Michigan Sworn Statement: Fill & Download for Free

I am going to try one more time to explain how dangerous this whole situation is.The first thing that has to be acknowledged is that there are no saints in this situation. There are only political self-interests at play here, no matter which side you are on. Your side is cheating too.The second thing that must be acknowledged is that there was definitely voter fraud. Every election has it. No matter which side you are on, your side cheated. Maybe it was just a really passionate supporter who voted his Alzheimer’s grandmother’s ballot. Here are some examples: Voter Fraud Map: Election Fraud Database | The Heritage Foundation (I know, I know, the Heritage Foundation, but it looks to be pretty well sourced).There are several questions then that need to be answered. The main question is: what was the will of the people in the states where the election is being contested or the count is still underway? Put another way, was there a fraud massive enough and one-sided enough to subvert the will of the people of any particular state?Some people and especially the media are acting like this just isn’t possible. Let’s look to history (I am limiting myself to Presidential contests with which I am familiar, not an exhaustive list and no, I am not going to research this more):1960 Presidential election: The Democrat’s Chicago machine delivered the state of Illinois to JFK. Nixon didn’t contest because there was no path to victory since he would have needed Texas as well. Later lots of people were indicted.The DNC was sued for backing Hillary over Bernie in the 2016 primary and argued in court that they had no obligation to be faithful to the votes.The Republicans shut down the Ron Paul delegates in the 2012 nomination to assure a Romney win. There was some parliamentary tactics the Ron Paul delegation used that the Romney people just shut down, violating procedural rules.So where there is intent, it seems plausible that some conspiracy to steal an election could potentially succeed.What is the strategy of the Trump campaign? Ignoring Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric, the campaign is alleging fraud or improper ballots broadly across several states. I assume they filed claims and then looked for the evidence and that they will withdraw of have dismissed several of those claims where they cannot find enough evidence to move forward. Several of those have already played out unsuccessfully for Trump. The media is using this as evidence of desperation. I would urge caution because there is another legal strategy they are using. They are suing for injunctions on states certifying the vote prior to Trump having time to make his case. My read on this is that we are left with essentially 4 states in play: Arizona, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia from an electoral point of view.The electoral strategy of the Trump campaign, and there obviously is an actual electoral strategy that the media is ignoring, is to win the votes of at least three of the states in play. Here is what I think they are doing (and this is where the media and left underestimate Trump by thinking he is purely a grifter and manbaby):Arizona: Win outright through the count as it continues and is swinging the margin toward Trump. They alleged fraud there to pressure the state to scrutinize questionable ballots.Georgia: The Republicans are pressuring their own Secretary of State to try to get him in line. He just declared a hand recount. I think they know this is a long shot, which will come in later. They need to eliminate ~25k Biden votes, plus enough to compensate for inevitable Trump votes that will also be eliminated, to flip the election to Trump. Their hope is that there were enough fraudulent ballots in Fulton county to find the votes they can eliminate from the count to make up that difference.Pennsylvania: This is the one court case that looks clearly to be an easy win, if the Supreme Court will take it up. The PA legislature passed a very clear statute to allow mail in ballots. That statute required all mail in ballots to arrive by 8:00pm on election day. The PA Supreme Court overrode that to say that they could arrive up to 3 days later. The US Supreme Court will likely take this up because it is a case, as established in precedent, where the court is essentially altering clear language of a statute. The Supreme Court wants to avoid ruling here so they will wait until some of the above is resolved. If they take it up, Trump will win, and it is very likely that PA will have voted for Trump.Michigan is the safety. It is a hail Mary in my opinion. Even though the Trump campaign has sworn statements of fraud, the courts will be hesitant to weigh in unless it is just blatant. The Trump team will need Michigan if AZ or GA doesn’t come back to them. If both are lost at the end, I think Trump concedes. If he wins one and loses the other, then he pushes Michigan hard.What is the Trump campaign alleging? Here are the main allegations based on what I can gather:Improper ballots: ballots cast by dead people, ballots cast on behalf of voters registered or residing in other states, on behalf of disabled persons without authorization, ballots “harvested” where the ballot would be filled out by someone, signature forged, etc.Count irregularities, especially related to computerized tallies, the exclusion or harassment of poll watchers.As I mentioned above, some of these allegations are just tactics to buy time. Others may have real substance behind them. I don’t trust anyone in this. The people charged with counting the votes would of course claim that there was no fraud. As you can see, even Republican election officials are being attacked by Trump. Kind of crazy.Are there any reasons to think that there might have been fraud?In my opinion, yes. First, as I stated above, there was certainly fraud. What would indicate a widespread or systematic fraud? There are some quirky things this election that could be statistical anomalies. Here are the four that I find most interesting. I am not evaluating them for accuracy, just saying that if true, they would look suspicious to me, although they could each have innocent explanations or be made up:This is not even disputed: Trump got more votes than any other sitting president in history. He got more votes than Obama in 2012. Biden got even more than that.Another one is the number of ballots where the voter apparently only voted for president and not for anyone down ballot. Based on what I saw, that is relatively rare in most elections. There is an allegation that this phenomenon is much more prevalent in 2020 and in swing states with low margins. Of course, it could have a completely innocent explanation in such a polarized environment where both campaigns focused on swing states.I saw something on twitter where a supposed data scientist had used a script to scrape the NY Times count data. Again, super sketchy source. The analysis showed that the counts jumped early in the morning of the 4th in a very similar way across the swing states…and Virginia. It was more complex than this in terms of randomness and other characteristics of time series data sets. Since no one has alleged fraud in Virginia, this could be innocently explained but I would want to see this looked at before it is dismissed.I also saw that a data analyst found that some of the counts violated Benford’s law. This would indicate non-random behavior in the data, or, said differently, that something was manipulated.The other troubling thing is the appearance of dead voters on the rolls. Again, the allegations of the Trump campaign would require this to be a systematic harvesting of those votes after inflating the voter rolls. If you refer to the Heritage Foundation data base, you can see that many people on there have voted either using a dead relative’s information of through identity theft. The fact that there are dead voters is not necessarily indicative of massive fraud. What would be indicative of massive fraud would be large numbers of such voters or voters on the rolls with conspicuously similar birthdates (1/1/1900), similar signatures, etc. Of course, there are plenty of reasons to believe that a default date was either built into the system or entered by a lazy clerk. Signatures would be more difficult to explain.Why is this all so dangerous?From the Republican point of view: If you believe there was fraud and you let it stand, you have been complicit in the corruption of our democracy. You have to fight it. You fear that your electoral possibilities in the future will be destroyed by the democrats packing the court and granting statehood to DC and Puerto Rico.From a Democratic point of view: The mere allegation of election fraud undermines our democracy. Trump should just concede, even if there were some isolated case of fraud. The rhetoric of Trump and even the man himself are threats to our democracy.From a SCOTUS point of view: We don’t want to weigh in. If we do, it will forever tarnish the reputation of the court. If we must weigh in, if our hand is forced, we will do the right thing. But we know half the country will think we acted politically, no matter what we do.Trump point of view: I have been under attack from the before I was even inaugurated. The deep state has been undermining me because they know I can’t be controlled. This was their final attempt to undermine me and our democracy and I won’t let it stand.From a Deep State point of view (LOL): That bastard Trump refuses to get in line with our agenda. We will make sure someone we control gets in this time. 2016 the voters caught us off guard, this time that won’t happen.So, the problem is that no matter what side or institution you are on, your team or institution is doing the right thing. There is hardly ever a more blind and stupid person than someone who believes they are right (see Dunning Krueger effect). I mentioned Nixon refusing to contest the election in 1960 even though many republicans urged him to do so. There is an argument that Trump should just accept it. But I see both sides here. What I want is peace in the valley. I think every Trump allegation should be run down and refuted. Every statistical anomaly explained. We shouldn’t fear sunlight, the best disinfectant. If we don’t, there are ~70 million people feeling like their votes were invalidated. It might be reckless for Trump to make the allegations but what is the solution if you want peace if not to answer them all? If we don’t, I fear that this division will be perceived as weakness, especially by the Chinese. That could have grave consequences. I expect civil unrest to ramp up again if Trump makes gains, which I think he will. I think he will ultimately fail in his electoral strategy.However, Trump has one more strategy. Remember the “top of the ballot” votes that did not include anything down ballot. If that was fraud, it may turn out to have been a short-sighted fraud because Republicans control many of the state houses that actually certify the votes. If Trump can get two of the four states in play “legitimately”, then all he needs to do is create enough doubt in people’s minds that his base will pressure their state legislators. Even if the courts won’t act, Trump could take his case to the voters with rallies in key states and try to push just one state legislature in a state that went for Biden to say that due to fraud, they will certify the vote for Trump. If that happens, the allegations of stealing the election will go in both directions and there won’t be peace in the valley. It could well be the unwinding of the American experiment. I think it would embolden our enemies. We are on the precipice and it doesn’t look good from here. I don’t see an outcome where the entire electorate accepts it as legitimate. We may have already crossed the Rubicon, and this is just the last throes of empire.EDIT: I edited for punctuation, spelling, and other errors, and updated the vote count for GA. Thanks to Robert Walker for the call out.EDIT 2: I never imagined the Trump Campaign would invoke a scorched earth legal strategy like this. I really believed they would throw in the towel if they lost both Arizona and Georgia. I was wrong about that. I hope Sydney Powell, who has a pretty good resume as a lawyer, can stay true to her promise to litigate this quickly and prove the allegations or not. I am really worried about this brinksmanship. It was weird to me, seeing part of the press conference, for Rudy to seem like the sane one and she looked like a complete nut. Strange times. Proving such a broad conspiracy seems like insanity to me. It is hard to understand what they are looking at that makes them think these public statements by members of the bar can end well for them as individuals. I think at this point the “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” bit comes into play. This cannot be circumstantial, run of the mill cheating. They have claimed a massive conspiracy and they have to prove a massive conspiracy. I thought that press conference did more damage than good. The only thing that would justify them doing that stunt is if they thought they were losing support of the base. At the end of the day, if they lose the support, which I think they are, then it won’t matter even if they can prove what they said. I actually think they lost those who were somewhat neutral but open to hear the claims proven, like myself. I think this has crossed a line.

As someone who works in contentious legal matters and a Trump supporter who is convinced the election was won by fraudulent means, and I’ll bring a concrete example below, I’ll explain why the courts haven’t sided, yet, with the Trump team.I’ll start by saying that anyone who thinks that the legal system in their country is impervious to politics is a little naive.President Obama vetoes Samsung patent ban on iPhone 4 and select iPads.So lets go through some reasons the Trump administration has been unsuccessful so far.A first reason is that it is critically important for the legal system to appear just to the people. Therefore, the judges are searching for any reason not to invalidate votes of the people, whether it be standing, or flaws in the cases presented to them.This is very reasonable, and even a conservative judge will indeed be worried about sticking their neck out if it appears that they are interfering with the will of the people.Nobody wants to “disenfranchise millions of voters”. But if the allegations of systemic voter fraud are true, then that is exactly what the judicial system is accomplishing.If one briefly reviews many of the decisions it appears that there are contradictory reasons for rejecting the suits, the sum result of which is that no one can actually challenge an election in court.For example, in the cases filed before an election you can’t prove there was injury, for the cases filed after the election it is considered late-filed in view of an election result that you didn’t desire.In other cases the Trump campaign was rejected as not having standing, and individuals were rejected as their single votes were not significant to overturn the votes of hundreds of thousands of people.There have been numerous “you sued the wrong person” decisions, it isn’t the Governor or the Secretary of State or anyone else in charge, but rather the clerk that carries out the signature check… So no one in charge is actually responsible…A second reason is that there are indeed many judges who are predisposed to allow the Democrats to win, and will happily find reasons to dismiss the case.A third reason is that there is a lack of overwhelming evidence, since the DOJ, FBI and other investigative bodies are not getting involved. Maybe not because of the “deep state” or even political alliances, but that they would also then be acting against the man who they expect will shortly become their boss.To elaborate, the other side is trying:A. To openly and illegally destroy the evidence:Benson memo demanding deletion of electronic pollbook data questionable | Michigan Senate RepublicansBecause we all know that even though there is a disputed election, the “software pollbook data” must be taking up a tremendous amount of warehouse space (#sarcasm).And not only is this suspicious, but as former Mayor Guiliani points out this clearly illegal:Michigan Legislature - 168.811 Election returns, records, and applications; preservation; destruction; time.All election returns, including poll lists, statements, tally sheets, absent voters' return envelopes bearing the statement required by section 761, absent voters' records required by section 760, and other returns made by the inspectors of election of the several precincts must be carefully preserved and may be destroyed after the expiration of 2 years following the primary or election at which the same were used.B. To secretly destroy the evidence:Antrim Michigan Forensics Report [121320] v2 [REDACTED].pdfRegarding the Antrim report, see what happens when you finally file enough cases to get to a judge who is on your side and resistant to intimidation? You can get actual evidence…As noted by the Dominion CEO, those very security logs are what is designed to show unauthorized alteration of the code (starting 201:49)[1]:"Is it your design… to keep security logs that would flag unauthorized alteration of the code?Yes, absolutely.”*See what happens when the Trump team can actually get testimony from the other side? [the above Dominion CEO testimony only being possible through Senate Hearings and not the courts]Video: Richard Baris: Evidence of Voter Fraud Disappears From State NetworksC. To prevent legitimate election integrity checks such as audits:Michigan Secretary of State Refuses to Testify to State Legislature on ElectionMaricopa County Board Votes Against Complying With Subpoenas to Audit Voting MachinesArizona Judge Dismisses Lawsuit to Enforce Subpoenas for Election Record, Opens Opportunity for RefileIf there is nothing to hide, then why not to allow audits? Arizona Senate Could Arrest Election Officials Kelli Ward:“The reason we have paper backups here in Arizona, is that when there’s a question, we can look at them. Right now, those paper ballots are basically being held hostage by attorneys, by judges, while the people of the state and people of the nation are crying out to know whether the results are accurate.”D. Playing the race card (because we all know that is the “real” reason Trump is challenging the election results (Wayne Co. canvassers certify election results after initial deadlock):“"The Republican members of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers put politics above their duty to our residents," Tlaib tweeted Tuesday. "Suggesting that all of Wayne County can be certified, EXCEPT for Detroit, is horrifying racist and a subversion of our democracy."”E. To pull the wool over the public’s eyes with randomized statistical-sample “audit-like” efforts which are really political ploys:Secretary Raffensperger Launches Cobb County And Statewide Signature Match AuditsWhich the recount prophets already told us in advance have a predetermined result Georgia's GOP secretary of state says recount results will show 'no substantial changes'.Also during first recount in Georgia, the media reported a few days in advance that Biden was leading, which is statistically not possible if you consider the winning margin:As Georgia's Hand Recount Concludes, Vote Count Shows Biden Still Ahead“Georgia election officials expect to release the results of a statewide audit by noon Thursday, as a handful of counties finish data entry from a full hand recount of 5 million presidential votes.”Lets put this propaganda in perspective:In an election with almost 5 million votes and a winning margin of ~0.2% (49.5% to 49.3%) the informal results could not statistically be showing a trend of Biden winning.“Yes sir, in each of the handful of counties that finished counting, for every 1000 votes we count Biden is consistently getting exactly two more (495 go to Biden and 493 to Trump).The truth was not that Biden had any sort of consistent county-wide win, but rather the win was due to a few large counties. For example Fulton county alone carried about 400k votes, of which 72% were for Biden, several times his winning margin.F. Big Tech is publicly suppressing distribution of the evidence:YouTube Removes Trump Lawyer's Opening Statement From Senate Committee Hearing“Earlier this month, YouTube announced that it would remove “content alleging widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of a historical U.S. presidential election.” The Google-owned company said that it would take this action because the “safe harbor” deadline on Dec. 8 in the presidential election had passed.”G. Big tech is delaying release of the evidence to give the other side time to develop spin stories:Twitter Blocks 'Potentially Harmful' Links to Sidney Powell Election LawsuitState Senator Mastriano's personal Twitter account temporarily suspended, Trump reactTwitter Blacklists Mathematician Who Testified at Arizona Voter Fraud HearingYouTube Bans Trump-Friendly OANN For One Week After Network Touted Fake Covid CureH. Witnesses are being intimidated, and punished, for example suspending without pay one of the USPS whistleblowers in violation of the Whistleblower Protections Act’s clause against retaliation (Ely Erlich's post in Everything Republican).Georgia Poll Workers Who Raised Election Concerns Get TerminatedSecretary Raffensperger Condemns Political Firingcalls For Rehiring Of Fulton County Whistle BlowersI. Out of all of the thousands of alleged voter fraud cases the only ones I have seen publicized are Trump supporters/Republicans who allegedly carried out the fraud.Which means that either only Republicans carried out fraud, or the enforcement agencies are only going after Republicans, or the media is created a slanted picture.J. Did I mention delaying the evidence? The law enforcement agencies themselves, those who are meant to protect the people, are overtly delaying damning reports of foreign interference in “the safest election ever”...🚨DNI Report on Election Threat Won’t Meet DEC 18 Deadline. “MASSIVE FIGHT HAS KICKED Off with DNI”…K. I’m sure I mentioned delaying the evidence… the courts too:Supreme Court Fails to Immediately Act on Trump Campaign's Request to Expedite Pennsylvania AppealL. Legal threats are issued to media entities who air expose pieces.Fox Airs Segment Challenging Election Fraud Claims Against Smartmatic After Threat of Legal ActionSo there is a lack of overwhelming evidence, because, like Trump’s Southern border wall which he “didn’t build”, there has been a tremendous opposition to all attempts for discovery, properly signature audits and examining the tabulators.But just like Trump fought for the wall, shutting down the government for it (Trump wall - Wikipedia) he is now fighting both the Democratic Party, large portions of the Republican party, the media, the countries opposing his re-election, and the tech giants supporting them, and the truth is trickling out.M. Wiki is clean of all major allegations of voter fraud.Guess nothing happened at Fulton County, huh Wiki?Fulton County, Georgia - Wikipedia2020 United States presidential election in Georgia - WikipediaOr Antrim County? You even have to click a button for this one, but still no mention of the controversy (Antrim County, Michigan - Wikipedia):N. Legal threats are issued to lawyers who allege fraudMichigan AG May Seek Sanctions for Lawyers Questioning Election ResultsO. Legal threats are issued to politicians who allege fraudhttps://floridianpress.com/2020/12/petition-filed-to-disbar-rep-matt-gaetz/P. And defensive Republicans are saying that while fraud exists in every election it “isn't widespread”.So if is “rare”, you tell me the odds of one of the two key election officials challenging Trump's claim in Georgia having his address used for fraud?Georgia Election Official and Trump Critic, Gabriel Sterling, Says Woman Fraudulently Voted Using His Address(I tried hard not to include statistical arguments but couldn't help myself when I saw that one…)Ok Ely, show me the evidence!Well, in my opinion, the best example of clear systemic fraud was the “widely debunked” publicly visible events at the Fulton County State Arena.What happened there?There were two desperate attempts in this Democratic stronghold counting the absentee, mail in and military ballots, to evacuate the Republican poll watchers from the area.The first was an alleged pipe burst, reported by the media on the night of the election as a breaking news story with an expected four hour delay in counting. The next day it was reported that there was indeed a four hour delay, with Director Barron stating it was a serious leak. Subsequently the official story was that it happened in the morning about 13 hours earlier than the breaking news story. Yet that “doesn’t hold water” because the election officials held a large 20 minute Zoom conference at 10am, mentioning all issues thus far, and didn’t mention a single word about any leak.Then, at about 1000-1030pm they packed up, told everyone to stop work which forced the Republican poll watchers by law to leave, and when the Republican poll watchers left, they pulled out the ballots they had packed away and started counting again in violation of at least two laws designed to prevent cheating.Nice story Ely, now show me the evidence!Enjoy!Below are the events in chronological order of the time they were reported at the State Farm Arena in Fulton County was the location where absentee, mail-in and military ballots were counted:Election Day, November 3, 2020, Tuesday morningAs reported here (It's Complicated: The "Burst Pipe" in Fulton County, GA - UncoverDC) during the 10am Zoom press conference, there was no mention of any burst pipe incident.For convenience, here is the direct link to the Zoom conference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l0zBdp4vac&feature=emb_logoIn summary, the 10am conference included 20 minutes of election officials patting themselves on the back for smooth sailing despite minor “glitches”. (For example: 3:45 – Chairman Pitts – "everything going smoothly"; "Overall things have gone smoothly today" – Director Barron, then goes on to mention technical issues, equipment delivered late – nothing about the pipe burst; 6:44 – specifically Fulton county, everything good).Election Day, November 3, 2020, Tuesday nightThe Wall Street Journal reported at 8:55 PM (Georgia Results Likely Delayed by Pipe Burst in Fulton County - WSJ.com; “Georgia Results Likely Delayed by Pipe Burst in Fulton County”):“Election officials in Fulton County, Ga., said results could be delayed Tuesday night after a burst pipe disrupted operations at State Farm Arena in Atlanta earlier in the day, stalling absentee ballot processing by four hours.”A similar “breaking news” story was reported on CBS on election night (watch it before they take it down…):Note that it is dark (night time), and the reporter states that “they have counted 86,000 votes” and this will delay the count for a day or two, also noting the fact that Georgia is now a critical battleground state.A similar story was reported by Forbes (Georgia's Absentee Ballot Count Delayed By Burst Pipe, But Officials Say Results Won’t Be Impacted) at 9:40PM.“the leak prevented workers from tallying ballots for about four hours”November 4, 2020, Wednesday morning - “the day after”Pipe bursts in Atlanta arena causing 4-hour delay in processing ballotsAt 6:25AM the ABC reported:"A pipe burst in State Farm Arena in Atlanta on Tuesday morning, causing a four-hour delay in processing election ballots, according to deputy Secretary of State Jordan Fuchs.”…“As planned, Fulton County will continue to tabulate the remainder of absentee ballots over the next two days," the officials continued. "Fulton County did not anticipate having all absentee ballots processed on Election Day."November 6, 2020 - “three days after”Trump’s claims about Georgia lacked facts, context“Fulton County Elections head Richard Barron said Wednesday that the pipe dumped a lot of water, soaking the carpeting and hampering work.It looked really like there was rain coming out of the ceiling and the entire carpeting was just covered in water,” he said. “There was no way to go in there and perform work.”Note: The quoted statement above indicates first-hand witnessing of the event (“It looked”), and indicated it was severe (no way to go in there and perform work) and this is the same Director Barron who didn’t mention the incident in the Zoom conference at 10am reporting all election incidents.And after all that, a month later when testifying to the senate that there was no break in the chain of custody, the election officials (who weren’t even there) stuck to the story that it was a morning pipe burst causing almost no disruption (Georgia Senate Election Hearing Transcript December 3 - Rev):Chairman Robb Pitts: (02:20:50)I’m not sure. That thing has taken the life of his own. There was a water, actually, there was a leak. The floor above where we were counting ballots at State Farm Arena, according to Steve Koonin, CEO of Atlanta Hawks. That occurred at 6:07 AM. I forget the exact date. By 8:07 AM, it was-Jessica Corbitt-Dominguez: (02:21:11)It was on Election Day.So were tens of thousands of ballots left unattended?Chairman Robb Pitts: (02:21:31)I was not there, but presumably there were people there because we started at probably seven o’clock, I believe. I’m sure that some people were there.Jessica Corbitt-Dominguez: (02:21:58)And I will say this sir, because the question of chain of custody has been raised. So I have had an opportunity to talk with the staff about that. I was not personally there, but my understanding is just in a room like this, if there was a leak over here, that does not mean that all of you would necessarily leave. And that is my understanding is that the workers who were responsible for those ballots never left the room. They were in the room the entire time. They had to stop working for a period of about two hours and that was the reason it was brought up in the first place is there was a slight delay of a couple of hours where they couldn’t access the entire room, but they did not leave. And the ballots remained in the custody of the sworn workers.To summarize:In the critical room where the alleged election fraud took place, the very room where the absentee and military ballots were to be counted, the so-called Democratic stronghold:1. There venue stated they alerted the election staff of a water leak at 6:07 AM which lasted two hours and delayed tabulating the results (Statement Regarding Absentee Ballot Tabulation at State Farm Arena | State Farm Arena). Note that this report must have at least been at night (if not days after the incident, despite the date of November 3) because they already mentioned that the results of 86,000 counted votes would be reported at night: “Tonight Fulton County will report results for approximately 86,000 absentee ballots, as well as Election Day and Early Voting results. These represent the vast majority of ballots cast within Fulton County. As planned, Fulton County will continue to tabulate the remainder of absentee ballots over the next two days.” ).2. The election staff made a public update at 10 AM making no mention of the delay or leak.3. The media reported at breaking story later that night of the leak of an expected 4 hour delay. Later that night being about 13 hours after the incident was allegedly reported to the election officials, and on election day with the media reporting every semi-newsworthy item they could find.4. The media reported the next day that a four-hour delay in counting had indeed occurred.5. Three days later, an election official who had talked extensively the 10am Zoom conference and yet made no mention of the leak, released a statement that he personally witnessed it and it was severe.6. The leak at some stage became a minor leak in the morning, which did nothing.And that, my dear friends, is only the first incident that happened at Fulton County.The second incident, which occurred about two hours after the breaking news story of the leak is well known to you.The election staff packed up the ballots, yes they did, it’s all on camera. [2]At 3:26 in the linked video, you can clearly see ballots on top left hand corner tables (top right hand corner screen)At 5:26 in the video (real time: 1037 the same desks have been packed up.Then, at 11:09 real-time (11:13 in the video) – the lady in purple who had been wiping down the tables earlier is now processing ballots in the top right hand screen, top left corner.The release of the video showing the ballots being packed away caused the other side to change their story from “the cutters finished their jobs and left, making the Republican Poll Watchers think the work was over” to “everybody thought the work was over and then it was decided to restart ballot counting due to external pressure, just coincidentally after the Republican Poll Watchers left”.Georgia election officials show frame-by-frame what happened in Fulton surveillance video (ironically the same official mentioned above who subsequently found out his address had been used by another voter…)“ At 10 p.m., with the room full of people, including official monitors and the media, video shows ballots that had already been opened but not counted placed in the boxes, sealed up and stored under the table.The reason? Employees thought they were done for the night.“They were closing things up and getting ready to leave,” Watson said.”And so why did they start counting again, according to the story?“Media and observers left as employees packed up. But Fulton’s election director called a supervisor at State Farm a few minutes later, telling them to keep counting after the Secretary of State’s office called and said they shouldn’t stop counting for the night so early.”Aha, again Director Barron… So the Secretary of State got wind that they were “stopping counting” and intervened to keep counting just a bit longer.Which makes a lot of sense (#sarcasm), since there was still extensive counting to be done and there would be no chance to finish at 1am anyway…Let me make it crystal clear: an instruction from the Secretary of State’s office and election director to not “stop counting” means that it was public knowledge that they were stopping counting, and the video shows they had, indeed, stopped counting, not that the “cutters had finished their part”.Not that I believe the story about the Secretary of State’s office anyway…But rest assured, there was no mishandling of the ballots because “State election investigators have already spent hours analyzing the video” and they couldn’t find evidence of fraud…Because anyone watching this video with distant screens not even facing the ballots or computers can tell if any foul play (digital adjudication etc.) is going on (#heavysarcasm).Pre-emptive responses to the strawman attacks on this evidence:The Trump team in their first presentation of the video stated quite explicitly that they had not had time to review the whole video and that the only thing they could say “for certain” after skimming it, was that it was not typical practice to be pulling ballots out of suitcases stored under the table (this is not where ballots had been coming from the whole day).The fact that it was later found upon further review that the ballots under the table had been put away there at 10:02pm is actually confirmation that it was not normal and that they had indeed been packed away.The Trump team in their first presentation indeed called the boxes with wheels and extendable handles “suitcases” because if you look up the dictionary definition this is a perfectly normal word to use. They didn’t say that “ballots are stored in ballot cases and this was an unusual suitcase which isn’t a ballot case”, this is a red-herring…There is no logical and legal reason election to start up counting again for only an hour and a half in the middle of the night, counting wasn’t close to finishing. This story falls short of basic believability.As explained in a subsequent Trump Team presentation here [3]citing and explaining relevant laws and the points I summarized below (starting at about 1:48:00):The Republican poll watchers were indeed forced to leave, by law they had no right to stay there after it was announced that work had been stopped.It was illegal to restart counting out of the public view. Georgia statute 21-2-483(b).It was illegal to restart counting without a public announcement. Georgia statute 21-2-493.Subsequently, the chief investigative officer told the press that there was no announcement to stop work. Yet ABC clearly reported at 6:30am the following morning that they had been informed that the counting had stopped at 1030am.NEW: The election department sent the ballot counters at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta home at 10:30 p.m., Regina Waller, the Fulton County public affairs manager for elections, tells ABC News. https://t.co/HgCtcXEka3— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) November 4, 2020I hereby call “pants on fire”.The legislature doesn’t require investigators to be able to catch election cheats with 10 witnesses, it is enough to state that counting should be in public view and with public knowledge.To try and avoid being caught violating the above mentioned laws they made up and circulated in the media a lie that the secretary of state sent a non-partisan official (who had to stay anonymous out of fear for his or her safety) and therefore they weren't counting out of the public's view.This is yet another lie debunked by the video who show no such person and apparently the alleged identify was revealed to the senate judiciary committee and testimony was obtained that this alibi was absolutely false (Page 5, first paragraph: Georgia chairmans report).Edit! Update from the Georgia Senate subcommittee hearing on December 30, 2020.Starting at 14:00 the Trump team show two women repeatedly running the same ballots from under the table through the scanners several times!https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uSfbEiV-UxgTwo incidents with contradictory, changing and prima facie illogical stories, occurred within two hours of each other at one of the counting locations critical to the national election (which had thousands of counting venues), the second event clearly including illegal activity.What are you going to tell me next, that the proud father-in-law of a Jew is a secret neo-nazi sending out messages in “codes”?[4]I tried sending the information about the conflicting timeline of the pipe burst to Sydney Powell, but had a terribly difficult time filling out the report form since the page (Contact) looks like this on all of my browsers:Awful hard to know what to fill in each box (although I did figure it out eventually, I’m quite stubborn).I’m sure it’s just a technical glitch, it happens all the time that contact pages are made virtually invisible...I’ll also add that Fulton County is in Georgia, where Trump votes kept reappearing (“oops!”) in the thousands in Trump strongholds, during the recount. [5]“During this audit, it was discovered that Fayette County had missed tabulating 2,755 votes, Floyd County had about 2,600 ballots that were never scanned, Douglas County failed to include a memory card from an Election Day precinct that included 156 votes, and Walton County discovered a memory card with 284 votes.Of course if there is nothing wrong with the system, why try to fix it?One final note, it has been claimed that the batch processed in Fulton that night had an unusually large Biden vote (unusually large compared to other mail in batches - which shouldn't happen) but I haven't been able to find the realtime Edison data myself.GEORGIA🚨An analysis of the Edison election database shows that Joe Biden received 98% of a 23,487 vote batch in Georgia at 12:18 AM.🔻 pic.twitter.com/eovvLebml9— Kanekoa (@KanekoaTheGreat) December 6, 2020Footnotes[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbegDlTxzMg[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=keANzinHWUA&t=553s[3] Page on youtube.com[4] Ely Erlich's answer to What factual examples or scientific studies do Trump supporters have that NBC, CBS, or ABC use fake news in their newscasts?[5] 2020 United States presidential election in Georgia - Wikipedia

Mormonism and doctrine/Prophets are not infallible< Mormonism and doctrineTable of ContentsThe fallibility of prophetsSummary: Are prophets considered infallible? Critics sometimes impose absolutist assumptions on the Church and hold inerrantist beliefs about scriptures or prophets. Critics therefore insist that any statement by any LDS Church leader represents LDS doctrine and is thus something that is secretly believed, or that should be believed, by Latter-day Saints.Jump to Subtopic:Question: Do Mormons consider their prophets to be infallible?Question: Can a prophet make mistakes?Question: How is it possible for a Church leader or prophet to have been influenced by racism, yet be consistent with the Lord not allowing prophets to lead the Church astray?Neil L. Andersen (2012): "A few question their faith when they find a statement made by a Church leader decades ago that seems incongruent with our doctrine""Approaching Mormon Doctrine," LDS Newsroom (May 2007): "Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine"Charles W. Penrose (1912): "Do you believe that the President of the Church, when speaking to the Church in his official capacity is infallible?"Question: How are Church members protected against error by leaders?Question: Should Church members simply have "blind trust" in their leaders?Question: Were Biblical prophets infallible?Question: How do Biblical prophets compare to modern prophets?Question: Do Mormons consider their prophets to be infallible?Latter-day Saints do not believe that prophets and apostles are incapable of error, despite being called of God and receiving revelationSome people hold inerrantist beliefs about scriptures or prophets, and assume that the LDS have similar views. This leads some to assume that prophets are infallible.[1]Joseph Smith himself taught that ‘a prophet was a prophet only when he was acting as such’.[2]The Church has always taught that its leaders are human and subject to failings as are all mortals. Only Jesus was perfect, as explained in this statement from the First Presidency:The position is not assumed that the men of the New Dispensation —its prophets, apostles, presidencies, and other leaders—are without faults or infallible, rather they are treated as men of like passions with their fellow men."[3]Lu Dalton, writing in the Church's periodical for women, explained:We consider God, and him alone, infallible; therefore his revealed word to us cannot be doubted, though we may be in doubt some times about the knowledge which we obtain from human sources, and occasionally be obliged to admit that something which we had considered to be a fact, was really only a theory.[4]Other authors have long taught the same thing:1887 B. H. Roberts, Letter written November 4, 1887, London, Millennial Star 49. 48 (November 28, 1887): 760-763; a portion of which reads: “Relative to these sermons [Journal of Discourses] I must tell you they represent the individual views of the speakers, and the Church is not responsible for their teachings. Our authorized Church works are the Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. In the Church very wide latitude is given to individual belief and opinion, each man being responsible for his views and not the Church; the Church is only responsible for that which she sanctions and approves through the formal actions of her councils. So it may be that errors will be found in the sermons of men, and that in their over zeal unwise expressions will escape them, for all of which the Church is not responsible” (762)1889 Charles W. Penrose, Editorial: Judge Anderson and ‘Blood Atonement,’ Deseret Weekly 39. 25 (December 14, 1889): 772a-773c. [Editor is Charles W. Penrose; in his response to the lengthy statement by Judge Anderson, he quotes from the same pamphlet which the Judge had quoted from: Blood Atonement, by Elder Charles W. Penrose, published in 1884; Penrose quotes a statement which the Judge had not] “’The law of God is paramount. When men give their views upon any doctrine, the value of those views is as the value of the man. If he is a wise man, a man of understanding, of experience and authority, such views are of great weight with the community; but they are not paramount, nor equal to the revealed law of God’” (773ab)1892 21 March 1892: Elder Charles W. Penrose, at the time a counselor in the Salt Lake Stake Presidency: "At the head of this Church stands a man who is a Prophet . . . we respect and venerate him; but we do not believe that his personal views or utterances are revelations from God." Millennial Star 54 (21 March 1892): 1911902 Joseph F. Smith to Lillian Golsan, July 16, 1902. "[T]he theories, speculations, and opinions of men, however intelligent, ingenious, and plausible, are not necessarily doctrines of the Church or principles that God has commanded His servants to preach. No doctrine is a doctrine of this Church until it has been accepted as such by the Church, and not even a revelation from God should be taught to his people until it has first been approved by the presiding authority–the one through whom the Lord makes known His will for the guidance of the saints as a religious body. The spirit of revelation may rest upon any one, and teach him or her many things for personal comfort and instruction. But these are not doctrines of the Church, and, however true, they must not be inculcated until proper permission is given.” - Joseph F. Smith Correspondence, Personal Letterbooks, 93–94, Film Reel 9, Ms. F271; cited in Dennis B. Horne (ed.), Determining Doctrine: A Reference Guide for Evaluation Doctrinal Truth (Roy, Utah: Eborn Books, 2005), 221–222. Also in Statements of the LDS First Presidency, compiled by Gary James Bergera (Signature, 2007), page 121. Bergera indicates it is a letter from JFS to Lillian Golsan, July 16, 1902.1907 March 26, 1907. [The following was first published in “An Address. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to the World”, in Millennial Star 69. 16 (April 18, 1907): 241-247; 249-254; also in Improvement Era 10 (May 1907): 481-495; reprinted also in Messages of the First Presidency, Volume IV, compiled by James R. Clark (Bookcraft, SLC 1970): 142-157; “We refuse to be bound by the interpretations which others place upon our beliefs, or by what they allege must be the practical consequences of our doctrines. Men have no right to impute to us what they think may be the logical deduction from our beliefs, but which we ourselves do not accept. We are to be judged by our own interpretations and by our own actions, not by the logic of others, as to what is, or may be, the result of our faith”, page 154.1921 B.H. Roberts: As to the printed discourses of even leading brethren…they do not constitute the court of ultimate appeal on doctrine. They may be very useful in the way of elucidation and are very generally good and sound in doctrine, but they are not the ultimate sources of the doctrines of the Church, and are not binding upon the Church. The rule in that respect is—What God has spoken, and what has been accepted by the Church as the word of God, by that, and that only, are we bound in doctrine. When in the revelations it is said concerning the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator that the Church shall “give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them—for his word ye shall receive as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith”—(Doc & Cov., Sec. 21)—it is understood, of course, that his has reference to the word of God received through revelation, and officially announced to the Church, and not to every chance word spoken.[5]The prophets are not perfect, but they are called of God. They may speak as men, but may speak scripture as well. Every person may know for themselves whether they speak the truth through the same power that their revelation is given: the power of the Holy Ghost.Question: Can a prophet make mistakes?The principle that the Lord will not ever allow the President of the Church to lead the Church astray means that He will not allow that man to lead the Church into apostasyOne part of knowing that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true is knowing whose Church it really is and that our Savior lives and leads the Church today. It is knowing that he has entrusted a living Latter-day Prophet with all the keys necessary to direct, act, and receive what is needed to guide and direct the Church under the Lord’s direction whose Church this is.Many Latter-day Prophets have taught that the Lord will not suffer the President of the Church to ever lead the Church astray. This is a true principle, but it only makes sense in light of the destiny of the Church as taught and revealed in Latter-day Saint scripture. Unlike previous dispensations, the Lord’s Church on earth today will not fall into apostasy, speaking of the body of the Church as a whole and not individuals.This statement does not mean that the Lord's servants are perfect or that they will never make mistakes, display weaknesses, sometimes be irritable, have bad breath, or display the characteristics of old ageThe principle that the Lord, who is the head of the Church will not ever allow the President of the Church to lead the Church astray means that He will not allow that man to lead the Church into apostasy. It does not mean that his servants are perfect or that they will never make mistakes, display weaknesses, sometimes be irritable, have bad breath, or display the characteristics of old age.In a discourse to the Saints on March 21, 1858, President Brigham Young asked:Can a Prophet or an Apostle be mistaken? Do not ask me any such question, for I will acknowledge that all the time, but I do not acknowledge that I designedly lead this people astray one hair’s breadth from the truth, and I do not knowingly do a wrong, though I may commit many wrongs, and so may you. But I overlook your weaknesses, and I know by experience that the Saints lift their hearts to God that I may be led right"[6]We should receive and follow the counsel “words and commandments” of the current President of the Church “in all patience and faith”There is also another principle involved here that we should receive and follow the counsel “words and commandments” of the current President of the Church “in all patience and faith” with great promises attending (Doctrine and Covenants 21: 4-9).Question: How is it possible for a Church leader or prophet to have been influenced by racism, yet be consistent with the Lord not allowing prophets to lead the Church astray?The goal of the Church is to bring people unto ChristThis is a difficult question. At face value, the idea that the Lord will not allow prophets to lead us astray seems to be in direct conflict with the Church acknowledging that early Church leaders and prophets were influenced by certain racist tendencies of their times. For example, how could the Priesthood ban have been implemented and yet be consistent with the prophets "not leading the Church astray?".The first thing we must do is step back and see what the Church and prophets are all about.What is the goal of the church?According to Spencer W. Kimball, and reaffirmed by the other prophets it is as follows:First, to proclaim the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people; Secondly, to perfect the Saints by preparing them to receive the ordinances of the gospel and by instruction and discipline to gain exaltation; Thirdly, to redeem the dead by performing vicarious ordinances of the gospel for those who have lived on the earth. (See Ensign, May 1981, p. 5.) All three are part of one work—to assist our Father in Heaven and His Son, Jesus Christ, in their grand and glorious mission “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” (Moses 1:39.) I renew that declaration today.[7]The purpose of the Gospel is to bring people to Jesus Christ. The Church is the organization that Jesus set up on the Earth to bring people back to Jesus and back to God so we can be joint heirs with Christ. (Romans 8:17.)The prophets will not lead the Church astray from the mission of leading people to Christ: This does not exempt prophets from saying or doing things that are incorrectWill the prophets lead us astray from this mission. No. They won't. They will keep us on that path and we should follow them.Will they say things, do things, and even make policy that isn't the best, or even is incorrect. Certainly. Just as one example, Joseph Fielding Smith did not believe that men would even go to the moon. He stated in the first edition of Answers to Gospel Questions,Naturally the wonders in the heavens that man has created will be numbered among the signs which have been predicted—the airplanes, the guided missiles, and man-made planets that revolve around the earth. Keep it in mind, however, that such man-made planets belong to this earth, and it is doubtful that man will ever be permitted to make any instrument or ship to travel through space and visit the moon or any distant planet.[8]He later accepted a flag from the Apollo astronauts. When asked about this by a reporter, he stated, "Well, I was wrong, wasn't I?"In Jonah chapter 3 it says,4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.But Nineveh wasn't overthrown. The people repented and the Lord spared them. This really upset Jonah. (This doesn't even get into the fact that he first ran away.)The Lord uses imperfect people to run his ChurchThe Lord uses imperfect people to run his Church. He has promised he will make it all right in the end.Karl G. Maeser taught:On one occasion he was going with a group of young missionaries across the alps. They were crossing a high mountain pass on foot. There were long sticks stuck into the snow of the glacier to mark the path so that travelers could find their way safely across the glacier and down the mountain on the other side.When they reached the summit, Brother Maeser wanted to teach the young elders a lesson. He stopped at the pinnacle of the mountain and pointed to those sticks that they had followed. And he said, “Brethren, behold the priesthood of God. They are just common old sticks, but it’s the position that counts. Follow them and you will surely be safe. Stray from them and you will surely be lost.” And so it is in the Church. We are called to leadership positions and given the power of the priesthood. And we are just common old sticks, but the position we are given counts. It is separate and apart from us, but while we hold it, we hold it.[9]If we go in with the expectation that the prophets will never do or say anything wrong, we will be disappointedIf we go in with the expectation that the prophets will never do or say anything wrong, we will be disappointed. There are more examples of this than the one you gave. Even Joseph Smith was reprimanded by God on more than one occasion.Just a few examples from history (There are also reprimands in the D&C) They started doing Baptism for the dead in the river in Nauvoo - until God stopped them. They started doing sealings of adoption- until God stopped them. Why didn't God stop the race issue? He did...but He just did it later in his time frame for His purpose.So again, If we go in with the expectation that the prophets will never do or say anything wrong, we will be disappointed. Prophets are learning and are being taught just as we are learning and being taught. Bruce R. McConkie stated that quite clearly.[10]But, if we go in with the expectation that the prophets will keep us on the Gospel path, complete with the ordinances we need to return to our Heavenly Father, then we will know that the prophets will never lead us astray.In John 6, Jesus taught hard things:66 ¶From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.We will get things wrong, because we are NOT Jesus Christ: He allows us to learn as we go alongJesus has taught the words of eternal life. This is his Church. We will get things wrong, because we are NOT Jesus Christ. He allows us to learn as we go along. The prophets will not lead us astray from that goal of eternal life.I also fall back onto the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. In my mind, the evidence is very clear. Joseph Smith could not have written the Book of Mormon in 1830. Nobody could have done that. There were things that Joseph Smith and scholars of the day did not know that are contained in the book. They would have written the opposite based on the science of the day.If the Book of Mormon is true, then Joseph Smith is a prophet of God. It also means we have a prophet today. Will they lead us astray? Is that statement even true that they won't? The prophets will not lead us astray from the Gospel path. Can they be incorrect on other issues-even involving the Church? Yes, they can. But, that isn't why we have a prophet. We have a prophet to help us return to our Heavenly Father. As such, we follow him. God will make it all right in our eternal lives.Neil L. Andersen (2012): "A few question their faith when they find a statement made by a Church leader decades ago that seems incongruent with our doctrine"Neil L. Andersen:A few question their faith when they find a statement made by a Church leader decades ago that seems incongruent with our doctrine. There is an important principle that governs the doctrine of the Church. The doctrine is taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is not hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk. True principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find.The leaders of the Church are honest but imperfect men. Remember the words of Moroni: “Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father … ; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been” (Ether 12:6)[11]—(Click here to continue)"Approaching Mormon Doctrine," LDS Newsroom (May 2007): Pesident Gordon B. Hinckley:"Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine"Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted. —(Click here to continue)[12]Charles W. Penrose (1912): "Do you believe that the President of the Church, when speaking to the Church in his official capacity is infallible?"Charles W. Penrose:Question 14: Do you believe that the President of the Church, when speaking to the Church in his official capacity is infallible?Answer: We do not believe in the infallibility of man. When God reveals anything it is truth, and truth is infallible. No President of the Church has claimed infallibility.[13]Question: How are Church members protected against error by leaders?The Church's system of councils provides protection against the fallibility of a single man or leaderPresident Joseph Fielding Smith explained:An individual may fall by the wayside, or have views, or give counsel which falls short of what the Lord intends. But the voice of the First Presidency and the united voice of those others who hold with them the keys of the kingdom shall always guide the Saints and the world in those paths where the Lord wants them to be.[14]Dallin H. Oaks explained how the Lord allows all His children to grow through struggling with problems:Revelations from God . . . are not constant. We believe in continuing revelation, not continuous revelation. We are often left to work out problems without the dictation or specific direction of the Spirit. That is part of the experience we must have in mortality. Fortunately, we are never out of our Savior's sight, and if our judgment leads us to actions beyond the limits of what is permissible and if we are listening, . . . the Lord will restrain us by the promptings of his Spirit.[15]The Lord will not help his children avoid all stumbling and error; He will protect them from permanent harm to His work, as Boyd K. Packer taught:Even with the best of intentions, [Church government] does not always work the way it should. Human nature may express itself on occasion, but not to the permanent injury of the work.[16]Question: Should Church members simply have "blind trust" in their leaders?Lorenzo Snow: "because each member of the Church has a right to have that measure of the Spirit of God that they can judge as to those who are acting in their interests or otherwise"Hardly, says President Lorenzo Snow:There may be some things that the First Presidency do; that the Apostles do, that cannot for the moment be explained; yet the spirit, the motives that inspire the action can be understood, because each member of the Church has a right to have that measure of the Spirit of God that they can judge as to those who are acting in their interests or otherwise.[17]Question: Were Biblical prophets infallible?The Bible itself does not support this claimSome critics will protest that this standard is not applied to Biblical prophets, yet the Bible itself does not support this claim. One Bible commentator noted that the Biblical authors were not perfect, and that they made errors of expression even in the Biblical record:Though purified and ennobled by the influence of His Holy Spirit; men each with his own peculiarities of manner and disposition—each with his own education or want of education—each with his own way of looking at things—each influenced differently from another by the different experiences and disciplines of his life. Their inspiration did not involve a suspension of their natural faculties; it did not even make them free from earthly passion; it did not make them into machines—it left them men. Therefore we find their knowledge sometimes no higher than that of their contemporaries.[18]Paul’s accounts even contain a contradictory account of his visionPaul’s accounts even contain a contradictory account of his vision (Compare Acts 9:7 & Acts 22:9). Paul and Barnabas disagreed severely enough for it to disrupt their missions Acts 15:36–39. Peter and Paul also criticized the other’s writing 2 Peter 3:16 and behavior regarding the Church Galatians 2:11–16.Question: How do Biblical prophets compare to modern prophets?Biblical prophets and modern prophets are divinely called, but clearly are not perfectTo get a better idea of how prophets are limited yet still divinely called, it can be helpful to look at some examples of Bible prophets and compare them with modern prophets.Bible prophetsModern prophetsMoses disobeyed God's instruction to speak to the rock and instead hit it. He then attributed the miracle to himself and Aaron, saying, "Must we fetch you water out of this rock?" He was chastized by the Lord afterward. (Numbers 20:)Joshua was deceived by the inhabitants of Gibeon when they claimed to come from a far country so they could get a peace accord with Joshua. Then the Israelites found that instead of living a long distant away, that people from Gibeon lived among them. (Joshua 9:)Gordon B. Hinckley was deceived by Mark Hofmann, who had done so in order to obtain money. Hofmann was even responsible for the death of some people. After some investigation, he was discovered and sentenced.Gideon repeatedly asked the Lord for signs even though the Lord has said, "An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign." (Judges 7:; Matthew 12:39)Nathan told David that the Lord approved of his desire to build a temple, and that he should commence the project. The Lord later told Nathan that such was not His desire, and that he was to tell David that the temple would be built by another. (2 Samuel 7:)Jonah felt some personal prejudices against Assyrians, to the point of expecting the Lord to give them fewer blessings than to Jews. (Jonah 4:1)Brigham Young felt some personal prejudices against blacks, to the point of expecting the Lord to give them fewer blessings than caucasians.Jesus' apostles were not always perfectly humble or modest. They once disputed over which of them would be the greatest in heaven. (Mark 9:34)Joseph Smith was not always perfectly humble or modest. He once said he had "more to boast of than ever any man had."[19]See here, though, to learn how critics misinterpret this event.A person could spend all day looking for examples of the Lord's chosen servants making mistakes, but such an activity does nothing to edify or strengthen people. In all of these situations, a prophet's weakness or mistakes do not make him any less a prophet, called of God to do His work.See also: More quotes on the fallibility of modern prophetsSee also: Brigham Young on the vital need to know for ourselves, Brigham claimed his sermons were "scripture"?, Quote mining Brigham Young's statement on sermons as scripture, and Prophetic infallibility?See also: Prophetic infallibility?, Racist statements by Church leaders?, Official or "core" doctrine, "Changing" doctrine?, and Repudiated conceptsNotesCriticisms regarding assumptions of prophetic infallibility are raised in the following publications: John Dehlin, "Why People Leave the LDS Church," (2008).; Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson, Mormonism 101. Examining the Religion of the Latter-day Saints (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 2000), Chapter 18. ( Index of claims ); Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), 437.( Index of claims ); Tower to Truth Ministries, "50 Questions to Ask Mormons," Tower To Truth Ministries (accessed 15 November 2007). 50 Answers; Watchman Fellowship, The Watchman Expositor (Page 1)Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 5:265. Volume 5 link; See also Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected by Joseph Fielding Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976), 278. off-siteJames R. Clark, quoting B. H. Roberts, Messages of the First Presidency, edited by James R. Clark, Vol. 4, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1970), p. xiv–xv.Lu Dalton, Woman's Exponent (Salt Lake City: 15 July 1882), p. 31.Brigham H. Roberts, “Answer Given to ‘Ten Reasons Why “Christians” Can Not Fellowship with Latter-Day Saints,’” discourse delivered in the Salt Lake Tabernacle, 10 July 1921. Deseret News, 23 July 1921, 4:7. Roberts' previous reply to the same pamphlet also appeared in His earlier response can be found in Brian H. Stuy (editor), Collected Discourses: Delivered by Wilford Woodruff, his two counselors, the twelve apostles, and others, 1868–1898, 5 vols., (Woodland Hills, Utah: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987–1989), 5:134-141. ; it was first published in Millennial Star 58 (July 22, 1896): 417-20; 433-9.“A Series of Instructions and Remarks by President Brigham Young at a Special Council, Tabernacle, March 21, 1858, Church Historical Department, in Richard S. Van Wagoner, ed., The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young (Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2009), 3:1418.Spencer W. Kimball, "Remember the Mission of the Church" (April 1982)Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel QuestionsBoyd K. Packer, "It Is the Position That Counts" (June 1977)Bruce R. McConkie, "All Are Alike Unto God". (18 Aug 1978)Neil L. Andersen, "Trial of Your Faith," Ensign (November 2012)."Approaching Mormon Doctrine," LDS Newsroom (May 2007)Charles W. Penrose, "Peculiar Questions Briefly Answered," Improvement Era 15 no. 11 (September 1912).Joseph Fielding Smith, "Eternal Keys and the Right to Preside," Ensign (July 1972), 88.Dallin H. Oaks, "Teaching and Learning by the Spirit," Ensign (March 1997), 14.Boyd K. Packer, "I Say unto You, Be One," in BYU Devotional and Fireside Speeches, 1990–1991 (Provo, Utah: University Publications, 1991), 84.Lorenzo Snow, "A Serious ordeal, etc.," in Conference Report (October 1898), 54.James R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible: Complete in one volume, with general articles (New York : Macmillan, 1984 [1904]), p. cxxxv.Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 6:408–409. Volume 6 link This statement, when understood in its proper context, doesn't appear to be a statement of personal pride at all. Joseph Smith read to the congregation 2 Corinthians 11 and then mimicked Paul in his "boasting." In its proper context, Joseph Smith was not acting in a proud manner at all but was using the rhetoric of Paul to defend his own authority as a prophet against those who were then proclaiming him a "fallen prophet." This statement, however, is used often in anti-Mormon literature as a criticism of the prophet and is used here only to show that even if he were in fact proud, it doesn't damage his authority as a prophet/apostles any more than it damaged Jesus' apostles' authority.ADDENDENDUM TO ORIGINAL FAIR ARTICLE1973 Spencer W. Kimball, Faith Precedes the Miracle President Joseph Fielding Smith was venerable and worthy of respect by reason of his character, dignity, age, position. He was one who had “clean hands and a pure heart, who has not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.” He was a true son of his Maker and a clean and holy man of God. He carried for sixty years the keys of the kingdom, gradually moving toward the day of his presidency. For six decades he was sustained by the Church as a prophet. Finally he was sustained as the prophet, the one who alone holds the keys in total use under the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the chief cornerstone and head of the Church.President Lee is the youngest President in more than forty years. He brings to the position rich experience, life-long dedication, and personal integrity beyond question. Longer than any man living he has served as an apostle of the Lord, faithfully and spiritually.To be a prophet of the Lord, one does not need to “be everything to all men.” He does not need to be youthful and athletic, an industrialist, a financier, or an agriculturist; he does not need to be a musician, a poet, an entertainer, a banker, a physician, a college president, a military general, or a scientist.He does not need to be a linguist and speak French and Japanese, German and Spanish, but he must understand the divine language and be able to receive messages from heaven.He need not be an orator, for God can make his own. The Lord can present his divine messages through weak men made strong. He substituted a strong voice for the quiet, timid one of Moses, and he gave to the young man Enoch power that made men tremble in his presence, for Enoch walked with God as Moses walked with God.The Lord said: “. . . whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.” (D&C 1:38.)What the world needs is a prophet-leader who gives example clean, full of faith, godlike in his attributes with an untarnished name, a beloved husband, a true father.A prophet needs to be more than a priest or a minister or an elder. His voice becomes the voice of God to reveal new programs, new truths, new solutions. I make no claim of personal infallibility for him, but he does need to be recognized of God, to be an authoritative person. He is no pretender, as numerous persons are who presumptuously assume position without appointment and authority. He must speak like his Lord: “as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” (Matthew 7:29.) [Emphasis added]He must be bold enough to speak truth even against popular clamor for lessening restrictions. He must be certain of his divine appointment, of his celestial ordination, and of his authority to call to service, to ordain, to pass keys that fit eternal locks.He must have commanding power like prophets of old: “. . . to seal both on earth and in heaven, the unbelieving and rebellious . . . unto the day when the wrath of God shall be poured out upon the wicked without measure” (D&C 1:8-9), and rare powers: “. . . that whatsoever you seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever you bind on earth, in my name and by my word, saith the Lord, it shall be eternally bound in the heavens; and whosesoever sins you remit on earth shall be remitted eternally in the heavens; and whosesoever sins you retain on earth shall be retained in heaven” (D&C 132:-46).What is needed is more a Moses than a Pharaoh; an Elijah than a Belshazzar; a Paul than a Pontius Pilate, He need not be an architect to construct houses and schools and high-rise buildings, but he will be one who builds structures to span time and eternity and to bridge the gap between man and his Maker.When the world has followed prophets, it has; moved forward; when it has ignored them, the results have been stagnation, servitude, death. — Spencer W. Kimball, Faith Precedes the Miracle, The Need for a Prophet, pp. 318-320, Deseret Book CompanyProtection against errorThe Church's system of councils provides protection against the fallibility of a single man or leader. President Smith explained:An individual may fall by the wayside, or have views, or give counsel which falls short of what the Lord intends. But the voice of the First Presidency and the united voice of those others who hold with them the keys of the kingdom shall always guide the Saints and the world in those paths where the Lord wants them to be.[6]Dallin H. Oaks explained how the Lord allows all His children to grow through struggling with problems:Revelations from God . . . are not constant. We believe in continuing revelation, not continuous revelation. We are often left to work out problems without the dictation or specific direction of the Spirit. That is part of the experience we must have in mortality. Fortunately, we are never out of our Savior's sight, and if our judgment leads us to actions beyond the limits of what is permissible and if we are listening, . . . the Lord will restrain us by the promptings of his Spirit.[7]The Lord will not help his children avoid all stumbling and error; He will protect them from permanent harm to His work, as Boyd K. Packer taught:Even with the best of intentions, [Church government] does not always work the way it should. Human nature may express itself on occasion, but not to the permanent injury of the work.[8]Does this mean that members must simply have "blind trust" in their leaders? Hardly, says President Lorenzo Snow:There may be some things that the First Presidency do; that the Apostles do, that cannot for the moment be explained; yet the spirit, the motives that inspire the action can be understood, because each member of the Church has a right to have that measure of the Spirit of God that they can judge as to those who are acting in their interests or otherwise.[9]Biblical prophets are not infallibleSome critics will protest that this standard is not applied to Biblical prophets, yet the Bible itself does not support this claim. One Bible commentator noted that the Biblical authors were not perfect, and that they made errors of expression even in the Biblical record:Though purified and ennobled by the influence of His Holy Spirit; men each with his own peculiarities of manner and disposition—each with his own education or want of education—each with his own way of looking at things—each influenced differently from another by the different experiences and disciplines of his life. Their inspiration did not involve a suspension of their natural faculties; it did not even make them free from earthly passion; it did not make them into machines—it left them men. Therefore we find their knowledge sometimes no higher than that of their contemporaries.[10]Paul’s accounts even contain a contradictory account of his vision (Compare Acts 9:7 & Acts 22:9). Paul and Barnabas disagreed severely enough for it to disrupt their missions Acts 15:36–39. Peter and Paul also criticized the other’s writing 2 Peter 3:16 and behavior regarding the Church Galatians 2:11–16.Biblical comparisonTo get a better idea of how prophets are limited yet still divinely called, it can be helpful to look at some examples of Bible prophets and compare them with modern prophets.Bible prophets Modern prophetsMoses disobeyed God's instruction to speak to the rock and instead hit it. He then attributed the miracle to himself and Aaron, saying, "Must we fetch you water out of this rock?" He was chastized by the Lord afterward. (Numbers 20:)Joshua was deceived by the inhabitants of Gibeon when they claimed to come from a far country so they could get a peace accord with Joshua. Then the Israelites found that instead of living a long distant away, that people from Gibeon lived among them. (Joshua 9:)Gordon B. Hinckley was deceived by Mark Hofmann, who had done so in order to obtain money. Hofmann was even responsible for the death of some people. After some investigation, he was discovered and sentenced.Gideon repeatedly asked the Lord for signs even though the Lord has said, "An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign." (Judges 7:; Matthew 12:39)Nathan told David that the Lord approved of his desire to build a temple, and that he should commence the project. The Lord later told Nathan that such was not His desire, and that he was to tell David that the temple would be built by another. (2 Samuel 7:)Jonah felt some personal prejudices against Assyrians, to the point of expecting the Lord to give them fewer blessings than to Jews. (Jonah 4:1)Brigham Young felt some personal prejudices against blacks, to the point of expecting the Lord to give them fewer blessings than Caucasians.Jesus' apostles were not always perfectly humble or modest. They once disputed over which of them would be the greatest in heaven. (Mark 9:34)Joseph Smith was not always perfectly humble or modest. He once said he had "more to boast of than ever any man had."[11] See here, though, to learn how critics misinterpret this event.A person could spend all day looking for examples of the Lord's chosen servants making mistakes, but such an activity does nothing to edify or strengthen people. In all of these situations, a prophet's weakness or mistakes do not make him any less a prophet, called of God to do His work.Endnotes1. [note] Charles W. Penrose, "Peculiar Questions Briefly Answered," Improvement Era 15 no. 11 (September 1912).2. [note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 5:265. BYU Studies link; See also Joseph Smith, Jr., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected by Joseph Fielding Smith, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1976), 278. ISBN 087579243X. off-site3. [note] James R. Clark, quoting B. H. Roberts, Messages of the First Presidency, edited by James R. Clark, Vol. 4, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1970), p. xiv–xv.4. [note] Lu Dalton, Woman's Exponent (Salt Lake City: 15 July 1882), p. 31.5. [note] Brigham H. Roberts, “Answer Given to ‘Ten Reasons Why “Christians” Can Not Fellowship with Latter-Day Saints,’” discourse delivered in the Salt Lake Tabernacle, 10 July 1921. Deseret News, 23 July 1921, 4:7. Roberts' previous reply to the same pamphlet also appeared in His earlier response can be found in Brian H. Stuy (editor), Collected Discourses: Delivered by Wilford Woodruff, his two counselors, the twelve apostles, and others, 1868–1898, 5 vols., (Woodland Hills, Utah: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987–1989), 5:134-141. ; it was first published in Millennial Star 58 (July 22, 1896): 417-20; 433-9.6. [note] Joseph Fielding Smith, "Eternal Keys and the Right to Preside," Ensign (July 1972), 88. off-site7. [note] Dallin H. Oaks, "Teaching and Learning by the Spirit," Ensign (March 1997), 14. off-site8. [note] Boyd K. Packer, "I Say unto You, Be One," in BYU Devotional and Fireside Speeches, 1990–1991 (Provo, Utah: University Publications, 1991), 84.9. [note] Lorenzo Snow, "A Serious ordeal, etc.," in Conference Report (October 1898), 54.10. [note] James R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible: Complete in one volume, with general articles (New York : Macmillan, 1984 [1904]), p. cxxxv.11. [note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 6:408–409. BYU Studies link This statement, when understood in its proper context, doesn't appear to be a statement of personal pride at all. Joseph Smith read to the congregation 2 Corinthians 11 and then mimicked Paul in his "boasting." In its proper context, Joseph Smith was not acting in a proud manner at all but was using the rhetoric of Paul to defend his own authority as a prophet against those who were then proclaiming him a "fallen prophet." This statement, however, is used often in anti-Mormon literature as a criticism of the prophet and is used here only to show that even if he were in fact proud, it doesn't damage his authority as a prophet/apostles any more than it damaged Jesus' apostles' authority.Copyright © 2005–2013 Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research. This is not an official Web site of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The content of this page may not be copied, published, or redistributed without the prior written consent of FAIR. The Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research (FAIR) is a non-profit organization formed in late 1997 for the purpose of defending the Church. FAIR is staffed completely by volunteers, all of whom are dedicated to defending the Church. FAIR is not owned, controlled by, or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of FAIR and should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief, or practice.If you have a question or feedback on this article, please feel free to pose your question to the FAIR Apologetics list at "Ask the Apologist"Retrieved from "Mormonism and doctrine/Prophets are not infallible"• This page was last modified on 24 February 2013, at 17:31.______________________________________________________________________________________“I make no claim of infallibility.”Spencer W. Kimball, Improvement Era, June 1970, p. 93“We make no claim of infallibility or perfection in the prophets, seers, and revelators.”James E. Faust, Ensign, November 1989, p. 11“The First Presidency cannot claim, individually or collectively, infallibility.”George Q. Cannon Gospel Truth: Discourses and Writings of President George Q. Cannon, 1957, 1:206“We respect and venerate” (the prophet), but “we do not believe that his personal views or utterances are revelations from God.”Elder Charles W. Penrose, Millennial Star, 54:191“Even the President of the Church has not always spoken under the direction of the Holy Ghost.”Elder J. Reuben Clark, quoted in Faithful History: Essays on Writing Mormon History, p. 82“…if He (God) should suffer him (Joseph Smith) to lead the people astray, it would be because they ought to be led astray…it would be because they deserved it…”Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 4:297-298“The First Presidency have of right a great influence over this people; and if we should get out of the way and lead this people to destruction, what a pity it would be! How can you know whether we lead you correctly, or not? Can you know by any other power than that of the Holy Ghost? I have uniformly exhorted the people to obtain this living witness each for themselves; then no man on earth can lead them astray.”Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 6:100“I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation…Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not.”Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 14:205“Individual members are encouraged to independently strive to receive their own spiritual confirmation of the truthfulness of Church doctrine. Moreover, the Church exhorts all people to approach the gospel not only intellectually but with the intellect and the spirit, a process in which reason and faith work together.”Official Church web site The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints“The Lord uses imperfect people…He often allows their errors to stand uncorrected. He may have a purpose in doing so, such as to teach us that religious truth comes forth “line upon line, precept upon precept” in a process of sifting and winnowing similar to the one I know so well in science.”Henry Eyring, Reflections of a Scientist, p. 47“There are exceptions to some rules. For example, we believe the commandment is not violated by killing pursuant to a lawful order in an armed conflict. But don’t ask me to give an opinion on your exception. I only teach general rules. Whether an exception applies to you is your responsibility. You must work that out individually between you and the Lord.”Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Ensign, June 2006, p. 16“I teach the people correct principles, and they govern themselves.”Joseph Smith, Journal of Discourses, 10: 57-58“We are all liable to error; are subject, more or less, to the errors incident to the human family. We would be pleased to get along without these errors, and many may think that a man in my standing ought to be perfect; no such thing.”Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 10:212“Sometimes traditions, customs, social practices, and personal preferences of individual Church members may, through repeated or common usage be misconstrued as Church procedures or policies. Occasionally, such traditions, customs and practices may even be regarded by some as eternal principles.”Elder Ronald Poelman, 1984 General Conference“Forget everything I have said, or what…Brigham Young…or whomsoever has said… that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.”Elder Bruce R. McConkie, CES Conference, August 1978“We set up assumptions, based on our best knowledge, but can go no further. We should remember that when inspired writers deal with historical incidents they relate that which they have seen or that which may have been told them, unless indeed the past is opened to them by revelation.”Elder John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, p. 127“I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the Saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of them, after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their traditions.”Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 331PROPHETIC UTTERANCES CONFORM TO REVELATIONWhen is a prophet a prophet? Whenever he speaks under the inspiration and influence of the Holy Ghost. Men frequently speak and express their own opinions. The Lord has not deprived men of [having] individual opinions. Good men, men of faith, have divergent views on many things. . . Some believe in a particular political philosophy and some are utterly opposed to it, yet they are faithful men with a testimony of the Gospel.When prophets write and speak on the principles of the Gospel, they should have the guidance of the Spirit. If they do, then all that they say will be in harmony with the revealed word. If they are in harmony then we know that they have not spoken presumptuously. (Deuteronomy 18:22) Should a man speak or write, and what he says is in conflict with the standards which are accepted, with the revelations the Lord has given, then we may reject what he has said, no matter who he is. Paul declared that he, at times, gave his own opinion in his writing.(Doc & Cov 74:5; 1 Corinthians 7:14) — Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation Vol. 1,Bookcaft, Salt Lake City, UT, 1954, p. 187