Affidavit Of Mailing Template: Fill & Download for Free

Financial Documents Required for Study Abroad ApplicationsStudying Abroad is a dream that requires extensive planning, various steps of application and a long meticulous documentation. Starting from collecting the transcripts, the score cards to writing and submitting admission essays/ statement of purpose/ Letter of Recommendation to the long application forms. The process does not stop there and with admissions begin a completely different set of paperwork – for student visas. An important component of the same are the financial documents. And while the specifics might change from country to country and university to university, every document essentially follows a format. This is a guide of the many documents students would require, samples of formats for financial documents specific to study abroad and basic good to know facts. We start by explaining some of the terms commonly used by Universities/ Consulates for Confirmation of Admission/ Student Visa Applications respectively.Proof of Funds or Financial Capacity: MeaningOne of the basics of Student Visa Applications is the requirement of Proof of Funds or Financial Capacity. For almost all countries (barring very few), students are required to provide evidentiary proof that they are able to not only pay for the fee but also normal living expenses for the duration of the stay. While some universities might ask for the same as well, it is often done after the admission offers are sent out and are taken to further assist in processing the visas. Irrespective who asks for the same, the fact remains that Proof of Funds refer to the proof positive that the student would be able to bear the cost of studying abroad. The costs include two chief components:1. Fees and other University chargesStudents are often required to make payment of this component in advance to confirm admission offer. Since the payments are made up front, the proof of this component comprises of receipt of payments made.Usually universities do not require a student to provide proof of future payments. Also, since more often than not the fees are revised and hence there is no fixed amount. Even then, Universities might request proof of income to ensure that you would be able to pay the fee in future as well. This might at times require sponsorship letters or Affidavit of Support. Some universities require proof of funds available in terms of a minimum balance requirement in special accounts (ex. Germany, Netherlands, Canada, etc.)2. Living ExpensesMost of the countries have a basic minimum living expense requirement which is specified. The students are in turn requested to provide proof that they have access to the same. Most of the European Countries require liquid funds in the amount specified available with the student called the statutory fund requirements. In USA, while there is no statutory amount specified in terms of minimum monthly expense, students would be required to provide proof of financial support and/ or capacity to make the payments. Students would have to provide documentary proof that they have access to that amount for the tenure specified. Again, a country might request proof of funds for one year while some might ask for fund availability for the entire tenure of the course’s normal duration. Here is a list of some of the countries and the minimum fund requirements (living expenses) specified.Name of the CountryStatutory Fund Requirements for Living ExpensesCanadaCAD $10,000 for every year of your intended stayUnited Kingdom£11,385 per annum (£1265 per month) for University situated in London or £9,135 (£1,015 per month) for anywhere other than LondonAustraliaAUD $ 19,830 per yearGermany€ 670/month of stay or € 8,040/ annumFrance€ 615 for each month of stayNetherlands€ 862, 50 per month for the period of staySwedenSEK 7,974 for each month of your stay in Sweden, computed for a the intended stay with a minimum of 10 months for every year of stay in SwedenIreland€ 7000 as living expenses for every year of stayNote: For admissions to Universities in USA, the Financial Proofs are requested at the time of confirmation of admission by the universities. It is only when the proofs are provided that the I-20s are issued by the university. Also, as mentioned, there is no minimum requirement but the University would provide a basic cost which the student would have to provide proof of capacity for.Still have questions related to Financial documents required? Get help from Shiksha Expert Counsellors - Sign Up NowTypes of Documents accepted under Proof of FundsThere is no standard list of documents that would be required by countries abroad. As the application process for the countries vary so does the student visa requirements and accordingly the list of documents that are required as proof of funds. Every country’s Student Visa/ University requirements list a separate set of acceptable documents. Here is a list of what all they can be, along with samples wherever necessary. Also, often more than one proof (unless a specific account/ deposit is requested) can be combined with another.1. Bank Account StatementsSimple enough, the universities/ Visa Consulates might require you to submit your/ your sponsors’ bank account statements for a specific period. Again, the formats are plain and simple. Students should remember thata. The statements should be of the person specifically required. For instance, in case university accepts support of parent/ guardian or spouse, then the statement should be of the person’s savings account. Some countries, like Sweden, require the funds to be in student’s personal account and accordingly the student should keep a check on the same. (Note: Current Account Statements are generally not accepted and hence it is always best to confirm before submitting the same.)b. It should be a scanned copy of statements in original and not e-mail statements, duly stamped and signed by the bank. With Net-banking, often getting a statement is a click away. However, for the purpose of proving financial capacity, the bank statement must be original, on bank’s letterhead, stamped and signed by the bank.c. Should clearly specify the tenures required. Often, universities/ visa consulates specifically ask for 6 months’ bank statements (the tenure may vary though).2. Loan Approval/ Disbursement LetterStudents can also provide a Loan Approval Letter as proof of funds. This is easy enough to get from the bank you have applied a loan from. While the banks might have a set format, the letter essentially conveys the approval of the bank of loaning the specific amount to the student for his higher education abroad. Here are a few things a student should keep in mind:The letter should be on bank’s letterhead, duly signed and stampedThe letter should clearly specify the amount of loan and the student’s nameShould include a promise to disburse the amount as and when specifiedShould mention “The Loan of Rs. _____________ has been fully sanctioned and all terms and conditions are completed except disbursement.”Download the guide on this page for sample formats of Loan Approval Letter.3. Scholarship LettersIn case you have been given a scholarship, the student can also attach the scholarship letter as evidence of financial capacity. This letter is often provided by the University/ Institution that grants the scholarship. In case you have received a Governmental Grant, you are required to attach the copy of the same as well.You might also like to readHow to write a Resume for UG Applications Abroad4. Affidavit of Support/ SponsorshipStrictly speaking, an Affidavit of Support is not a Financial Document but rather a validation of financial support being provided to the student. Since, the document is often asked for by Universities in USA and Australia along with Financial Proofs, we have included the same in the list.An Affidavit of Support or Sponsorship is a notarized document on a Stamp Paper (often of INR 10 or INR 20 denomination), which clearly mentions that another person (parents/ spouse/ relative) would be sponsoring your education and paying for (or can afford) your fees and living expenses. The signed document directly binds the person to accept all financial responsibility of the cost of studying for the student. Often, the Affidavit of Support is supplemented with Proof of Income and/or Bank Letters. Things to keep in mindAffidavit of Support cannot be provided by a distant relative. Often direct blood relations are required which include parents, maternal/ paternal uncles/ aunts, grand-parent. Spouse is also acceptable.It should be a notarized and on the stamp paper. This is available at the local courts.In case it is from an uncle/ aunt, the document should clearly mention the reason for their sponsorship + claim that they have enough funds to bear their own/ family unit expenses even after providing the sponsorship/ support to the student. Student should always check that this would be acceptable from the University.Note:Students applying to European Universities should note that for European Countries the Sponsorships are quite different in nature. Most of the countries do not accept support documents. They, however, accept Sponsorships from people who are residing in that country. For instance, if you are applying to Universities in France and an uncle is staying in France and is willing to take care of your expenses, then the student would be required to provide a “Letter of Sponsorship”. These are standard formats often available to students by the Visa issuing authority for that country.Download the guide on this page for sample format for Affidavit of Support.5. Bank LettersSimply put these are letters that clearly mention the nature of accounts held by the student/ sponsor in the banks as well as the balance in the account. As suggestive, these are provided by the bank and should be accordingly on Bank’s official letterhead, duly signed and stamped. Here is what all the bank letter should includea. Name of the person/ persons who hold the account with the bankb. The kind of account (savings/ current/ joint) and the tenure of relationship (years for which the person has held the account in that bank)c. Balance in the account/s with its converted amount along with the rate of conversion used. Ex. Savings Bank (Balance as on 31st October 2016) INR 800,000, equivalent to US$ 11,928 at conversion rate of US $1 = INR 67.07Note: A Bank Letter can also state the Fixed Deposits (if any) held by the sponsor. Not all countries accept FD amounts and hence students must check the individual financial documents acceptable for proof of funds for respective countries.Download the guide on this page for sample format for Bank Letter.6. Loan Capability CertificateThis is a bit different from a Loan Approval Letter and is often asked by Universities in USA at the time of admission, without which they would not issue I-20s (in case you have suggested you would be requiring loan to fulfil the fund requisites.) This document, as the name suggests, is a “Capability Certificate”, given by banks / financial institutions which suggests that they would be willing to provide loan to the student should he get admitted in the University Abroad. Here is an example template of the same:Again, things the Loan Capability Certificate should include the following things clearly,Name of the studentWillingness and prima facie promise of the bank to grant a loanAmount of the loan eligibilityAgain, it should be on the bank’s letterhead, duly signed and stamped.Download the guide on this page for sample format for Loan Capability Certificate.7. CA CertificateSome countries also require what is commonly referred to as a CA Certificate. Prepared by a certified CA, the document specifies the actual assets held by the student/ sponsor as well as the liabilities. This essentially includes both the current assets (like bank balance, fixed deposits, shares, bonds, etc.) as well as fixed assets (land, property, gold, etc. with an estimated value of the same). The document must be signed and stamped by the CA. Again, there is no fixed format and usually the CAs have their own formats.Download the guide on this page for sample format CA Certificate.8. Property Evaluation ReportThis is more common for Australia and New Zealand Visas. In case a student has applied for a Student Loan and the same was procured against property, the student is also required to attach a Property Evaluation Report alongside the Loan Approval Letter. This is a comprehensive report prepared by competent authority (the bank/ financial institution in case of a student loan). Here is what all the Property Evaluation Report usually includesa. Property picturesb. Size of the property and specificationsc. Ownership proof of the property being evaluatedBanks have their own formats and you need not worry about the same. Simple mention of the same to the lending institution would suffice. At times, the same can be prepared by CAs as well.9. GPF/ EPF Statement confirming ability to withdrawMany countries also accept the funds available in your/ parent/guardian’s Provident Fund Account. These are official statement issued by the Provident Fund Disbursing Authority clearly stating the amount of funds available in the account along with the ability to withdraw. In case there is a variation in the amount the person can withdraw, the letter should clearly mention the amount that can be withdrawn. Here are the things you should keep in mindThe statement should be on the Provident Fund Disbursing Authority’s Official Letterhead.It should clearly specify the name of the employee/ account holder along with the name of the student. Since the document is only valid if it is a parent, the relationship should be clearly mentioned as well.It should specify the total amount available along with the withdrawable limits.The letter should clearly state that the withdrawals are “non-refundable/ permanent” in nature.Name, contact details of the signing authority along with the stamp should be clearly mentioned as well.Download the guide on this page for sample format for PF Letter.Also ReadStudent Visa for USAStudent Visa for CanadaStudent Visa for UKStudent Visa for AustraliaStudent Visa for GermanyStudent Visa for SingaporeStudent Visa for FranceStudent Visa for New ZealandNeed help in editing your SOP/LOR/Essays ?Get help from expert Shiksha editors to create a winning applicationFind out moreLearn more about application processSOPStatement of purposeLORLetter of recommendationAdmission EssayEssay writingStudent CVCurriculum vitaeThis article was written by: Kanika Khurana, 17 May'18 | 11:39 AMBrowse Universities AbroadUniversities in USA859 UniversitiesUniversities in Canada114 UniversitiesUniversities in Australia112 UniversitiesUniversities in UK159 UniversitiesUniversities in New Zealand70 UniversitiesUniversities in Ireland21 UniversitiesArticles related to Student VisaCanada Student Visa Guide 7953 comments | 437858 viewsStudent Visas for Study Abroad 232 comments | 95616 viewsInterview Guide for F1 Student Visa for USA 16 comments | 78811 viewsPost Study Work Permits for Indian Students in France 11 comments | 30808 views19 CommentsParticipate in discussion, write your comment.SubmitSusanne HozaPG AspirantBuy Real And Fake Passports,Drivers License,ID Cards,100% UNDETECTABLE COUNTERFEIT MONEY ,IELTS: Contacts via Whatsapp...... +44 7984803365email address:::[email protected] Apr'18, 06:26 PMReply to Susanne HozaSourabh SainiUG AspirantCan i show funds to Australian University by selling some of our land31 Jan'18, 04:03 PMReply to Sourabh SainiAmbrose ClintPhD AspirantDear Applicant,We give loan to private company and individuals. You can find some vital information about the loan we offerbelow. In getting a loan from our company, there are some information we need to pass across to you before wecan proceed to the application process . INTEREST RATE: In the l16 Jan'18, 09:39 AMReply to Ambrose Clintamy angUG Aspiranthow much one needs to show in indian bank account to study in Spain?09 Jan'18, 08:55 AMReply to amy angGagandeep SinghPG AspirantCan my relatives show the financial funds to the embassay for my masters program30 Sep'17, 10:44 AMReply to Gagandeep Singh+ View MoreDownload this guide to read it offlineEmail Student Visa Guide1251 people downloaded this guide

So I used the answers posted on this question to get a duplicate RC smart card for my scooter because I didn’t want to pay the agents a dime. ( They asked for INR.4500 and still needed me to do everything myself)Step 0: Calm down. All of the following steps are going to take a bit of time and it works better if you space it out over a few days like I did, because you know- people have other stuff to do in life.Step 1 - file a police complaint : Unlike, what’s mentioned in some of the answers here; I first went to the police station, and I went prepared. I printed out two copies of a letter stating details of my lost RC card and the fact that I wish to get a new one. I mentioned, the date I lost it. There are a few templates for this online, modify them to suit your needs. The cop was mostly nice to me, though he did ask me for “something” and unfortunately I did give him something, INR.100 to be exact.He kept one of the copies of the letter and signed and handed me the other copy. This isn’t an FIR though.( Some cops might throw a fit if you don’t have an affidavit made first…which is why I think this bit varies from police station to police station.)Step 2 - Get your insurance, Pollution check (PUC) papers and an NOC from your financier* in order- I lost the whole bunch of documents for my scooter and from the other answers here and the RTO site, I knew that I had to get the documents in place.Thankfully for me, my insurance company e-mails me a copy of my insurance papers every time I renew it and I could get this printed without any hassle. If you are in luck, you probably have it in your email as well (if you gave them an e-mail id) or some other way to access it online. It’s much simpler than going to their offices.For PUC, I just got a new PUC check done and paid INR.50.*I did not need an NOC from a financier since my scooter wasn’t purchased on loan or financed by an institution. In case your vehicle has been financed, you’ll need to get an NOC from your financier- check the other answers here for more details.Step 3 - Get an affidavit made and get it notarized- The affidavit needs to be made for INR.20 and has to be notarized. The matter in the affidavit is pretty standard and the best way to get it made is to go to the shops around or below your RTO- they have these templates in place, they’ll just ask you a few details and get this made for you. They will also get it notarized. In my case, the Koramangala RTO (KA-01) has plenty of these places and it cost me INR.120 to get this done.Step 4 - Make sure you have the following documents-Before we proceed, here are all the things you will need for the next step.Form 26 (http://rto.kar.nic.in/FORM26.pdf)A passport sized photo to be affixed on the left corner of Form 26(You will need two or three copies of Form 26 in case your vehicle has been financed or has been bought on loan and you will need as many photos with every form)Photocopy of PUC certificate and Insurance papersThe original police complaint from step 1The affidavit from step 3NOC from financier if applicableA photocopy of the ID proof, make sure you are carrying the original for verification.An online police complaint (?) - I haven’t mentioned this earlier because even I was unaware of it but when I was getting my documents verified, I was also asked to file an online police complain. None of the other posts here mention it either. It’s not too hard, it can be done here: http://bcp.gov.in/ - click on Lost&FoundThis is a redundant step because I have already filed a complaint in a police station but I guess arguing with the RTO staff is next to pointless. I suggest having this around, since it costs no money and the staff at the RTO just need a reason to delay your workAn envelope for postage, with your address on it, these are available at the shops around the RTO for INR.30.A tag file to put all of these documents inStep 5 - Get hydrated and go to the RTO and be ready to wait- This was the most mundane part of the process.In the Koramangala RTO, head to room.11 and you will be directed to an officer who’ll inspect your documents and tell you if something is wrong ( like he did with the online complaint for me)They have made it their life’s motto to be difficult and try and stall you as much as possible, so please don’t lose your cool. There are other things he may reject your documents for; one of which is if your insurance papers has less than a month on them.He will then write down the fee that is to be paid and it can be paid at the cash counter post which you’ll get two receipts- one blue and one red. This is for the cost of the duplicate RC and the cost of the smart card. Make sure to attach these with the rest of your documents. This process can be done even before approaching the officer.After this return to the officer with your documents, if all is good, he’ll direct you to his superior officer, who’ll sign and attest the documents and check your ID proof post which you’ll be directed to another official who’ll print your acknowledgement slip. All of this happens inside room no.11 or at least it did for me.Though the above sounds simple, it took me 3 hours to get it done, cause the officials really like making you wait and delaying the process.Step 6- Wait- It takes about 30 days for the RC card to reach your address, I have heard both positive and negative angles to this- I will only know in 30 days time but the acknowledgement is equivalent to the RC until you receive the card or go collect it.The answers for this question helped me a lot, so I thought I’d leave my experience here for others.The whole experience was very educative.Firstly, all ‘agents’ are pretty useless. You’ll see a number of these characters trying to sweet talk into getting their work done.They’ll charge you money for nothing, you will still need to do everything yourself.Do each of these things on a different day, I chose to get the main RTO work done on a weekday (avoid the days they have driving tests going on in the RTO, the RTOs are packed on such days)The biggest learning was how flawed and medieval our RTOs are, this should be as easy as applying for it online (paying for it online) and getting it via courier or registered post - the same way you get your debit or credit cards but no, our country loves paper processes. All of these papers are just lying around the RTO for no reason.So yeah, it took a few hours over three different days ( you can do it in two) to get this done.Money spent:INR.100 - bribe paid to PolicemanINR.120 - Affidavit and notary feeINR.50 - PUC Certificate+ Fee paid for the smart card and RC

This is a long answer that will summarize all the testimonies and rebut most of the misleading information.Most of the people have covered the fact that this wasn’t an official hearing, it was more like a GOP clubhouse meeting with a GOP Pennsylvania legislator. No one was under oath.It seems that they held a similar meeting in Arizona with similar results. It’s performatively trying to look official to give more credence to their conspiracy theories and misinformation since they clearly don’t have the evidence to press forward in court.This was a superspreader event. They attempt to spread misinformation masquerading as official testimony…and no one wore a mask in a small hotel ballroom.Let’s look at Giuliani’s testimony, first.To summarize in advance, it’s full of either lies or ignorance mixed with misinformation.During the course of this election, we’ve come pretty close to losing our right to free speech. There’s been censorship that I’ve never seen before, of an incredible nature by big tech, big networks, big companies.This is utter nonsense. “Big tech” can’t censor you, by definition your right to free speech is protected from the government. Facebook has been removing fake posts, while Twitter has been labeling them as misinformation (but still showing them). This is Victimhood talk, and pathetic victimhood talk on top of it. What I’m reading here is that the Trumpists don’t want government out of business, they want to regulate media companies to only tell their truth.You know there was a fierce debate over whether we should have mail-in ballots in the first place.It’s so bizarre the different factual universes we find ourselves in. We’ve always had mail-in ballots. Every state had a way to mail in ballots for decades. Several states have exclusively mail in ballots. PRESIDENT TRUMP ALWAYS VOTES BY MAIL! This narrative has been invented by the GOP who have spend decades stacking the deck through dozens of legalized voter suppression measures.[1] They knew that voter turnout would be increased significantly by mail in ballots and have been eroding public trust in the process that the President himself utilizes in order to stage this last ditch attack on Democracy.Many scholars, many experts, always felt that mail-in ballots were very dangerous because they’re very easy to forge, it leads to more defrauding. We will warned by Justice Souter, among others. We will warned by President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, in a report that they did on how to make elections more secure.I couldn’t find what Souter said other than a decision that he would have upheld restrictions in Texas on helping the elderly cast their ballots out of fears of ballot harvesting.[2] Also, The Carter Foundation found the exact opposite thing that Giuliani has claimed.[3]“I urge political leaders across the country to take immediate steps to expand vote-by-mail and other measures that can help protect the core of American democracy – the right of our citizens to vote,” said former President Carter.Giuliani continues:Witnesses we present are going to first show you that, in the case of Philadelphia, and in the case of Allegheny County, and one or two other counties, the mail-in ballots that were received, were not inspected at all by any Republican, they were hidden from Republicans. In the case of Philadelphia and Allegheny County, I can’t be absolutely certain, but I do believe the witnesses will show that a Republican never got to see a single ballot.This is directly contradicted by their lawyers:The transcript from one of Trump’s legal challenges is fascinating. The judge trying to get to the bottom of whether they WERE allowed to have observers:Judge : “Are your observers in the counting room?”Trump lawyer: "There's a non-zero number of people in the room.” pic.twitter.com/CU4VbqIfj4— Man vs Baby (@mattcoyney) November 6, 2020Not just in this case, but in every one.Giuliani continues to complain about absentee ballots not being a problem normally because it’s acceptable to have a little bit of fraud, in his book (I mean, to be fair, there’s likely always a small amount of fraud, these elections are a big deal).That’s a huge number of votes, 65% of the vote had been cast. Under normal circumstances, like if this were a fair media, your state would have been called for Trump. Virginia was called with 10% of the vote, it turned out to be separated by 1%.I think we may have actually won Virginia, but that’s another battle. Michigan, we were ahead by 300,000 votes, Wisconsin, more. Georgia, we were down to 90% and ahead. What are the odds that they all switched overnight? They just switched by the next day.So the interesting thing here is that he’s playing into the other narrative that the media doesn’t determine the winner.The problem is that he’s he’s right, he’s just digging a deeper hole into reality.Virginia has gone blue for the past decade, and not by a little. The past 3 presidential elections leaned heavily red in the initial counting, because those small precincts all over the state are able to finish and report quickly. The much larger precincts and counties in Northern Virginia (Loudoun, Fairfax, Arlington, Alexandria, Prince William) as well as Richmond and Chesapeake are heavily blue and take much longer to finish processing. That last 1% of precincts has more than half the vote in the state. This is not unusual.With more mail-in ballots than usual, many states accepting the ballots for as long as a week after the election so long as they’re postmarked before the end of election day. It didn’t help that the GOP sabotaged the post office, either, disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of voters.[4] Pennsylvania, in particular, and these legislatures, in particular, made it illegal to validate and count the ballots before the election was over causing this delay in counting.Nothing switched overnight. The ballots were already cast, they were just being counted.The media caused this complaint, and their “calling” of the election doesn’t mean anything, legally. The results are certified by the states and then they send electors to vote officially. Frankly, I think the media should cut the crap with this play-by-play election commentary since it plays right into the hands of those trying to erode trust in the Fourth Estate.We have calculated, and the evidence will show, that there were 682,770 mail-in ballots that were entered into your votes, in just Allegheny County and in Philadelphia, that were not observed by any single Republican.This would be news…if they did have evidence…which they don’t. They’ve repeatedly said they did, but haven’t presented ANY evidence of it. They even removed this part of it (the number of ballots keeps changing daily, as well) from their lawsuits two weeks ago.[5] They’re most likely taking the inch (they found that they were kept too far away) and taking a mile (THEY WEREN’T ALLOWED TO OBSERVE ANYTHING!).[6]Once again, they’ve presented zero, zip, zilch, evidence that 600,000+ ballots were verified without observation.I’ll give you one other enormously puzzling statistic. You sent out in the State of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 1,823, 148 absentee or mail-in ballots. You received back 1.4 million, approximately. However, in the count for President, you counted 2.5 million. I don’t know what accounts for that 700,000 difference between the number of ballots you sent out and the number of ballots that ended up in the count. That number, 2,589,242 was on your government website until yesterday. And yesterday, it was removed without explanation.There’s 3 things wrong with this statement:The first number cited was for the primaryThe larger number cited was for the 2020 presidential electionThe numbers weren’t removed from the website (You can see them here: Pennsylvania Elections - Summary Results)I’ll repeat, Both of these different sets of numbers are still on the website and you can see them.Fact check: Pennsylvania mail-in ballot claim mixes primary, general election dataHe throws out a bunch of other numbers:22,686 mail-in ballots that were returned on the day they were mailed. (Pennsylvania allows you to request and submit in person early, no issues there)How about 32,591 were returned the day after they were mailed? (same as above)20,000 were returned before they were mailed (this comes from an “anonymous source” at epoch times (a right wing propaganda source) that posted screenshots of a datasource that’s not available and is formatted improperly from the site…My guess is that there was a placeholder or a clerical data entry error)8,021 ballots from dead people (but then he changes it to 30,000 in the next sentence) A number of news sources have looked into these finding no evidence outside of a few small incidents involving registered Republicans.[7]4,984 mail-in ballots that were never requested. (This is perfectly legal in Pennsylvania for parties to request ballots for people)[8]I can go on. Everything Giuliani brings up in his little tirade is either blatantly false, intentionally misleading, or easily explicable but easy to manipulate for people who refuse to listen.Before I continue, let me remind you: this hearing was held after nearly every single lawsuit was thrown out because there was no evidence of anything wrong. That even their assertion that the observers weren’t able to see things that they initially gave an injunction to allow the observers to be closer, was rejected on appeal because they weren’t restricted arbitrarily, they were restricted by a highly contagious virus that kills or cripples many that are infected.The “hearing” continues with different witnesses, mostly volunteers who were observers.Justin Kweder tries to establish they didn’t have meaningful access to observe things, but, again, the access was there, it was just not over people’s shoulders, and nothing was done in secret. His claims apply to all observers, so shenanigans could have occurred for Trump. Nevermind that the counters are also working in teams to prevent mistakes, as well…I find it disturbing that they’d allege that these volunteers would be able to, and willing to, stuff hundreds of thousands of ballots with hundreds of observers in the room.Kim Peterson makes similar allegations, but is inconsistent claiming that she was either 10, 15, 20, or 200 feet away from people, without mentioning that there were people all around the corral which were 10, 15, or 20 feet away from the people on the other side .She also reveals that there was closed circuit TV on so that the observers could see everything from a distance. She was disappointed in the quality — she just wanted to do her civic duty. The precious snowflake.Let’s summarize, briefly the first two. Some observers were far away from some of the counters…but there were cameras and monitors all over so that you can see everything.Leah Hoops says this:Not only was private grant money used from the center for tech and life owned by Google and Mark Zuckerberg, but pop-up voter sites were also approved. These pop-up voter sites were placed in heavily Democrat cities, including Chester and Upper Darby, Pennsylvania, in which case the grant money from the CTCL was used to pay for electioneering. It was literally a one-stop shop. Walk in, apply, get your ballot, submit, and you were out the door. But where this didn’t take place was in heavily Republican and independent areas.The reality is that areas with lots of people tend to be blue, proportionately. Areas with fewer people proportionally tend to be red. If you were going to put a pop up location anywhere, why would you put it in the middle of a cow pasture?Her complaints might be true, but they’re founded in nonsense, like arguing that Gravity isn’t fair.We have signed affidavits under penalty of perjury, which should be consideration enough to know that this is a very serious issueJust because you tell the truth doesn’t make it relevant. Her claims about not being able to observe were heard but dismissed after initially granting an injunction. The distance was not arbitrary, and accomodations were made for access.She also claims that they weren’t able to see the ballot signature validation room until an injunction was put in place. I found no record of any such injunction, unless she’s referring to the injunction that was put in place requiring them to be allowed within 6 feet, that was then rescinded on appeal.[9]Gregory Stenstrom did his best to be charming, but starts off saying it was his first time. He claims to have memorized the process manual, but he clearly skipped the training session.First, he claims they gave actual ballots instead of provisional ballots to people who claimed that they had requested mail in ballots. He doesn’t understand the process because if they had shown up as requesting mail in ballots, they would have been in the database. They didn’t, so they got actual ballots. Never mind this contradicts what other poll watchers saw regarding the treatment of black voters.[10]Then he claims that he wasn’t allowed into the counting center at first, which is valid because you have to be certified to be allowed in. Remember the chaos in at the Michigan counting facility when people not authorized to be there tried to storm in?He then claims there was a “forensically destructive process” with how the ballots were coming in…making claims that people “weren’t observed” and USB drives were being shuffled around. Ballots being moved around, votes being updated (50,000 for biden…because they organize the ballots and then run them…). He claimed that he spoke with a sheriff and the sheriff did nothing.He constantly makes emotional appeals and seems interested in the process…but rather than actually be a part of the process he’d rather “just ask questions.” — A key tactic in spreading conspiracy theories. His entire testimony seemed to revolve around ignorance of the process and drawing long conclusions from incomplete understandings of what was going on.The star witness seems to be Colonel Phil Waldron. He claimed no expertise or evidence or observation of the counting process, so he had no way to make any real claims about observers, but that didn’t stop him from continuing the claims the other witnesses made. He did claim expertise in information warfare that he took part in towards the end of his 30 year career.Consider a Colonel to be similar to a Project Manager at a very large company. They usually have several teams working underneath them and they’re either happy where they are, they’re not driven enough to advance, or not political enough…or they’re just not good enough. When you get to that point you’re in charge of people that know what they’re talking about and you just have to have a vague sense of it, it’s not required that you actually be or have the qualifications of a white hat hacker…and it shows in his testimony that he’s been at a distance from this stuff.He was clearly brought in by Trump's team and nearly everything he says is irrelevant and speculative. He claims, without evidence, for example, that 600,000 ballots were counted without observation. He insinuates, that the late Hugo Chavez had his undead hands on this election.I know there have been statements to the contrary but I personally debriefed the son of a Cuban intelligence officer who had first hand knowledge of Hugo Chavez’s family members who told him not to worry about the populous threat against Maduro’s election in Venezuela.Actual people that were able to analyze these things and verify the machines were trustworthy didn’t find anything…but Mr. Waldron personally could talk to people who guaranteed it. And let’s be clear, he’s tracing this “DNA” history back to before 2010…6 years before Trump won in Pennsylvania and many other states that use the same machines.All of this is similarly pointless conjecture since we have the paper ballots that we can audit.He says some things that make someone at all familiar with security wonder about his qualifications:And just so you probably all are aware, on 30 September, an election storage facility was robbed in your state. 30 USB devices were stolen and a laptop. Those USB devices more than likely had encryption devices and you just heard another previous witness talk about the nonstandard use of the USB storage devices.Yes, a facility was robbed. No, the USB devices didn’t have nonsensical “Encryption devices” on them, they had ballot layout templates for the machines to be programmed.[11] The machines are all sealed and those layouts are easily acquired elsewhere. The ballot layouts are also public information that are mailed out to everyone in advance of even the ballots being mailed out for remote voting.As a matter of fact, one of our white hat hackers previously discovered a malware that’s present on the servers that captures every log in and every password of every operator down to the precinct level that logs into one of these systems. That’s just like giving the password to your bank account out, putting it on the dark web. It’s not going to be there very long.There’s no context here. “Previously” could mean any time before hand. It looks like he hasn’t touched these things since 2010…They’ve most likely updated these servers since then, and if they found this “a malware” (No one talks like this in infosec circles) they probably fixed it…but we don’t know. But because of the way that he talks about these things it’s clear that he doesn’t have much insight and is simply trying to “just ask questions”.There’s a manufacturer specified rate of speed that a number of ballots can be imaged and processed. These spike anomalies in this chart really show where for us to look forensically to actually determine what happened with these votes. Our team has looked at these systems and there are a dozen ways to interdict the voting process, whether it’s mail in ballot manipulations, they can scan and allocate blank votes, whether it was a 70,000 votes left in the back room. There’s just lots of ways to interdict these systems.It’s like he doesn’t understand that:They don’t have to upload them as they run the ballotsThey can have more than one machine goingThey can release the reports whenever they feel like itMost of those votes are mail in ballots which haven’t been used to this extent in previous elections due to obvious circumstances, so this process is going to be differentThese aren’t votes coming in…these are votes that are being counted. There’s nothing unusual about this other than the fact that Pennsylvania didn’t allow early ballot counting to take place.This is just a purported “expert” “just asking questions” and sowing distrust.Gary Phelman says he has a “poll watcher’s certificate” that he says is good in every location in Philadelphia. He said he was denied entry. He claims it’s because his was yellow. He tries to claim they weren’t wearing masks, he definitely wasn’t wearing his bandana properly, however. A video of his encounter was here:A poll watcher in Philly was just wrongfully prevented from entering the polling place#StopTheSteal pic.twitter.com/iJTFtRk0Id— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) November 3, 2020Even though he is complaining about this now, it was cleared up pretty quickly:(Feeley is a spokesperson for the city commissioners) More on this can be seen here: Right-wing propagandists try to concoct a Philadelphia election scandalThis was an isolated incident that was cleared up on election day…yet here he is testifying about it.Dave Stisogis testified about a few things. He’s a lawyer and worked on campaigns for several candidates as well as running for office several times.First he complained about the processes and rule changes and how difficult it was for him to get people accredited (which applies to both sides).Then he talked about how he was observing the mail in ballot process about how they were separating the secrecy envelopes from the ballots with the cutting machines.His entire testimony can pretty much be summed up with this sentence:We had really no concept of what was going onThe Dunning-Kruger was strong with this one. He uses his credentials to imply that he is familiar with how it should work without establishing that he actually understands how it should work before saying flat out here that he doesn’t and has no intention of learning.At one point he called the fact that they had to “flatten out ballots” “obscene.” Which is a very…bizarre term for it. He says:People would come in with big armloads of ballots from the other room. Apparently with no providence, no explanation of where they came fromThis has been debunked to death. It’s a multistep process with observers at every step. Just because you can’t see everything doesn’t mean there isn’t meaningful access to it. If you did “have a concept of what was going on” you probably wouldn’t have expected it to be narrarrated to you.But there was absolutely no providence to what was going onHe likes the word providence.I had about 25 other affidavits from other folks that had joined me during the time that had been part of this that describe essentially the same thing over there in Allegheny County, most of whom were attorneys and had been versed on the comings and goings of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which I might suggest, ultimately, the last decision in recanvassing when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ultimately said that it doesn’t matter how far you’re away from the ballots because you don’t have the right to challenge anything, anyway. I read the opinion, and I said to myself, “The Pennsylvania Supreme Court just called off elections in the state of Pennsylvania.”Again, a sworn affidavit might mean that you’re telling the truth, but it doesn’t make it relevant. Just because you’re a lawyer doesn’t mean that you have any insight into how elections work behind the scenes…and I’ve linked to the decision [9], and it doesn’t say what he claims.Next we have Elizabeth Preate Harvey who is full of softball concerns about the process, all of which are rehashes of what’s already been said and completely ephemeral.First, the Montgomery County Republican Committee was not provided meaningful view of the mail-in ballots at any time, despite our requests. Second, we were not provided with regular, detailed information about the mail-in ballots over the course of the election, despite our requests. Third, we still lack complete and detailed information about these ballots despite our written requests.I mean, this is, frankly all bullshit. Mail-in ballots are the same as in person ballots, except with secrecy envelopes. Sample ballots are mailed out prior to the mail in ballots.Second, as testified, you have observers all over the place. The “regular, detailed information” is likely not something that you’re entitled to, however much you wish you were.Third, Public information is available on the Pennsylvania secretary of state website.Since the election, we have received many calls and emails from Republicans with questions about whether their mail-in ballot was counted, expressing concerns that they didn’t request a mail-in ballot, but received one, anyway, that they were made to vote provisional when they shouldn’t have, that they have great concerns about the efficacy of this election.They can check that by calling their office. Clerks all over the country are friendly and very helpful.As touched on above, the Republican party likely requested one on their behalf which is completely legal in PennsylvaniaProvisional ballots are counted if they’re deemed legitimate to vote.In order for this country to have trust in the electoral process, elections must be viewed as open and transparent.I agree, and with social media, and media coverage, this has been the most transparent election in the history of the country.Julie Vahey was the Executive Director of the Montgomery County Republican Committee. She claims no one was allowed to see the mail in verification area…yet the lawsuits never make this assertion.[12]They claim they weren’t close enough to see what was going on. (Neither were the Democratic observers if that was the case). They eventually moved the tables to give better visibility, which she doesn’t mention…just complaints about the process.Over the last ten months, in my role, I’ve spoken to thousands of voters firsthand who have lost faith in the election processes and procedures in Montgomery County and across Pennsylvania as a whole.Over the last ten months…That’s waaaaay before Trump started complaining about mail in ballots. That’s back in February even before the lockdowns hit. That’s a really bizarre time frame.Next we have Barbara Sulitka who is basically an elderly voter and her daughter Cheryl Nudo and son-in-law Charles who is helping her testify. Barbara thinks her vote didn’t count since she got a print out that didn’t have Trump on it. Cheryl thinks scantron forms are a form of voter suppression because old people don’t get technology. (seriously).I’ve never gotten a receipt of who I voted for, and the only thing I could find is that if you did a provisional ballot they give you the id of that ballot so you can track it.[13]Then we have Olivia Jane Winters who told a long tale about how the Chief of elections might have voted twice.Finally we had Gloria Lee Snover who testified that Mail-in ballots were new and confusing…She claimed that they didn’t have access to observe them (which would have been illegal, so why they didn’t file suit about that is strange) and that, without evidence, claimed Democrats had more access and information than she did.Then Trump came on and rambled for 10 minutes adding no evidence to the table since he wasn’t there and had no visibility or expertise on the matter.They let the audience chant “Trump” in a cult-like manner for 5 minutes.The Chairman then pats himself on the back:I think what you’ve just heard guarantees that a hundred years from now, that this is the most important public hearing ever held by this Senate committee.and they lob it back to Trump’s lawyers, who botch the numbers to make it seem like they’re going to flip the election because of all of this pretend fraud.This fake hearing was more like cult-ritual. There were no Democrats present, no testimony from the election officials (many of whom were Republicans), no testimony from anyone but the select few that could try to confirm their biases.The people present were not under oath and some of their testimonies were different from their sworn affidavits. Many of them weren’t trained.The numbers provided were wrong. Their experts weren’t experts.The goal of this is to build up a wall of “Just Asking Questions” and pile on more and more innuendo to try to make it seem like there’s smoke, and therefore fire. Upon closer examination, it’s all just steam. These implications are like a hydra, designed so that if you cut one head off, 2 more pop in their place. Such that books have to be written that no one will read to debunk it all.This is like a travelling revival show. The purpose was to sell snake oil.The only thing that will come of it is more donations to help Trump pay back his debts.Some more viral misinformation debunking:Tracking Viral Misinformation About the 2020 ElectionFootnotes[1] Stacking the deck: How the GOP works to suppress minority voting[2] Absentee ballot dispute reaches Court - SCOTUSblog[3] Carter Center Statement on Voting by Mail for 2020 U.S. Elections[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/11/05/usps-late-ballots-election/[5] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-lawsuit-pennsylvania/2020/11/15/4aab8048-279b-11eb-9b14-ad872157ebc9_story.html[6] Trump lawsuit seeks to block certification of votes in Allegheny, Philadelphia counties[7] Man arrested for voter fraud in Luzerne County[8] Your Pa. election questions answered: I received a mail-in ballot application but never requested one. What should I do?[9] https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000176-0ae5-d692-a977-1effb4f90000[10] Being a poll observer in West Philly made me really angry. Here’s why. | Opinion[11] Memory sticks used to program Philly’s voting machines were stolen from elections warehouse[12] Poll watchers emerge as a flashpoint in battle over ballots[13] Election 2020 in Pennsylvania: All of your voting questions, answered | Spotlight PA