A question that I have not yet seen posed directly, nor has there been any suggestion of an answer — obviously — is whether the FBI in Atlanta, working with the US Attorney in the Northern District of Georgia, has taken an interest in the individuals who were in the room where the surveillance video was recorded.
My view of what has been happening in Georgia is that the “sound and fury” has all been behind the lawsuits filed by Lin Wood and Sidney Powell, while the Trump Campaign has more quietly pursued an “election contest” lawsuit filed last Friday in Fulton County Superior Court. That lawsuit was filed after the full “hand count” and later automatic machine “recount” were completed pursuant to Georgia law. While that was taking place the Campaign was going about gathering factual information about “invalid” voters who may have cast “mail-in” ballots.
President Trump has remained mostly silent on the specifics of the allegations of vote irregularities in Georgia, He publicly distanced himself from Lin Wood and Sidney Powell when they began to suggest that GOP voters should not participate in the two runoff elections unless state GOP officials took action on their allegations of hostile foreign penetration of the Dominion voting system devices used. He has remained active in supporting the two GOP candidates in those runoff elections, calling attention to the vote irregularities that are now part of the publicly filed allegations in his election contest complaint.
But there has been no public comment — or criticism that I can find — by Pres. Trump directed at DOJ or Attorney General Barr specifically as it relates to Georgia. I SUSPECT — pure speculation on my part — that DOJ is investigating fraud in Georgia, including Fulton County, and the videotape footage from the surveillance cameras in the ballot counting room is of great interest to them.
The FBI and US Attorney do not require “evidence” of a “crime” BEFORE they start to ask questions. “Evidence” of a “crime” is what they are searching for through the process of asking questions.
The videotape and the timing of the recorded/reported vote totals create sufficient “suspicion” to justify an inquiry. Those two pieces of information are then combined with the sworn statements from Observers that they were told to leave as counting was done for the night – when that is objectively not true — plus the media reports that Fulton County officials reported that counting was being halted for the night at 10:30 pm, which circumstantially corroborates the Observers’ statements that they were told counting was done for the night.
Within the “global village” of actors in, and observers of, the events on the night of November 3 you have both “witnesses” and “subjects”. Observers and the “cutters” who were told their work was done for the night and they should leave are all “witnesses” to what was said that caused everyone other than “counters” to leave the room. They should all be interviewed and their recollections captured as part of piecing together what happened.
We now have conclusively “debunked” the story about the “burst” water pipe somehow delaying the vote counting for some unexplained reason. The Georgia Secretary of State has now reported that the incident involved an overflowing toilet or urinal, which was discovered at 6:04 in the morning on November 3, but that the water did not reach the counting room. You can imagine that created quite a mess if it had been overflowing all night until being discovered early in the morning.
This is actually the story that was reported by the local press early in the evening on November 3 — that the “water leak” in question happened early in the morning, and it delayed election workers from getting started at the time they anticipated. It had nothing to do with “stopping” the counting during the late-night hours of November 3. How those two matters came to be joined in the public reporting is another question that should be explored.
The next area of inquiry by investigators would be the actual events reflected on the video footage during the period after the Observers left. Every person in that room should be questioned about their own actions and the actions of those they observed. This should happen first without the benefit of letting them watch the footage. Then, after they have given their recollection from memory, then you walk them through the footage action by action and see how what they see themselves doing matches with what they related from memory. When there are significant differences, you try to poke at the reasons why — has the person given you a faulty recollection, or were the answers given purposely misleading?
Every person who was in the room needs to be interviewed by the FBI, where providing false information is a crime. What instructions were they given? What did they say in response? Who seemed to be in charge? What did that person do? Who did they speak with? Did you overhear what was said? Did anyone tell you later what was said? Etc.
If I’m a Fulton County Democrat partisan and I want to slow down the investigation, I tell everyone involved to get a lawyer and use the need to get a lawyer to delay talking with law enforcement.
Apparently, that is just what Ruby Freeman has now done after she backed out of an agreement to give an interview to a news outlet on Monday. She has reportedly either deleted her Facebook page or set it to private as well.
Among the most “curious” — and maybe incriminating — parts of the video surveillance footage from the Fulton County counting room was that showing Freeman seeming to run the same stack of ballots through a tabulating machine multiple times.
While officials from the Georgia Secretary of State’s office have sought to “normalize” everything shown on the videotape, they cannot offer definitive answers to some questions because they were not there. Only the people in the room can dispel or confirm the conclusions being drawn by the people who watch the video.
ASSUMING that there was some centralized scheme or plan to create a window of opportunity to “pad” the vote total for Joe Biden while not under the watchful eye of monitors, and while making it all appear as if things were proceeding as “business as usual”, there are always instances in these kinds of “conspiracies” that arise where some form of clarification is needed on a development that was not anticipated and planned for.
But it is almost inevitable that the “clarification” doesn’t fit in the narrow confines of the “story” that was planned in advance. All conspiracies of this nature include measures to avoid being exposed and contingencies when some measures fail. But sometimes the failures are not anticipated, and the contingencies do not provide complete relief.
Ruby Freeman running the same stack of ballots over and over is one of those “hard to explain” episodes.
When personal exposure to possible criminal prosecution becomes a potential outcome of “Wheel of Fortune”, someone ALWAYS cracks.