French presidential elections.

In Serbia we have these transpent boxes where you also have to fold your ballot paper. So far nobody complained about them.

glasacke_kutije_izbori_2022.jpg
 







Claude BESNIER

@cl_besnier
https://twitter.com/cl_besnier

voyons maintenant l'élection qui a été volée en France dimanche dernier. Selon une source de la CIA, en échange de son acceptation de "perdre", la candidate de l'opposition Marine Le Pen "percevra au moins 300 millions de dollars pour sa participation au spectacle.

Lors du débat télévisé, Marine Le Pen, a passé sous silence tous les éléments sérieux qui auraient dû mettre sérieusement en difficulté la crédibilité de Monsieur Macron. Madame LEPEN aurait été payé par une société américaine proche de McKinsey , pour 300 millions de dollars

Now let's look at the election that was stolen in France last Sunday. According to a CIA source, in exchange for agreeing to "lose", opposition candidate Marine Le Pen "will receive at least $300 million for her participation in the show.

During the televised debate, Marine Le Pen ignored all the serious elements that should have put Mr Macron's credibility in serious difficulty. Madame LEPEN would have been paid by an American company close to McKinsey, for 300 million dollars

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)


Image
 
lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

Fraudes à la présidentielle : le greffe du Conseil Constitutionnel refuse de transmettre le recours citoyen

Les fraudes à la présidentielle nourrissent de nombreuses inquiétudes et de nombreuses rumeurs hâtivement qualifiées de complotistes par la presse
lecourrierdesstrateges.fr lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

Fraud in the presidential elections: the registry of the Constitutional Council refuses to transmit the citizen appeal

The frauds in the presidential election are fuelling many concerns and rumors hastily qualified as conspiracy by the subsidized press which openly called for voting Emmanuel Macron. Curiously enough, the clerk's office of the Constitutional Council seems to have taken it upon itself to declare inadmissible the appeal filed by several lawyers, including Carlo Brusa and Maud Marian (and many others) on the famous France 2 case. This stubbornness once again raises serious questions about the commitment of the famous Constitutional Council, which is gradually ruining the reputation for independence that it had more or less managed to preserve until now.

Everyone has heard about the famous inconsistency between the results posted on the evening of the elections by the public channel France 2, presented as being directly linked to the Ministry of the Interior, and the final results given... by the same Ministry of the Interior, a few minutes later, where Marine Le Pen had mysteriously lost more than one million votes.

In fact, electoral law provides that only a candidate (or a representative of the State) can contest the results of an election after the closing of the polls. Here we come across an oversight or loophole in French law: citizens are strangely excluded from control of a process central to democracy.

French results processed... in the USA!

As Maud Marian, co-editor of the appeal against the presidential results, points out, this legal loophole poses serious problems in light of the evolution, and especially the computerization, of the electoral process itself.

As for the voting machines, his colleague Tarek Koraitem has already explained the troublesome legal problems: illegal installation of voting machines, vagueness about the procedures for verifying these machines, complete uncertainty about their operation and regularity.

Regarding the computer processing of the results after the counting, Maud Marian raises another embarrassing point: the aggregation of the results by the Ministry of the Interior escapes any control, and takes place on servers... hosted in the USA, under American control!

Those who remember the disputes during the counting of the results of the last American presidential elections will not be reassured.

The law has not kept up with technology

As we can see, French electoral law is obsolete and completely ignores the problems posed by the technological innovations that have taken place since the adoption of the Constitution in 1958... Which means that there are a lot of changes to integrate.

Maud Marian, Carlo Brusa, and the group of lawyers who prepared the appeal before the Council, have the merit of proposing "praetorian" evolutions, i.e. decided by the judge, to adapt the law to its time.

Surprisingly, this seemingly legitimate request has been blocked for the time being by the clerk's office of the Constitutional Council, which has announced its intention not to transmit it to the Council. Such a refusal can only feed suspicions and, as Maud Marian points out, it is in the interest of democracy to purge the electoral process of any toxic suspicion.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 
genero81 said:
It's clear they don't care how obvious elections being stolen are. Maybe even they are making it obvious to send the message that's there's no point in trying to resist the globalist agenda(s)?
Click to expand...
Yes - I don't have high hopes for France. I remain quite surprised by how much little power French people have against their government. They are always rioting over there but nothing ever appears to change?
 
Maat said:
lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

Fraudes à la présidentielle : le greffe du Conseil Constitutionnel refuse de transmettre le recours citoyen

Les fraudes à la présidentielle nourrissent de nombreuses inquiétudes et de nombreuses rumeurs hâtivement qualifiées de complotistes par la presse
lecourrierdesstrateges.fr lecourrierdesstrateges.fr

Fraud in the presidential elections: the registry of the Constitutional Council refuses to transmit the citizen appeal

The frauds in the presidential election are fuelling many concerns and rumors hastily qualified as conspiracy by the subsidized press which openly called for voting Emmanuel Macron. Curiously enough, the clerk's office of the Constitutional Council seems to have taken it upon itself to declare inadmissible the appeal filed by several lawyers, including Carlo Brusa and Maud Marian (and many others) on the famous France 2 case. This stubbornness once again raises serious questions about the commitment of the famous Constitutional Council, which is gradually ruining the reputation for independence that it had more or less managed to preserve until now.

Everyone has heard about the famous inconsistency between the results posted on the evening of the elections by the public channel France 2, presented as being directly linked to the Ministry of the Interior, and the final results given... by the same Ministry of the Interior, a few minutes later, where Marine Le Pen had mysteriously lost more than one million votes.

In fact, electoral law provides that only a candidate (or a representative of the State) can contest the results of an election after the closing of the polls. Here we come across an oversight or loophole in French law: citizens are strangely excluded from control of a process central to democracy.

French results processed... in the USA!

As Maud Marian, co-editor of the appeal against the presidential results, points out, this legal loophole poses serious problems in light of the evolution, and especially the computerization, of the electoral process itself.

As for the voting machines, his colleague Tarek Koraitem has already explained the troublesome legal problems: illegal installation of voting machines, vagueness about the procedures for verifying these machines, complete uncertainty about their operation and regularity.

Regarding the computer processing of the results after the counting, Maud Marian raises another embarrassing point: the aggregation of the results by the Ministry of the Interior escapes any control, and takes place on servers... hosted in the USA, under American control!

Those who remember the disputes during the counting of the results of the last American presidential elections will not be reassured.

The law has not kept up with technology

As we can see, French electoral law is obsolete and completely ignores the problems posed by the technological innovations that have taken place since the adoption of the Constitution in 1958... Which means that there are a lot of changes to integrate.

Maud Marian, Carlo Brusa, and the group of lawyers who prepared the appeal before the Council, have the merit of proposing "praetorian" evolutions, i.e. decided by the judge, to adapt the law to its time.

Surprisingly, this seemingly legitimate request has been blocked for the time being by the clerk's office of the Constitutional Council, which has announced its intention not to transmit it to the Council. Such a refusal can only feed suspicions and, as Maud Marian points out, it is in the interest of democracy to purge the electoral process of any toxic suspicion.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Click to expand...

Same technique that was used for the Biden election.
 
SOTTREADER said:
Yes - I don't have high hopes for France. I remain quite surprised by how much little power French people have against their government. They are always rioting over there but nothing ever appears to change?
Click to expand...
Due to its past, France is very watched by others countries I think. So if it fall, there would be contamination. They maintain a very hard lock on it.
When the Truckers tried to come into Paris, people waiting them with foods, preventatively received a fine. It's Orwellian.

April 22: "The Ministry of the Interior purchased 91 armored vehicles for law enforcement three months ago."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517492213726560257
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom