Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D., F.A.C.P.

Medical Oncology/Hematology  Telephone: (215) 333-4900

Smylie Times Building - Suite #500-C  Facsimile: (215) 333-2023
8001 Roosevelt Boulevard  rsklaroff@gmail.com
Philadelphia, PA 19152-3041 October 22, 2021 – Pope John Paul II
Inauguration

To: Distribution [Politicians, Media, Potentially-Interested Persons]

Re: Pennsylvania “Forensic Audit” of 2020 POTUS Election [PART CXXXIII] – “Corman = Dybbuk”?
{}

As opposed to the stridency of prior memos, it’s mandatory that the message herein be conveyed
with due humility; the reader is invited to weigh whether my concern is justified vs. overblown,
taking into account the snail’s pace of any election review/study/audit occurring in Pennsylvania.
The pathway to shaming Corman into action has been demonstrated to run through Bannon;
Epshteyn’s rhetorical rants entertain, but are sadly complicit when supplanting confrontation.

I introduce my logical thread by noting that the only set of subpoenae issued by Corman/Dush
[via the Senate Intergovernmental Operations Committee] isn’t slated to be heard until November
by Commonwealth Court; these seek “name/rank/serial-#”-type info, absent any request for the
fundamental components of what led to Maricopa’s successful Forensic Audit [that seemingly was
amplified, finally, absent a conclusion that “Our data show that decertification is mandated”].

Sen. Mastriano considers this to be a sham, that the clock will expire, that nothing will emerge;
inasmuch as NOT ONE STEP has been made to emulate Phoenix, I posit that he’s totally correct.
Boris Epshteyn [on 10/20/2021] told Bannon that, today, not only will the Committee “respond”
to AG-Shapiro’s accusations, but also an auditor will be appointed. Recall that the former doesn’t
supplant the need for dropping more focused discovery requests, and recall that the latter will
have contradicted a prior claim that no such announcement would occur until completion of the
legal-challenge process; again, repeatedly in these memos, I have expressed strong skepticism.

When Bannon/Epshteyn give telegraphic updates, details aren’t provided; sometimes they mirror
what I knew from a.v.a. Zoom calls (such as that with Favorito), but oftentimes they’re replete
with more “We’re winning!” optimism than reproducible factoids. We never find out inside-dope
as to WHEN pivotal events will occur (particularly in Arizona/Georgia). Meanwhile, muted critique
is conveyed by the grassroots [Toni Shuppe (of Audit the Vote PA)]; as a result, Bannon/Epshteyn
conclude that it remains unclear whether it’s OK to buy into Corman, despite crater-like flaws.
Naturally, I join Toni in REFUSING to coadopt-by-reference Corman’s palpably deficient narrative.

Remember, it’s necessary to submit decertifications of three battleground states to the SCOTUS
to prompt it to kick a no-longer-majority Electoral College vote to single-state House delegations.
There’s lots to accomplish between “here” [Fall, 2021] and “there” [ASAP, to save America].
Canvassing by volunteers and/or unofficial county-level audits will NOT expedite this pathway,
notwithstanding the intensity of Toni’s efforts; of course her work is respected, but to what end?
State legislatures must be given solid foundations, to withstand risks of being undermined;
audits/investigations must be repeatedly vetted, an admittedly time-consuming process.
Remember that Corman admitted he’d flipped in favor of an “investigation” after having been
pressured by everyone [from waiters to car-parking attendants]; thus, from my perspective,
dissatisfaction with the snail’s pace of subsequent events REQUIRES another follow-up chat that
explores WITH PRECISION how he envisions Dush’s efforts CHRONOLOGICALLY to impact 2020.

It may be recalled that Mastriano attacked “a group of previously-supportive ladies” when he was
dumped by Corman; later, I was told a misunderstanding had been rectified but, more recently,
at Brandywine, it was suggested that this rift hadn’t completely healed. As was noted when the
overall event was summarized, speakers sometimes dissed colleagues even when, for example,
prior to the event, I pointed-out two speakers to each other [holding court @ opposite sides of
the ballroom], but neither even gestured toward chatting; frictions may be ego-/stress-related,
but they must be rectified if a rag-tag army is going to revolutionize the electoral system ASAP.

Toni praised Mastriano, but didn’t condemn Corman; she spent valuable time reviewing the data
that are to be disseminated about her canvassing. This may make great TV, but I felt she had been
squandering an opportunity to force Bannon/Epshteyn to agree to confront Corman “sensitively.”
If she agrees the current paradigm is a sham, then a full-throated condemnation is mandated,
precisely how Mastriano conveyed these sentiments in Brandywine [to thunderous applause,
emulating the unique reaction to his presentation at the PA Leadership Conference, months ago].

This may be her “style,” but it’s almost as if she had to be nudged into critiquing Corman. Indeed,
it violated a classic tenet of what I learned during my involvement with Organized Medicine
[quoting patrician/guru George Ross Fisher, III, M.D., PA Hospital endocrinologist extraordinaire].
Whether speaking or composing an op-ed, because there is a small window of attention on-tap,
“Say what you plan to say, say it, and say what you said.” Then “Wash/repeat/wash/repeat.”
[This was also how I was trained in 1979 to debate spokespeople from the Tobacco Institute.]

Granted, this is a tremendous improvement over what Sam Faddis said/wrote, for she’s focused
on 2020 … Maricopa … Mastriano … “it’s the canvass not the count” … and proving assertions.
And Epshteyn is getting tiresome, almost mirroring how CNN/MSNBC are long on commentary
and short on facts; we’re correct and, thus, we mustn’t sink to a rah-rah-rah blur, ignoring Indies.

But what can be done NOW to multitask, to ensure the Commonwealth Court hearing unleashes
action rather than procrastination, to initiate (at the very least) scrutiny of “Phraudulent Philly”?

I’m thrilled with Toni and am NOT trying to “kill by faint praise”; I am conveying anguish that the
PA-audit process seems more distant than ever before; Bannon should never have had the ability
to adopt a two-schools-of-thought posture after listening to her, absent laser-focus on Corman.
THIS is why "our side" continues to disappoint. We cannot blind ourselves to ANY gaping openings
to move-the-marble; her content was OK, but she didn’t target stridency on the Dybbuk. [Ignore
egocentrism when comparing/contrasting her pleasant nature with my unambiguous messaging.]

Toni isn’t an expert, so I shouldn’t expect perfection; Bannon is a communications guru, and that’s
why I’m frustrated that we remain too polite when aware that “RINOs/GOPe” aren’t performing.
A kick-the-can-down-the-road phenomenon permeates my reaction to this overall experience;
the only proven way to activate the Senate is to push Bannon to push Corman AGGRESSIVELY.