Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

H.B. 267 REFERENDUM UPDATE: Protect Utah Workers, led by Utah Education Association, says they've gathered nearly 130k *UNVERIFIED signatures thus far. The Lt. Gov. Deidre M. Henderson's office reports that none have been verified yet. The groups have until April 16 at 5 PM to collect 140,748 verified signatures....

23,010 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

5 Kommentare

Profilbild von Real Deseret Bro
Real Deseret Brovor 1 Jahr

@myuea @LGHendersonUtah I would trust food prepared by Jeffrey Dahmer before I would trust Deidre verifying signatures. How the hell did our state give this kind of power to one corrupt highly partisan politician.

Profilbild von Mountain States Legal Foundation
Mountain States Legal Foundationvor 1 Jahr

Will you take just 2 minutes to sign the petition in support of these ranchers as they actively safeguard their family's way of life in the face of an overreaching government? Please sign our petition by clicking below.

Profilbild von Patriotic Jon
Patriotic Jonvor 1 Jahr

@myuea @LGHendersonUtah Nice to see Henderson suddenly care about signature verification

Profilbild von Crzyhorsefan
Crzyhorsefanvor 1 Jahr

@myuea @LGHendersonUtah UT legislature getting a taste of FAFO again. @JStuartAdams

Profilbild von Mark D. Butler
Mark D. Butlervor 1 Jahr

@myuea @LGHendersonUtah Congratulations to them on gathering that many signatures, but they certainly have their work cut out for them persuading a majority of voters in a conservative state to support restoring something controversial and left liberal (public sector unions) that even FDR opposed.

Ähnliche Videos

🚨 BOMBSHELL! 🚨LIST OF PEOPLE WHO KNEW TYLER ROBINSON WAS ALREADY IN CUSTODY & THAT THE DISCORD CONFESSION WAS IMPOSSIBLE At a minimum, IMO, all of these officials know—and likely have known since this press conference started at 7:51 PM on September 11, 2025—that Tyler Robinson WAS ALREADY IN CUSTODY at the Washington County Sheriff's Office. Yet they pretended then, and continue to pretend until now, that they didn't have a suspect in custody. They've also allowed the alleged Discord confession to stand unchallenged, even though it was posted AFTER Tyler was already in custody. 1. FBI Director Kash Patel 2. FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino (whose wife works for TPUSA) 3. FBI Agent Robert Bohls, appointed head of the SLC FBI field office by Kash Patel a few weeks earlier in August 2025 4. Utah Governor Spencer Cox 5. Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson 6. Utah County Sheriff Mike Smith 7. Utah Department of Public Safety Agent Brian Davis, who was dispatched to Washington County to take Tyler into custody 8. Washington County Sheriff Nate Brooksby 9. Retired Washington County Sheriff’s Office detective Scott Messinger, who helped bring Tyler in to the sheriff's office 10. Unidentified Washington County Sheriff's Deputy(ies) present when Tyler was taken into custody 11. Utah Attorney General Derek Brown 12. Commissioner of the Utah Department of Public Safety Beau Mason, appointed by Spencer Cox in June 2025 13. Utah County Attorney Jeffrey S. Gray, lead prosecutor on the case IMO, that's over a dozen officials who, up to this point in time, have NEVER MENTIONED OR ACKNOWLEDGED that they actually had Tyler Robinson 3.5 hours BEFORE the official "33-hour" arrest time announced the morning of September 12th, and over 1.5 hours before the posting of the alleged Discord confession. NOW YOU KNOW WHY THEY "LOST" ALL THE SURVEILLANCE VIDEO FROM THAT NIGHT AT THE WASHINGTON COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE Tell me if you disagree with anyone on this list or if I missed someone.

Sam Parker 🇺🇸🧯

316,587 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

UPDATE: New Zealanders deserve the chance to decide in a democratic way if we stay in the WHO or not. Not the Cabinet behind closed doors. You, me, all of us should decide. That is why I am calling for a referendum. We now have two ways that people can support this campaign: 1) Electronic Parliamentary Petition; 2) Citizens Initiated Referendum Petition. (Links in the comments) Anyone can sign the Electronic Parliamentary Petition. However, the Citizens Initiated Referendum Petition can only be signed by people on the NZ electoral roll and it’s old school – by law you have to sign with a pen and on the paper form. We need signatures from 10% of all registered voters. That’s about 400,000 signatures. It’s a huge number – about equal to every person in Wellington City times two. However, 4000 people collecting 100 signatures, 10,000 collecting 40 signatures or 40,000 collecting 10 signatures gets us to the threshold for a referendum. This is truly a grassroots effort – from the ground up, powered by ordinary Kiwis. We don’t have corporate sponsors. We don’t have taxpayer funding. In fact, under referendum rules, we’re not allowed to spend more than $50,000 on promoting and gathering signatures. However, other groups can spend up to $50,000 promoting the Citizen Initiated Referendum Petition as long as they don’t work with us. If we gather enough signatures, Parliament has to notice. It’s your voice in action: by gathering enough support we can make Parliament debate and act, giving everyday New Zealanders a say in our future. Together, we can show the world what a determined group of Kiwis can do. They may have the World Health Organization, but we have each other – and that is stronger. NZ and the MRNA NZDSOS - NZ Doctors Speaking Out with Science James Lindsay, anti-Communist Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH® Lee Donoghue Aly Cook Coronavirus Plushie Cam Slater Dr. David Martin Elon Musk Jim Ferguson James Roguski Matt Shelton Perth Today 🇦🇺 Malcolm Roberts 🇦🇺

Kirsten Murfitt

25,115 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Spencer Pratt voters are reporting that their ballots have been rejected. This is from an independent journalist in San Diego named Amy Reichert: "Multiple Spencer Pratt voters have contacted me saying their signatures were rejected and their ballots were not counted. Here is the letter they get. “More than 200,000 Californians have had their ballots rejected since 2020. This is what happens when you don’t require voter ID. If a machine can identify your party registration, people have every right to question whether the process can be manipulated." This is from a man who lives in Southern California named Russ. He said, "Today I received a letter, just like my neighbor did, informing me that my California ballot was not counted because my ‘signature verification’ supposedly didn't match the state's records. I've been voting in California for 20 years." Leftists are engaging in a series of talking points to defend the California election system. They say things like, “Well, you need to sign the ballots, so there will be signature verification” or “We check those signatures” or “It has to be postmarked by Election Day” or “Ballot harvesters have to put their signature on the ballot envelope, so it's not done anonymously. There's still a chain of custody for these ballots.” They're saying these things to try to instill confidence in voters, when none of us have any confidence in the California election system. Each and every one of their talking points is contradicted by the actual election procedure and the laws on the books that guide Los Angeles elections. So they say “You need to sign it.” OK, but does a smiley face count? Oh, it counts. And they say, “We checked these signatures.” OK, do you check them on any ballots other than Republican ballots? Because there have been reports of Los Angeles election workers telling journalists, “Actually, we don't really check these ballots.” So do you or don't you? The mail-in ballots that come in late, the left says, “They have to be postmarked by Election Day. These are not people that are casting ballots after Election Day tallies have been made public.” Actually, you don't need a postmark. If you look at California election law, you don't have to have a postmark by Election Day. You can simply handwrite any date that is either on or before Election Day, and the ballot is counted. What happens to the ballots that have been ballot-harvested and are turned in to be counted if the ballot harvester doesn't put his or her name on that ballot? Is that ballot rejected? Oh, no, it's not rejected. That ballot is still counted, even if the ballot harvester doesn't sign the ballot envelope. So all of these talking points that are thrown at us by the left are…lies.

Liz Wheeler

84,930 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten