US Supreme Court fails, so the people take election fraud evidence to US Federal Grand Jury
By EDITOR, Cairns News
PEOPLE from Georgia and several other states are turning to their last hope of getting election fraud prosecuted – a federal Grand Jury. Late this week 44 people signed a petition to present to a federal Grand Jury calling for an official investigation into election fraud allegations in Georgia and other states. The group showed up on the Justice Department steps in Georgia live on NTD – one of the new channels not partaking in the criminal cover-up of election fraud investigations by the big media club – CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, BBC, Washington Post, New York Times etc.
Astonishingly, the US Supreme Court led by Justice John Roberts, has also joined the cover-up by refusing to hear evidence of fraud and simply dismissing a series cases appealed from lower courts on procedural issues – apart from one brought by President Trump against the State of Pennsylvania, which it has agreed to hear two days after the global business kingpin and alleged president-elect Joe Biden is inaugurated.
Retired judge Paul Nally, who assisted the Grand Jury petitioners, said the group of 44 “had seen and were able to understand evidence which gave them a reasonable belief there were serious election violations in this presidential election cycle”. “Now, normally, we the people depend upon the executives of departments to handle criminal prosecutions when crimes are committed. Unfortunately, that does not appear to be the case in this situation. The Attorney-General, Mr Barr, shortly before leaving office, made the comment in words to the effect that he did not see sufficient amount of evidence to indicate to him that there would be a significant difference in the vote count.”
Judge Nally said this all implied to the petitioners there would be no attempt by the Justice Department to prosecute anyone who may have committed criminal acts [in relation to the election]. “We do not agree with Attorney General Barr’s assessment based upon the evidence we have seen. We are satisfied that there is probably cause to believe that criminal acts did occur and did adversely affect the value of each of our votes and the votes of our neighbours.
“Those votes are our individual pieces of property, so when they are unlawfully taken, it is time to criminally prosecute somebody. Now in our Republic there is a governmental entity, established both in the United States and State of Georgia Constitution, called the Grand Jury. They stand between the government and the people. The neat thing about it is, everybody answers to that body – everybody. So we are asking that … Federal Grand Jury to look at all 50 states to determine if there was in fact evidence of malfeasance, and if so, to determine who the perpetrators were, the crimes they committed, and return presentments or indictments as the Grand Jury sees fit.”
Judge Nally said in the federal circuit grand juries were appointed from a computerized random selection of names that were summonsed and brought in for questioning. They were not required to be legally qualified people. “They come here sometimes with nothing more than commonsense. But that’s the beauty of it,” Nally told NTD. “It’s their commonsense, their understanding of the weight, relevancy and sufficiency of whatever fact or law that was put in front of them.”
Judge Nally said the authority of grand juries went back into common law and Article 5 in the US Constitution and Article 1 in the Georgia Constitution. In effect the idea of the common law Grand Jury had been picked up the by founders of the state and “sat down” in the constitutions.
“Not only is a Grand Jury clothed with extensive power in reaching a discretionary decision on a matter, but they have a great deal of discretion about how they handle the fallout from that evidence that they see. They can issue a presentment, they can issue a special presentment, they can issue an indictment.”
Nally then referred to a Grand Jury case in in Liberty County, Georgia, in 1953, which heard from a citizen’s committee in relation to complaints of criminal acts against a local sheriff. The committee did not want to see the sheriff jailed for life, but instead invoked their power to order the Governor to remove him from office.
Judge Nally said there was a case of intimidation of a Federal Grand Jury in 2013 when a federal attorney lied to a Grand Jury foreman and tried to get the complaint sent to the FBI. He said grand juries did not have discretion to not hear a case, but what they did with what they heard was “entirely their business”.
In addition, when a citizen petitioned a Grand Jury and when they stepped into the Grand Jury room, they were standing there as a government attorney, a state’s prosecutor. “And that’s case law history,” he said. In the case of efforts to establish a Grand Jury being obstructed by judges, district attorneys, or US attorneys, this would simply bring up another criminal issue for a Grand Jury Inquiry. Further information on grand juries can be found at Nally on Georgia Grand Juries on Facebook.