless shelter). their home address can be "a park" or "an underpass".
- their ballot is mailed to the homeless shelter (or whatever address the NGO elects for them)
- the only verification done for the mail-in ballot is "signature verification" and uniqueness (only one vote per person is counted theoretically).
- the signature can be an X. if they register with an X, they can sign with an X. that is sufficient to pass verification. signature verification is also deliberately loose. the signature does not have to be a perfect match.

now consider the hypothetical scenario, which is fraudulent, but virtually impossible to detect:

- a homeless person cycles through the LA system. they get registered with their mailing address listed as the NGO HQ or homeless shelter
- they "sign" their registration with an X or nondescript, easily replicable signature
- they disappear. never seen again. or they exist, but it doesn't matter. they don't get purged from the voter rolls for 4-8 years typically.
- the address where they registered receives their ballot for several cycles
- operatives are aware that they have X amount of votes to make up. they fill in X many thousand mail-in ballots themselves. the ballots are manually postmarked (permitted). they forge the signature to match whatever signature (could be an X) was submitted upon registration
- ballots can be accepted even if they are postmarked at 11.59 pm. polls closed at 8 pm. (you would need an accomplice who is a USPS employee)
- the only fraud checks are de-duplication (if the homeless person through some miracle voted in person, only one of their ballots would be counted) and signature verification
- because very few of the homeless people in question would have voted in person, this gives NGO operatives tens of thousands of possible mail-in ballots to submit unilaterally.

the big problem is that there is NO way to detect this type of fraud. NGOs that register homeless people to vote exist. that isn't a secret. ballot harvesting is fully legal. voting by mail is encouraged. signature verification is as loose as possible. de-duplication doesn't solve anything, since few homeless people vote in person. and no one in power locally is going to spend political capital on rooting out such fraud, since they are all wholeheartedly committed to "voting rights".

in a situation where fraud is undetectable, the absence of hard proof of fraud is not evidence that no fraud exists.

Raman has gained around 20k votes since election night. She is around 3k votes ahead of Pratt now.

there are over 72 thousand homeless people in LA county.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@pigments12 @WSJ You’re a dem op or bot who didn’t even bother to respond to the substance of what’s above. You’re also a crystal clear example of the flaws of this platform. Kick rocks.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

There’s also the mathematical improbabilities of all votes in successive drops going to the third place candidate and zero for Pratt or Bass—very odd—like picking the same single grain of sand off different places on earth 12 successive times in a row.

The fact that these drops are totally uncorrelated to the in-person voting spread.

Massive amounts of Ramen’s votes coming from Skid Row where the above was filmed.

Do any of these things prove fraud, 🤷‍♂️, but If I was a journalist, I think I might ask a couple of questions. You might win a Pulitzer or something.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@neoavatara Please please please. Go add value to another country. You’re obviously a genius and there are so many places in the world more deserving of your help than America.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@guyfelicella @CollinRugg Thanks for the thoughts and prayers from Canada. We here in CA will be sure to ruminate soulfully on your moralizing and vote accordingly. #EAD

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

Didn’t the Judicial Qualifications Commission of Georgia determine that they both violated the Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct during their campaigns?

Is this an issue as far as you’re concerned or is this a “nothing to see here” moment?

“The commission found that the candidates made improper statements regarding issues likely to come before the court. Specifically, the JQC pointed to campaign activities where the candidates indicated they would “restore abortion rights” if elected. Under Georgia’s Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 4.2(A)(2), candidates are prohibited from making statements or promises that would commit them to specific positions that conflict with the impartial performance of their adjudicative duties.”

“The JQC found that Jordan and Rankin improperly endorsed one another. The commission cited a joint campaign commercial circulated on television and social media where Jordan and Rankin appeared together. In the advertisement, the candidates used collective terms like “we’re running,” “we’ve,” and “we’ll fight for you”. The JQC ruled this violated conduct rules that strictly prohibit judicial candidates in nonpartisan elections from publicly endorsing other candidates for public office.”

https://t.co/nbJb8tqZyT

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@RepLuna Vote
Him
Out

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@kamikazecash @judicialhub @Politics_PR Tell me you didn’t read the opinion without using the words “I haven’t read the opinion and am just regurgitating headlines and outrage I’ve read online.”

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@thematrixb0t @iluminatibot His words, message, and accent all remind me of someone. Can’t put my finger on it, but pretty sure it’s someone my grandpa didn’t like all that much. I’m sure it will come to me . . .

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@Acyn Does anyone else remember the TV show “V”? Karen Bass could totally be a human eating reptile alien, and it would be roughly the same.

@spencerpratt—your next campaign ad. Just an absent minded thought . . .

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@Ezinger44 @LeadingReport I mean . . . He was pretty bad a running a mid-sized college town . . . Give the guy a chance? 😂

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@DaCaRet2022 @redsteeze @guypbenson I mean . . . Other than the Nazi tattoo literally permanently etched into his skin, right? Right . . . ?

I mean other than that, absolutely no indications whatsoever. Agreed. None. Not any.

Totally agree with you that other than the SS tattoo, he bears no hallmarks of a Nazi.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@Strandjunker We’re totally willing to take the “loss.” Good luck with the Russians. Wish you the best.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@dailystoic And this marks the last Ryan Holliday book ever. Deeply appreciate the consequences conversation. Never want to hear this guy speak ever again. Hypocrisy is most cringe form.

[Aaron Crews @ESIESQ]

@mrp @EmbarcaderoCtr @U2 Drain it and bulldoze it. I played “Oregon Trail” as a kid. Always died of cholera. Lesson learned. #itsgross