This past Tuesday, the Georgia State Election Board (SEB) held a scheduled meeting to discuss several new agenda items that were brought before the Board.
However, prior to the agenda being discussed, a motion was introduced by Board member Dr. Jan Johnston and seconded by the Board’s newest member, Janelle King.
The motion was to permit the complainants of SEB Complaint 2023-025 to be heard. Traditionally, complainants have been permitted to speak when their complaint was being heard and presented.
However, a unilateral rule change made SEB 2023-025 the first complaint where the researchers who brought forth the complaint were not permitted a rebuttal to, in this case, the Secretary of State’s investigation.
A second motion was also made by Dr. Johnston to require further research into the issues brought up in 2023-025, as the Secretary of State’s Office and Fulton County had still not explained and supported in full their response to discrepancies in SEB Complaint 2023-025.
This motion would end up being delayed until the August 6th board meeting.
The Gateway Pundit wrote about the two 15-minute segments authorized to the complainants, including the video of the presentations by VoterGA’s Garland Favorito, as well as Phillip Davis and Clay Parikh, here and here.
Much of the substance of Complaint 2023-025 was reported by The Gateway Pundit in this 4-part series on Fulton County’s election discrepancies:
Tuesday’s meeting also included a fiery public comment from Georgia resident Bob Coovert, who discovered that the Pro V&V audit that Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger told Georgia citizens was an “unqualified success” was likely just ‘unqualified,’ as FOIA’d emails from the county’s alleged to have been audited have no records, communications or invoices of any audit being performed by Pro V&V.
Further, the “memo” to Pro V&V calling for the audit that allegedly took place in November 2020 was dated just a few days after the FOIA request was made, 7/16/2021.
Tuesday’s board meeting was abruptly ended at 5pm and recessed until Wednesday morning at 9am. That was a unilateral decision. Member King pointed out that there was not 24hrs notice given for the continuation, as required by Georgia law, and several members had prior obligations that would prevent them from attending.
The meeting was ultimately cancelled. However, the meeting was not properly adjourned. This is significant.
Despite the improper noticing of the meeting, the members who could not attend in-person agreed, and showed up, for the meeting ‘virtually’. When they showed up virtually, they were told the meeting would no longer be taking place.
On Wednesday, Fulton County selected a team of monitors for the 2024 Presidential election, their second Presidential election in a row requiring a monitoring team from the State Election Board after their agreement in the May meeting.
The Gateway Pundit reported on this subversive attempt by the Fulton County BRE to appoint favorable monitors prior to the SEB and SOS approvals.
The State Election Board then had to call an emergency meeting on Thursday at 4pm, to allow for 24 hours notice, in which a quorum of four out of six members were present, including Dr. Johnston by teleconference. Board member Janelle King explained the significance of the meeting:
“Had we not called this meeting today…everything that took place on Tuesday would have died. But they didn’t tell you that. And we would have been back at square one.
“I made phone calls to see what could be done and was told that holding the meeting at 8am would be problematic because we were obligated to provide 24hr public notice, although there was not a 24hr public notice for the 9am meeting that was supposed to take place on that Wednesday morning.
“That being said, in the spirit of cooperation, we agreed to hold the meeting today at 4pm, announcing within 24hrs yesterday. To my surprise, without speaking to the media…I began to hear that this meeting was illegal or unconstitutional. Unfortunately, I heard that the same way you heard it because I have not been contacted by our chairman or our attorneys.”
Member King went on to call out the Board’s leadership and attorneys for a failure to respond to calls and texts concerning the Board’s standing. Member King stated:
“To be clear, as of 4:05pm today, July 12th, I have yet to have a received a call back or text message from any Board member or attorney. You would think every member of the Board or those associated with the Board would have the same urgency to get this meeting done that we have.
“Considering the stakes that are on the table. Instead we are getting criticism and accusations of revolting or taking over, in fact, there’s something that is outside the law, which is untrue.
“When I joined this Board, I stated that I am not interested in wasting anybody’s time or wasting my time. I’m interested in doing the work for the People. I do not work for an agency or an attorney. I work for the People. I will not apologize for agreeing to continue to work for the People, especially when we have modern technology that allows us to all be in one place.
“Every Board member has had an opportunity to join virtually and be a part of this Board meeting, including the two that are not here.”
Member King then assured the gallery that this was simply a meeting convened to officially adjourn the meeting so the business can be conducted and the Board can move on to the August meeting. Otherwise, all the work from Tuesday’s meeting “would have died.”
