It's a National Emergency!
No evidence that Biden was EVER ELECTED! NONE!
written on the three year delta of our nation’s ‘day of infamy’. 2024 JAN 6 to the selected officials at the top of Nebraska’s food chain.
January 6, 2024
Lincoln, Ne 68509
TO: Nebraska Governor James Pillen
Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers
Lancaster County Sheriff Terry Wagner
It is with deepest concern for our great state of Nebraska
as well as our great nation that I write to you
on this three year delta of our nation’s ‘day of infamy.’~ Patriot Penny
Selected Officials,
I open my correspond with you with the following documents so that you can read these documents since by your actions/words to protect the people of this great state it seems you have not read them in their entirety. Or you refuse to read and apply.
PART ONE: FEDERAL LAWS
Congressional Research Service Report: Voting Systems and Federal Law
PART TWO: STATE LAWS
Under Nebraska State Election Statue 32-1041 paragraph (2) NO ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEM SHALL BE USED UNDER THE ELECTION ACT.
SECRETary of STATE office has sketching dealings with HAVA; Facebook; ES&S; Albert Sensors (see part four below)
Lancaster County Commissioners take over $400,000 from Zuckerbucks Center for Tech and Civic Life ("CTCL") (see part four below)
PART THREE: BE HERE NOTIFIED
Under EO13848 we have been in a State of Emergency since September 13, 2018. This EO has been continued five times since its original declaration (as shown below).
There are so many instances, backed with real documentation, that our elections are not being handled in a manner that results in the people of Nebraska having confidence in our elections. Patriot Penny
Governor Pillen, AG Hilgers and Sheriff Wagner and other selected officials — You have the power to protect the voice/vote of ALL the Nebraskans that you have SWORN an QATH to SERVE.
“Emergency powers exist so state and local governments can act quickly to protect their citizens. These emergency powers are meant to bypass the usual (and often, slow) legislative process so that action can be taken quickly during a crisis. Usually, such action is taken by a state governor, city mayor, or other executive body.
States have the primary responsibility to protect their citizens and generally are in a better position to do so than the federal government. Most often, the impact is felt locally. And states can rely on their broad police powers (which the federal government doesn't have) to protect their citizens, as well as leverage regional support and federal assistance. This isn't to say the federal government doesn't have a role, but it's generally focused more on financial, expert, or military assistance.
Police powers are the overarching and broad authority given to states through the U.S. Constitution to protect public health, safety, morals, and general welfare. Through this authority, states can enact and enforce laws that protect life and property during an emergency, as well as maintain and uphold law and order in everyday life. A state's police powers aren't limited to public safety. They also allow governments to enact laws aimed at protecting public health and general welfare.
During a crisis, civil liberties sometimes take a backseat to public health and safety. But, importantly, they are not gone. The law provides latitude for government efforts to preserve public health and safety and avoid catastrophe—but checks and balances remain.” (Click here for this article)
You are all hereby notified, by the power given me through the original U.S. Constitution dated September 17, 1787 to uphold all these state and federal laws indicated above, to carry out upon this request a call:
for an EMERGENCY REMOVAL of any and all ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS that have been used; are currently being used and those electronic systems which are currently being considered for future use until a FULL investigation into the unlawful use of ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS throughout all 93 counties and their precincts.
Be it also put in place a tried and true program of hand counting of paper ballots at the precinct level on election day, including primary and general, for the year 2024, until said investigation has been made satisfactory by the people of Nebraska (that you serve) and shows undeniable evidence of the elections, by the people, of those currently holding office, including those in Washington, DC are indeed true and accurate.
Be it also carried out that ANY state official person, including and not limited to the offices of our secretary of state, election commissioners, county clerks, county commissioners, third parties that have contracted with ANY government office as well as the department of motor vehicles involved with ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS be removed from these positions until it can be PROVEN through a fully transparent investigation for ALL NEBRASKA VOTERS to see the evidence that no ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEMS were used or mismanaged in Nebraska to tabulate ballots and or votes.
Electronic Voting Systems MUST BE REMOVED! NOW!!!
This is a NATIONAL EMERGENCY!
For the purposes of PART THREE:
(a)the term “person(s)” means an individual(s) or entity;
(b)the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;
Election Integrity should be THE most important TASK at hand. Knowing that the current person holding the highest office in our great nation calls me a terrorist just for asking questions about our election is deeply appalling. It is a slap in every single Veteran’s face who have sacrificed so much and many who gave all. All Nebraskans want are the irrefutable evidence that he (and others) have been rightfully placed in that position by WE THE PEOPLE and not just because someone said so.
It’s time to do the right thing. Get on the right side of history. Shut down the electronic voting systems, now! It’s a NATIONAL EMERGENCY!
With much concern for my country for future generations, respectfully, I look forward to your responses.
May God Bless America!
Penny Stephens
Nebraska Citizen of Lancaster County
PART FOUR: TO CONCLUDE
The following are just a few of the sketchy actions of those who have sworn an oath to serve us, WE THE PEOPLE:
SOS Robert Evnen DID NOT maintain a fair election when he did not put in place prior to mailing out ballots a proper protocol in the tracking these ballots. It is derelict of his duties to send out mail in ballots not knowing where these ballots could end up, possibly in the hands of those seeking to manipulate and defraud our elections.
We have requested Evnen’s office to provide the investigation that Evnen stated he would put into motion. As of this writing, we have yet to get those documents from his investigation.
Wayne Bena, from the sos office, has stated on several occasions, that there are no CVRs and that the ESS voting systems do not create them.
From Our Neighbors in South Dakota:
Then a captured audio has ESS saying their machines make them but we can’t have them, that they a proprietary and would reveal a voter.
Then ESS executive says, “Just so we’re on the same page, I just want to point out that when you cast a ballot to an ESS tabulator, two items are created. One is a ballot image. The other is a cast vote record. They are two separate entities. They are not merged together. They do not exist together, but they relate to one another…. The cast vote record is a hundred percent, always available.”
Multiple Nebraskans through public requests forms have asked for the CRVs prior to the 22 month deadline. Again, sos office refused to release these records.
A recent release of a transcript by ESS states that CVR (cast vote records) are indeed created by their electronic voting systems.
An Emergency Act, January 5, 2024, senate bill 48 in South Dakota, to make the CVRs public records available to the voters.
If our audit trail for our elections are propriety to ESS, this is not an election conducted in a free society. This is a state sponsored selection.
No election with a hidden audit trail will ever be trusted.
Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines (VVSG)
As part of its advisory role to state and local governments,
HAVA requires the EAC to develop and maintain a set of
guidelines called the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines
(VVSG). The VVSG are specifications for voting systems,
including basic functionality, accessibility, and security
capabilities. In addition, 52 U.S.C. § 20971 further requires
the EAC to provide for the testing, certification,
decertification, and recertification of voting systems
technology by accredited laboratories.”
In 2003 -2012 Nebraska failed to uphold HAVA by not providing the needed documents to be in good standing. (see document)
(NOTE: a violation can also occur when individuals, unknowingly leave cookies from the use of their personal devices to register online to vote, check voting status online, log on to the dmv websites. Personal computers are currently being targeted which can ALSO cause vulnerabilities in our electronic voting systems. As stated elsewhere, home computers are used as data mining via government websites that aren’t actual government websites but websites controlled by third party vendors such as ESS.1) aNo personal computers have been tested under HAVA 52 U.S.C. § 20971,
Executive Branch Developments in Securing Election Infrastructure
In 2017, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
designated election equipment as “critical infrastructure”
deemed “so vital to the United States that the incapacity or
destruction of such systems and assets would have a
debilitating impact on security, national economic security,
national public health or safety, or any combination of those
matters[.]” According to DHS, the designation allows the
federal government to better prioritize election
infrastructure in policy planning. However, the Department
emphasized that the designation “does nothing to change
the role state and local governments have in administering
and running elections.” Additionally, DHS, through its
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, provides
services to state and local governments to assist them in
reducing risk to their election systems and facilities.
Considerations for Congress
Article 1, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution, the Elections
Clause, states, “The Times, Places and Manner of holding
Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be
prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the
Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such
Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.”
Article II, Section 1 provides that in presidential elections,
“Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors,
and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which
Day shall be the same throughout the United States.”
Congress does not have general regulatory authority over
state and local elections, but it may still exercise its power
over such entities in several contexts. For instance,
Congress has the authority to prevent unconstitutional voter
disenfranchisement in a state or local election. Relying on
its Spending Clause authority (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 1),
Congress may also condition the receipt of federal funds for
state or local elections on compliance with federal
requirements. Congress’s authority to legislate regarding
these various issues derive, in addition to its Article I
powers, principally from the Fourteenth and Fifteenth
Amendments.
Voting systems incidents—like delays, misuse, or
cyberattacks—can invite attempts to discredit the electoral
process, reduce voter turnout, and create political
instability. Congress may consider several different types of
requirements for voting systems beyond those currently
existing in federal law. For example, Congress may expand
existing voting system requirements in HAVA, make the
guidelines under the VVSG mandatory, or create new
criminal penalties for conduct specifically targeting election
infrastructure.
Proposed legislation in the 117th Congress to address voting
systems includes S. 2747, the Freedom to Vote Act, and
H.R. 1, the For the People Act, which would amend HAVA
to include additional voting systems requirements and
provide federal grants to state and local governments for
election infrastructure. Both bills would require the VVSG
to include electronic poll books for voluntary testing and
certification, and would require states to “seek to ensure”
that any voting machine used in an election for federal
office is manufactured in the United States. Additionally,
both bills would create an explicit private right of action for
HAVA and amend 52 U.S.C. § 21081 to require states to
replace paperless voting machines with voting systems that
provide voter-verified paper ballots for federal elections.”
Jimmy Balser, Legislative Attorney IF12245
Voting Systems and Federal Law | IF12245 · VERSION 1 · NEW
Disclaimer: The above four quotes under title, Executive Branch Developments in Securing Election Infrastructure, written by Jimmy Balsar, was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS.
Under Nebraska State Election Statue 32-1041 paragraph (2) NO ELECTRONIC VOTING SYSTEM SHALL BE USED UNDER THE ELECTION ACT.
Voting System Defined
2 U.S.C. § 21081 In this section, the term "voting system" means-
the total combination of mechanical, electromechanical, or electronic equipment (including the software, firmware, and documentation required to program, control, and support the equipment) that is used.
Definition of Electronic Voting Systems
Electronic voting systems is voting that uses electronic means to either aid or take care of casting and counting ballots.
Depending on the particular implementation, e-voting may use standalone electronic voting machines (also called EVM) or computers connected to the Internet. It may encompass a range of Internet services, from basic transmission of tabulated results to full-function online voting through common connectable household devices. The degree of automation may be limited to marking a paper ballot, or may be a comprehensive system of registering to vote, requesting online to receive mail-in ballots, updating personal information at a department of motor vehicle website, vote input, vote recording, data encryption and transmission to servers, and consolidation and tabulation of election results.
A worthy e-voting system must perform most of these tasks while complying with a set of standards established by regulatory bodies, and must also be capable to deal successfully with strong requirements associated with security, accuracy, integrity, swiftness, privacy, auditability, accessibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability and ecological sustainability.
Electronic voting technology can include punched cards, optical scan voting systems and specialized voting kiosks (including self-contained direct-recording electronic voting systems, or DRE). It can also involve transmission of ballots and votes via telephones, private computer networks, or the Internet.
Failed to Uphold HAVA Protocols
November 26, 2013
HAVA - EAC MANAGEMENT DECISION:
Resolution of the OIG Audit Report on the Administration of
Payments Received Under the Help America Vote Act by the
Nebraska Office of Elections for the Period April 22, 2003
Through September 30, 2012 Report No. E-HP-NE-07-12 (see document)
Nebraska failed to uphold HAVA by not providing the needed documents to be in good standing. Nebraska has fallen short in many areas in being inline with HAVA protocols. Findings #1, 2, 4 and 5 were NEVER resolved or found on the HAVA website.
(1) All electronic voting systems must pass inspection. As noted above, once an individual(s) uses private devices to register to vote, etc, these devices leave IP addresses that can be tracked and used in data mining which can be used to defraud elections.
Albert Sensors
“Our voting systems are not connected to the internet.” SOS Robert Evnen and Deputy SOS Wayne Bena. Click here for just ONE story, there is more than enough evidence to prove the statement made by our SOS was indeed false! As Evnen testified that the Albert sensors are connected to the servers but not to the computers. Yet computers are connected to servers, that are connected to the Albert Sensors. It’s a play on words and is NOT ACCEPTABLE to the people of Nebraska. This testimony was done UNDER OATH at a congressional hearing last March 28, 2023 in which misleads the people he sworn an oath to serve. Evnen testified that Albert sensors were securing our elections. When indeed, this is just not true. Evnen was put in this position to secure our elections. He falls extremely short in providing safe and secure elections. He continues to make this false claim heading into the primaries. After 3 long years are we still to take him at his word without him providing solid evidence to back up his claims?
Interference of Elections from SOS Office and Social Media
Documents recently obtained by NEvoterAP show our SOS office was working with Facebook CEOs interfering with our elections.
Interference of Elections from Lancaster Co Commissioner received $$$ from Social Media Giant Meta aka Facebook
September 30, 2020
“Sean Flowerday, I am pleased to inform you that based on and in reliance upon the information and materials provided by Lancaster County, and the special circumstances Lancaster County faces administering elections in 2020, the Center for Tech and Civic Life ("CTCL"), a nonprofit organization tax-exempt under Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") section 501(c)(3), has decided to award a grant to support the work of Lancaster County ("Grantee").The following is a description of the grant:
AMOUNT OF GRANT: $404,584.50 USD”
Electronic Voting Systems MUST BE REMOVED! NOW!!!
This is a NATIONAL EMERGENCY!
For the purposes of PART THREE:
With respect,
Penny Stephens
Citizen
State level government can only be served Notice Of Tort Claim about this when we're asking for purely monetary reparations, but lower government levels need to be served says notice before the lawsuit step.
Great to meet you in person - in Fremont last Thursday. God bless you. What do you think about that, I needed to leave early but I had heard the other presenter. My point is that the pressure to bear needs to be put at the County Commissioners level. I am trying to post about that. I mentioned to you re: the Ne Open Meetings Act - and Robert J. Borer, yourself, all Patriots - holding them publicly accountable - to answer our facts and questions re; the OMA and the stolen eledtion - before the Primaries! More later!