BKP talks about the results Cherokee Co and the Pickens Co Board of Elections opening ballots

Her­schel Walk­er has agreed to a debate in Octo­ber with Warnock.

Chero­kee Co attempt­ed to go to the board of elec­tions to vote to ask their coun­ty atty to write an order to take to the court to audit their bal­lots in the May pri­ma­ry. The atty was pre­pared to give all the excus­es to the board to stop the oper­a­tion. Chero­kee was nev­er going to hap­pen based on cer­tain peo­ple mov­ing some­thing for­ward.

If a board of elec­tions, not an indi­vid­ual, has stand­ing. Elec­tions are run and exe­cut­ed at the coun­ty lev­el. The coun­ty has a char­ter and they give pow­ers to a board of elec­tions or a pro­bate judge. You have heard about stand­ing and the board of elec­tions or a pro­bate judge has the stand­ing. There has not been one court order from a board of elec­tions or a pro­bate judge to ask to do a recount or an audit. If the judge lets a pro­bate judge or a board of elec­tions, that will crack the cov­et­ed holy bal­lots.

On July 19th the Pick­ens Co Board of Elec­tions vot­ed to have the court order writ­ten for the unseal­ing of the bal­lots to do an audit. At the July meet­ing the Christo­pher Mora, the Pick­ens Coun­ty GOP chair and vot­er in Pick­ens Coun­ty, law­suit was already in the works to unseal the bal­lots for an audit of the bal­lots. All 3 judges in Pick­ens coun­ty recused them­selves from the suit. It has gone to a Cobb Coun­ty judge and the court case will be heard on Sep­tem­ber 19.

Mike Carv­er reads a state­ment about audit­ing the pri­ma­ry before the motion. Dur­ing the state­ment he says that We have the author­i­ty as the board to open the bal­lots. In the June Meet­ing they did the inves­ti­ga­tion of what they could do and how they go about it and what would be involved. As Mike Carv­er told you they had dis­cus­sions with the coun­ty atty and pos­si­bly the sec­re­tary of state’s office. They did­nt make the motion in June they need­ed the inves­ti­ga­tion on how to go about it so on July 19th they made the motion to unseal the ballots.There isnt any men­tion at the July meet­ing about any objec­tions for mov­ing for­ward.

The motion was to have legal coun­sel to write the court order. They already know that the Christo­pher Mora suit is already in motion. And the Phil Lan­drum, the coun­ty atty could have made a com­ment at the time of the vote that the case that Christo­pher Mora has in place is against the coun­ty to unseal the bal­lots and he is rep­re­sent­ing the coun­ty in this suit and how could the atty rep­re­sent the coun­ty to open the bal­lots and then in turn write the court order for this board to open the bal­lots.

In the August 2 meet­ing, the board said that the Mora case had to be com­plet­ed before they could assess the need to move for­ward. Now when the board makes a motion, and noth­ing is done with the motion, should­nt the board make a motion to put the July 19th order on hold or dis­miss and rescind it. They have a live motion that has­nt been ful­filled and will assess it in the future. It is a real con­fus­ing state­ment that pre­vents them from mov­ing for­ward.

Phil Lan­drum is cor­rect that he rep­re­sents the coun­ty and will be rep­re­sent­ing the coun­ty in the Mora case and will prob­a­bly file for a motion of dis­missal or maybe that Mora may not have stand­ing. Now he would­nt be able to do that and then have the board of elec­tions order him to write the court order. Maybe when they made the order on July 19th he should have stood up and told the board that he would have to recuse him­self from the order due to con­flict. On July 19th, why was this allowed to move on.