Last week, Republican poll watcher from Chester, Pennsylvania Leah Hoopes testified in front of the Republican Pennsylvania Senate to give her testimony on what she experienced as a poll watcher during the 2020 election.
Hoopes explained that she was kept in a “play pen” with other observers and no Republicans were allowed to actually watch the counting of ballot.
WATCH her interview with Newsmax from last week: (Story continues below)
On Sunday, Hoopes revealed that she was visited by Special Agents from the State’s Attorney General’s office who showed up at her house to question her.
“I was at work and I had gotten a phone call from another observer and witness, my friend Greg who testified in Gettysburg,” Hoopes said during an interview with War Room. “They had shown up to his house and he had given me a heads up that they were headed to my home.”
“The whole story just didn’t make any sense,” she continued. “They just came completely unannounced. They were, from what they said investigating voter fraud. I didn’t kn ow if I was being investigated as a criminal or they were genuinely interested in my affidavit and what I saw.”
WATCH: (Wait for tweet to load)
The situation in Pennsylvania regarding the 2020 election seems to be heating up. On Friday, the Pennsylvania judge who ordered the state to not certify the 2020 election results, wrote an opinion where she stated how she thinks the Trump campaign will likely win their case in the state.
Pennsylvania Commonwealth Judge Patricia McCullough made the argument in an opinion where she explained her reasoning for blocking the election certification in Pennsylvania.
Earlier in the week, Republican lawmakers sued the state, claiming Act 77, the mail-in voting law, broke the commonwealth’s constitution.
“Petitioners appear to have established a likelihood to succeed on the merits because petitioners have asserted the Constitution does not provide a mechanism for the legislature to allow for expansion of absentee voting without a constitutional amendment,” McCullough explained.
Check out what the Epoch Times reported:
When ruling on an emergency injunction, judges have to consider whether the party which requested the injunction is likely to win the case or “succeed on the merits.” McCullough opined that the “petitioners appear to have a viable claim that the mail-in ballot procedures set forth in Act 77 contravene” the plain language of the provision of the Pennsylvania Constitution which deals with absentee voting.
Pennsylvania said that it had certified the results of the election for president and vice president on Nov. 24 while the court was reviewing briefings from both parties. In response, the plaintiffs filed a request for an emergency injunction, arguing that that state need not have acted so fast.
“It appears that respondents’ actions may have been accelerated in response to the application for emergency relief … in an effort to preclude any remedial action by this court faster than this court was able to evaluate the application for emergency relief and the answers to it,” the plaintiffs wrote.
The emergency request underlined that while Pennsylvania completed vote-counting and submitted the signed certification to the U.S. archivist, a number of steps still remain for the formal certification process to be completed.
“While Respondents may have proactively attempted to avoid potential injunctive relief granted by this Court, Respondents duties with regard to finalization of the full election results are far from complete,” the filing states.
On November 27, Republican lawmakers dropped a memo, claiming that they would soon be bringing forward a resolution to dispute the election results.
The resolution “declares that the selection of presidential electors and other statewide electoral contest results in this commonwealth is in dispute” and “urges the secretary of the commonwealth and the governor to withdraw or vacate the certification of presidential electors and to delay certification of results in other statewide electoral contests voted on at the 2020 general election.”
What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!