The U.S. Government & The Third-Party Vendor Are One

A lawsuit in Colorado alleges that a private company currently trying to chill free speech in America is actually the government itself.

Emerald Robinson

The “lawfare” letters sent out to these 150 people were merely one part of a much larger campaign to stop anyone from criticizing the results of the 2020 election:

Public debates, audits, and/or investigations of the 2020 General Election are currently being conducted or contemplated by state legislators in Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and other states to ascertain the scale of vulnerabilities and whether they were exploited. By widely publicizing its intimidation campaign, OVS and its co-conspirators seek to intimidate and silence not just Plaintiffs and the Class, but also the public at large from exercising their right to speak and to share their own testimonial evidence relevant to proceedings investigating election fraud in the November 2020 election.

Does this sound like the behavior of a third-party vendor to you? Have you ever heard of a private company waging war against the free speech of its customers? Of course not.

These things do not happen for obvious reasons. Lest you think that OVS is just a company with suicidal business practices, the lawsuit drops the most important and explosive allegation contained in any lawsuit filed in America:

OVS has not waged its Lawfare campaign as only a corporate citizen, 
but also as a state–actor, i.e., the government. OVS is a state–actor because States across the United States have outsourced their constitutional obligation to run elections by deferring to OVS’s professional experience and contracting out the administration, collection, counting, recording, and auditing of ballot results through voting technology, software, and thousands of hours of technical and election services. For example, Georgia paid OVS roughly $90,000,000 for a complete, end–to–end election solution in their Master Solution contract. In the Master Solution, Georgia specifically stated “[t]he unique abilities, knowledge, and skills of [OVS] constitute a material inducement for State entering into this Agreement.” Such reliance and partnership between OVS and States, according to which OVS itself takes the place of the government, makes OVS’s conduct of elections and all its related activities a state-action. The administration, collection, counting, recording, and auditing of ballot results in elections are inherently a traditional, exclusive public function. So not only have these Americans received Letters from a corporate citizen with tens of millions in annual revenue and private equity support, but they have also been threatened by, in effect, the government itself.

Just read those key sentences again:

The supposedly third-party vendor which presents itself as a private company “is a state actor, i.e., the government.”

“These people have been threatened by, in effect, the government itself.”

That’s why a cyber security expert on stage at Mike Lindell’s Cyber Symposium said: “The question is: who’s running our elections? I think the third-party vendor is running our elections. I think this has been happening for a long time.”

That’s because the U.S. Government and the third-party vendor are one and the same. These people have been threatened by, in effect, the government itself.