|
Patriots Against Corrupt Election Results - PACER
|
|
7/8/21 - Kagan Parrots Voter Suppression Line
It’s worth taking a moment to demolish Justice Kagan’s dissent in the recent Supreme Court case upholding Arizona’s new election integrity laws. I freely confess to you I have not read the dissent or the Court’s opinion. What follows is based on an article in the Guardian lambasting the Court and praising what it called Kagan’s “scorching” dissenting opinion. Presumably, the article puts Kagan’s best foot forward.
Kagan’s views track the bogus Left-wing voter suppression narrative from start to finish. She calls this an age of voting rights retrenchment with several states passing laws to deprive minorities of equal access to the ballot. She calls it a “perilous moment” for democracy and the Court’s opinion “tragic”. In this, she doesn’t sound a whole lot different from the head of a Latino pressure group who said the Court’s decision in this case is “woefully disconnected from social and historical reality” and the Court’s opinion offers nothing more than right-wing sound bites.
Let’s get some perspective here. The Arizona laws in question simply require voters to show up at the right precinct and restrict pressure groups like unions from collecting and turning in big batches of absentee ballots, an activity that invites voter fraud. Somehow, these common sense measures are supposed to be disproportionately burdensome for minorities. In other words, minorities are too stupid to show up at the right precinct or turn in their absentee ballots by themselves. That’s racist. Anyone who believes it, is paternalistic and a racist. Let’s compare these measures to actual voter suppression in America’s past. Early Supreme Court decisions knocked down poll taxes and literacy tests. Blacks were kept from voting entirely if they couldn’t pay the tax or read. Now all anyone is asked to do in Arizona is show up at the right precinct or complete the absentee ballot process themselves. You cannot reasonably equate these requirements with poll taxes and literacy tests. The difference is night and day and no amount of hyperventilating about poor, pitiful minorities can cover up that fact.
Kagan also says states that ban handing out water to people waiting in line to vote are discriminating because minority precincts have longer lines. There’s only one problem with this: no state has banned food and water in line. People are free to bring their own. The restrictions on third parties handing out food and water are meant to address the situations that have arisen of pressure groups handing out bottles of water with ‘Vote Democrat’ printed on them in violation of common sense rules against haranguing voters or buying their votes with gifts. Stupid stuff like this is why the Democrats’ phony voter suppression narrative is falling apart with Stacey Abrams now saying that requiring voter ID is not necessarily racist and other Democrats denying they ever said it was.
Kagan also complains the Court’s opinion didn’t meet her quota for mentioning the term ‘Native American’ enough times. Give me a break.
She also rails against states imposing new restrictions on voting by mail. In the first place, mass mail-in voting generally didn’t exist before COVID. In light of all the problems that arose with mass mail-in voting in a lot of places in the 2020 election, returning to pre-COVD rules makes eminent good sense. In some states, secretaries of state took it upon themselves to change the rules and allow mass mail-in voting on their own motion, and state legislatures are properly reasserting their authority. The left-wing bureaucrats are getting their wings clipped and deservedly so.
Kagan wants to undo a 2013 Supreme Court case and reimpose preclearance on southern states - requiring them to beg Washington for every little change they want to make to their election rules. That case said supervision had gone on long enough - 50 years - and the circumstances justifying preclearance had all evaporated. But Kagan claims voter suppression continues in those states today. Of course she does. That’s what the phony voter suppression narrative requires, the same bogus narrative that claims voter ID laws, which are supported by most minorities surveyed, are the new Jim Crow.
The truth is the Democrats’ phony voter suppression narrative is falling apart and they’re running scared. They’ve shown us who they are. They’ve shown us they don’t care about fair and honest elections. They’ve shown us they’ll knock down every election safeguard they can and pull every trick in the book to cheat. They’ve shown us they only care about power and, worst of all, they’ve shown us they will deliberately use minorities as pawns to cover up how badly they lust for it.
6/2/21 - Election Law Preclearance Is Unnecessary
Once again, the Left is out with a new argument and it’s crickets from the professional Right. I used to send alerts to people I know on the professional Right asking them to counter new arguments, but I never got any response, so I gave up years ago. So there’s just me here and this is my first stab at preclearance, the argument that the federal government needs to directly supervise elections in the states again.
Yesterday, Joe Biden put Vice President Kamala Harris in charge of efforts to undermine election safeguards. I hope she does as good a job on this as she’s doing on the southern border, which she’s also in charge of. Actually, the appointment is interesting for the new preclearance argument because Kamala Harris argued for preclearance of state abortion laws when she was campaigning for president. She wanted the federal government to control what abortion laws states could and, more importantly, could not enact, so I have no doubt she will push for preclearance in the election law context, as well. Never let anyone be free when you can use the federal government to control them, right?
The idea of preclearance comes from provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which forced states and counties with a history of discrimination to get preclearance from the U.S. Justice Department to make changes in their election procedures. The Feds blocked 86 measures in several states under voting rights preclearance.
But in 2013, the Supreme Court knocked down part of the voting rights preclearance scheme. The Court found that the formula used to determine whether states were still discriminating against minority voters were out of date and the Justice Department was acting like nothing had changed in the last 50 years when it clearly had. As applied, preclearance had become unconstitutional, violating the Tenth Amendment. [Shelby County v. Holder, 2013]
However, the Supreme Court did not say preclearance itself is unconstitutional or against the Tenth Amendment. Instead, it said Congress can mandate preclearance anew under “exceptional conditions”. Literacy tests and poll taxes were the “exceptional conditions” justifying preclearance initially.
Today, Senator Joe Manchin wants preclearance for the entire country. He’s not alone. [here at 47:34l] But other liberals see this as a bridge too far, “tilting the scale too much in favor of federal control.” [here and here at 48:15]. However, this is the first problem with the preclearance argument. The Left will always want to expand preclearance, even if there’s no factual predicate for it, and they won’t stop until elections everywhere are under the control of the U.S. Justice Department. How do I know this? Because this is what the Left always does, this is who they are. It’s all a big game to them and they never stop. So no matter how much sense preclearance might make in specific situations, I’m opposed because the tendency of the Left is always to seek more and more control.
A witness at a congressional hearing took a different approach. [at 26:26] The witness started out heavy on narrative - making conclusory references to “voter suppression”, “devastating attacks” on minority voting rights, threats to democracy, and other vague notions. Then the witness gave a handful of specific examples she said could have been fixed by preclearance, such as no early voting on one black campus. However, all of the examples she gave were ameliorated through new legislation or court action. None of them would have justified a complete federal takeover by any stretch of the imagination. The witness went on to say there’s a need for a prophylactic remedy, to get out ahead of discrimination against minority voters before an election. But that doesn’t explain why plaintiffs can’t negotiate, seek injunctions in court before elections, or work through their Secretary of State offices which made lots of changes to election procedures in many states before the 2020 elections.
Try as they might, the Left will never convince me that any present-day problem rises to the level of poll taxes, literacy tests, simply refusing to register black people to vote outright, or any of the other barriers to minority voting that justified preclearance ages ago. To the extent there are legitimate grievances, careful analysis will reveal there are other remedies, making federal takeovers completely unnecessary. Preclearance is a heavy-handed solution in search of correspondingly grave outrages it will never find in modern times.
It’s worth taking a moment to demolish Justice Kagan’s dissent in the recent Supreme Court case upholding Arizona’s new election integrity laws. I freely confess to you I have not read the dissent or the Court’s opinion. What follows is based on an article in the Guardian lambasting the Court and praising what it called Kagan’s “scorching” dissenting opinion. Presumably, the article puts Kagan’s best foot forward.
Kagan’s views track the bogus Left-wing voter suppression narrative from start to finish. She calls this an age of voting rights retrenchment with several states passing laws to deprive minorities of equal access to the ballot. She calls it a “perilous moment” for democracy and the Court’s opinion “tragic”. In this, she doesn’t sound a whole lot different from the head of a Latino pressure group who said the Court’s decision in this case is “woefully disconnected from social and historical reality” and the Court’s opinion offers nothing more than right-wing sound bites.
Let’s get some perspective here. The Arizona laws in question simply require voters to show up at the right precinct and restrict pressure groups like unions from collecting and turning in big batches of absentee ballots, an activity that invites voter fraud. Somehow, these common sense measures are supposed to be disproportionately burdensome for minorities. In other words, minorities are too stupid to show up at the right precinct or turn in their absentee ballots by themselves. That’s racist. Anyone who believes it, is paternalistic and a racist. Let’s compare these measures to actual voter suppression in America’s past. Early Supreme Court decisions knocked down poll taxes and literacy tests. Blacks were kept from voting entirely if they couldn’t pay the tax or read. Now all anyone is asked to do in Arizona is show up at the right precinct or complete the absentee ballot process themselves. You cannot reasonably equate these requirements with poll taxes and literacy tests. The difference is night and day and no amount of hyperventilating about poor, pitiful minorities can cover up that fact.
Kagan also says states that ban handing out water to people waiting in line to vote are discriminating because minority precincts have longer lines. There’s only one problem with this: no state has banned food and water in line. People are free to bring their own. The restrictions on third parties handing out food and water are meant to address the situations that have arisen of pressure groups handing out bottles of water with ‘Vote Democrat’ printed on them in violation of common sense rules against haranguing voters or buying their votes with gifts. Stupid stuff like this is why the Democrats’ phony voter suppression narrative is falling apart with Stacey Abrams now saying that requiring voter ID is not necessarily racist and other Democrats denying they ever said it was.
Kagan also complains the Court’s opinion didn’t meet her quota for mentioning the term ‘Native American’ enough times. Give me a break.
She also rails against states imposing new restrictions on voting by mail. In the first place, mass mail-in voting generally didn’t exist before COVID. In light of all the problems that arose with mass mail-in voting in a lot of places in the 2020 election, returning to pre-COVD rules makes eminent good sense. In some states, secretaries of state took it upon themselves to change the rules and allow mass mail-in voting on their own motion, and state legislatures are properly reasserting their authority. The left-wing bureaucrats are getting their wings clipped and deservedly so.
Kagan wants to undo a 2013 Supreme Court case and reimpose preclearance on southern states - requiring them to beg Washington for every little change they want to make to their election rules. That case said supervision had gone on long enough - 50 years - and the circumstances justifying preclearance had all evaporated. But Kagan claims voter suppression continues in those states today. Of course she does. That’s what the phony voter suppression narrative requires, the same bogus narrative that claims voter ID laws, which are supported by most minorities surveyed, are the new Jim Crow.
The truth is the Democrats’ phony voter suppression narrative is falling apart and they’re running scared. They’ve shown us who they are. They’ve shown us they don’t care about fair and honest elections. They’ve shown us they’ll knock down every election safeguard they can and pull every trick in the book to cheat. They’ve shown us they only care about power and, worst of all, they’ve shown us they will deliberately use minorities as pawns to cover up how badly they lust for it.
6/2/21 - Election Law Preclearance Is Unnecessary
Once again, the Left is out with a new argument and it’s crickets from the professional Right. I used to send alerts to people I know on the professional Right asking them to counter new arguments, but I never got any response, so I gave up years ago. So there’s just me here and this is my first stab at preclearance, the argument that the federal government needs to directly supervise elections in the states again.
Yesterday, Joe Biden put Vice President Kamala Harris in charge of efforts to undermine election safeguards. I hope she does as good a job on this as she’s doing on the southern border, which she’s also in charge of. Actually, the appointment is interesting for the new preclearance argument because Kamala Harris argued for preclearance of state abortion laws when she was campaigning for president. She wanted the federal government to control what abortion laws states could and, more importantly, could not enact, so I have no doubt she will push for preclearance in the election law context, as well. Never let anyone be free when you can use the federal government to control them, right?
The idea of preclearance comes from provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which forced states and counties with a history of discrimination to get preclearance from the U.S. Justice Department to make changes in their election procedures. The Feds blocked 86 measures in several states under voting rights preclearance.
But in 2013, the Supreme Court knocked down part of the voting rights preclearance scheme. The Court found that the formula used to determine whether states were still discriminating against minority voters were out of date and the Justice Department was acting like nothing had changed in the last 50 years when it clearly had. As applied, preclearance had become unconstitutional, violating the Tenth Amendment. [Shelby County v. Holder, 2013]
However, the Supreme Court did not say preclearance itself is unconstitutional or against the Tenth Amendment. Instead, it said Congress can mandate preclearance anew under “exceptional conditions”. Literacy tests and poll taxes were the “exceptional conditions” justifying preclearance initially.
Today, Senator Joe Manchin wants preclearance for the entire country. He’s not alone. [here at 47:34l] But other liberals see this as a bridge too far, “tilting the scale too much in favor of federal control.” [here and here at 48:15]. However, this is the first problem with the preclearance argument. The Left will always want to expand preclearance, even if there’s no factual predicate for it, and they won’t stop until elections everywhere are under the control of the U.S. Justice Department. How do I know this? Because this is what the Left always does, this is who they are. It’s all a big game to them and they never stop. So no matter how much sense preclearance might make in specific situations, I’m opposed because the tendency of the Left is always to seek more and more control.
A witness at a congressional hearing took a different approach. [at 26:26] The witness started out heavy on narrative - making conclusory references to “voter suppression”, “devastating attacks” on minority voting rights, threats to democracy, and other vague notions. Then the witness gave a handful of specific examples she said could have been fixed by preclearance, such as no early voting on one black campus. However, all of the examples she gave were ameliorated through new legislation or court action. None of them would have justified a complete federal takeover by any stretch of the imagination. The witness went on to say there’s a need for a prophylactic remedy, to get out ahead of discrimination against minority voters before an election. But that doesn’t explain why plaintiffs can’t negotiate, seek injunctions in court before elections, or work through their Secretary of State offices which made lots of changes to election procedures in many states before the 2020 elections.
Try as they might, the Left will never convince me that any present-day problem rises to the level of poll taxes, literacy tests, simply refusing to register black people to vote outright, or any of the other barriers to minority voting that justified preclearance ages ago. To the extent there are legitimate grievances, careful analysis will reveal there are other remedies, making federal takeovers completely unnecessary. Preclearance is a heavy-handed solution in search of correspondingly grave outrages it will never find in modern times.
5/12/21 - Marc Elias Falling Down on the Job
Democrat election lawyer Marc Elias was on NPR last night talking about the lawsuit he filed against Florida’s new election reform law nine minutes after Governor DeSantis signed it.
Elias wrapped himself in the flag - “if people are put to the question of, should people vote, should people's vote be counted, should we have consent of the governed, that people will answer the question, yes.” Reminds me of the time the famous Mayor Daley of Chicago said, “we must reach higher and higher platitudes together.” ‘Consent of the governed’ - that’s a good one. Elias left out apple pie and motherhood. If Democrats were really concerned about the consent of the governed, their prosecutors in blue states would be going all out to investigate credible allegations of voter fraud, but they don’t. Investigations and prosecutions are few and far between, allowing the Democrats to get away with their phony narrative ‘there is no voter fraud’. No investigations, no prosecutions, no voter fraud. See how this works?
Elias trotted out the Democrats’ threadbare, timeworn false voter suppression narrative. They’ve been claiming for years Republicans try to suppress minority votes, but they never say how. They just make conclusory declarations, like insisting voter ID suppresses the vote. OK, but how? Tell us how. They never tell us how. Never mind that minority voting doesn’t go down where voter ID is implemented. Never mind that most of Stacey Abrams’ voter suppression case in Georgia got thrown out of court for being bogus (AJC), and she now admits voter ID is not racist per se. Elias didn’t say one word last night about how, exactly, it is that Republicans suppress the vote. It was one conclusory declaration after another. All you have to do when you hear somebody doing that is say to yourself ‘I don’t believe you’ and the fairy dust they’re sprinkling can’t put you in a spell.
If you want to see real voter suppression, just look at the history of the Democrat Party - poll taxes, literacy tests, simply refusing to register blacks to vote - these are all Democrat tricks.
Elias claimed Republican states are passing voter suppression laws because they’ve bought Donald Trump’s ‘big lie’ the 2020 election was stolen. He doesn’t know that; he’s just speculating about motive. I can see state legislators voting for reforms because they want to make it harder to cheat. Nothing wrong with that, is there? There’s only one reason to oppose common sense election safeguards like voter ID and that’s because you want to steal elections.
Finally, Elias said, “the federal law set minimum standards for our military voters to receive absentee ballots.” What he didn’t tell you is Democrats do their best not to count those military votes because they know most of them are for Republicans.
All in all, a pretty lame performance from Elias last night. Democrats have been relying on the phony voter suppression narrative so long, they’ve gotten mentally lazy. They need some new shtick. People are starting to see right through their current bag of tricks.
4/27/21 - Election Reforms We Can All Get Behind
An independent team of experts has issued 30 recommendations to ensure free and fair elections. [Full report here.] Some are just common sense, and many could be supported by Americans of every political stripe unless, of course, your intent is to steal elections.
One recommendation is to require voter ID. Even Stacey Abrams now admits voter ID is not necessarily racist. She told a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing earlier this month that she supports voter ID laws, depending on how they’re written, and noted that 35 states already have them.
Other common sense measures recommended by the experts include not changing the rules within 180 days of the election, not allowing deficient ballots or envelopes to be fixed through alteration, maintaining chain of custody for all ballots for 22 months so election contests can be decided, and removing ineligible voters from the rolls annually.
Other recommendations would roll back the supposedly temporary measures adopted in the pandemic. The experts recommend no drop boxes and favor in-person early voting for three weeks, instead. Absentee balloting would go back to needing a good reason, instead of becoming a de facto substitute for early voting. Election observers from political parties would be assured complete access to the process, not effectively shut out like they were in several places in the 2020 election, supposedly because of the pandemic.
Other recommendations are directed at shutting down known avenues for fraud. Ballot harvesting would be prohibited, for example. State and local governments could not accept private money to stage elections. Private money became a real problem in the 2020 election where in Green Bay, for example, the entire election was turned over to private contractors and run by a Democrat Party operative.
The experts make two recommendations aimed at allowing genuine election contests. Citizens and state legislatures would have standing to challenge election results in court. I don’t know that’s the best answer for election contests, but it sure beats what happened in 2020, with courts first saying challengers were too early, and then later saying challengers were too late, in filing their contests.
As for electronic voting machines, the experts recommend making it illegal to allow them to be connected to the Internet. There were many claims in the 2020 elections that domestic and foreign agents tampered with machine results through the Internet, severely undermining confidence in the election. Other experts are recommending open source software for the machines, or doing away with the machines altogether and returning to paper ballots as other countries have done. Keep your eye on this one. Something will be done about the machines before this is all over.
Finally, the experts recommend tightening the rules preventing noncitizens from voting in our elections. I’ve never claimed, as some have, this occurs in great numbers. But I’m all in favor of preventing noncitizen voting because American citizenship should mean something, and every noncitizen vote wipes out a citizen vote, which shouldn’t be happening at all.
There are other reform ideas circulating the experts did not mention, like numbered ballots which make a lot of sense to me. Numbered ballots would prevent middle-of-the-night drops of fake ballots from out of state or China. But even though the experts’ recommendations are not complete, they are a good starting point for states currently considering reforming their voting laws.
4/12/21 - Election Integrity Advocates Racking Up Victories
There’s some good news on the election integrity front.
The forensic examination of voting machines in Michigan is continuing. You may recall that the forensic examiners earlier found the machines in Antrim County deliberately generated a 68 percent error rate elections officials could then fill in any way they wanted. In a new report, a forensic examiner announced he had discovered an algorithm in Michigan machines that was used to shift votes in the 2020 election. Further, he found over 66,000 ballots not associated with a registered voter were recorded in nine counties. In addition, a machine was discovered to have a modem installed on its motherboard allowing the machine to connect to the Internet without visible wires or other apparent means. The same equipment is used in eight Michigan counties. Remember, we heard repeatedly after the election that voting machines don’t connect to the Internet. Now there is hard evidence at least some of them do.
What is it the Democrats don’t want us to know about what transpired on the Internet on election day? What are they hiding? It’s interesting that another forensic investigator, working in other states, reports he was offered $10 million to just walk away. Somebody’s getting nervous. The forensic examination story is continuing in Michigan, so we should learn more over time.
The good news doesn’t stop there.
You might recall that, last month, a court found that the Democrat Secretary of State in Michigan violated the law when she loosened the signature verification requirements for absentee ballots without a formal rule or legislative authorization.
Wyoming’s Governor signed a bill requiring voter ID at the polls and for in-person early voting. Democrats can jump up and down about Jim Crow all they want, but voter ID is just common sense and everybody knows it.
Speaking of jumping up and down, Stacey Abrams is known for that, but large parts of her lawsuit alleging infringement of voting rights in the 2018 Georgia election was thrown out of court. AJC Running around yelling ‘voter suppression’ is easy. Proving it in court is quite a different matter.
Pennsylvania agreed to remove dead voters from the rolls to settle a lawsuit. Well, duh. Why such resistance to common-sense election safeguards? Because Democrats are trying to steal elections, that’s why.
Finally, a $160 billion class action lawsuit has been filed against Dominion Voting Systems, Facebook, and others over irregularities in the 2020 elections. Unhappy voters are invited to join the lawsuit.
That’s it for now but, as you can see, this story isn’t over, not by a longshot.
4/7/21 - The Left Doubles Down on Georgia Election Law and Loses
I can’t believe it. The Left actually doubled down on its war of words over the Georgia election reform law. It’s that old saying, if you can’t argue the facts, pound the table.
Let’s start with demolishing Joe Biden, first. There he goes again, comparing the new Georgia voter ID law to Jim Crow. I defy anyone to tell me how the Georgia law is anything like Jim Crow. What are Jim Crow laws? They were laws that racially segregated the South after the Civil War. Blacks couldn’t sit at white lunch counters, drink from white water fountains, or use other whites-only public facilities. To say requiring all voters to show ID is anything remotely like Jim Crow is the mother of all false equivalencies. Of course minority voters can get IDs; most already have one. The rest can get free government-issued non-driver IDs in many states. To say blacks aren’t capable of getting IDs like other people is blatantly racist. The comparison to Jim Crow is so outlandish, it exposes the emptiness of the Left’s rhetoric. They can’t make their case so they seek refuge in hyperbole, the last refuge of the morally bankrupt.
A fact check by the liberal BBC found, contrary to the Left’s claims, the Georgia law does not prevent voting after work, does not prevent ‘Souls to the Polls’ early voting on Sunday, and does not prevent election officials from handing out water to people standing in line. Further, the law institutionalizes drop boxes for early voting. Drop boxes didn’t exist before the pandemic.
A completely unbalanced story from the leftist Guardian repeats the lie the Georgia law prevents all water from being handed out to voters in line. The Guardian goes on to mischaracterize election integrity measures as blatantly racist voter suppression. Limiting early voting, removing ineligible voters from the rolls, and tightening requirements for absentee voting are all portrayed as attempts to keep minorities from voting. No, they are aimed at shutting down proven avenues of election fraud. Fraud has been known to occur with every one of these things and reformers are right to try to get a grip on the situation. Calling these things racist just doesn’t cut it. It’s no longer acceptable to have dead people voting, or more precisely, allowing fraudsters to use dead people’s names to vote. Why would anybody want that possibility to continue to exist? There’s only one reason the Left wants to strip away election safeguards like scrubbing the voter rolls, and that’s to steal elections.
Major League Baseball’s decision to move the All-Star game from Atlanta to Denver drew comparisons between the election laws in Georgia and Colorado. Georgia’s Governor said the move doesn’t make sense given that Georgia allows more days of early voting than Colorado does. NPR went through both sets of laws. It acknowledged both states have restrictions on early voting and both require voter ID in some instances. It went on to praise Colorado’s vote-by-mail approach as superior to Georgia’s traditional emphasis on voting in person. 99.3 percent of Colorado voters use mailboxes or dropboxes. But in praising Colorado’s mail-in approach and criticizing tighter restrictions in Georgia, NPR misses the forest for the trees. The forest is all the problems with universal mail-in balloting in the 2020 election NPR does not even mention:
NPR isn’t telling you any of this. It’s true election laws are tighter in Georgia than Colorado with its loosey-goosey mail-in approach. You can call me a racist, but I sure hope they are.
Democrat election lawyer Marc Elias was on NPR last night talking about the lawsuit he filed against Florida’s new election reform law nine minutes after Governor DeSantis signed it.
Elias wrapped himself in the flag - “if people are put to the question of, should people vote, should people's vote be counted, should we have consent of the governed, that people will answer the question, yes.” Reminds me of the time the famous Mayor Daley of Chicago said, “we must reach higher and higher platitudes together.” ‘Consent of the governed’ - that’s a good one. Elias left out apple pie and motherhood. If Democrats were really concerned about the consent of the governed, their prosecutors in blue states would be going all out to investigate credible allegations of voter fraud, but they don’t. Investigations and prosecutions are few and far between, allowing the Democrats to get away with their phony narrative ‘there is no voter fraud’. No investigations, no prosecutions, no voter fraud. See how this works?
Elias trotted out the Democrats’ threadbare, timeworn false voter suppression narrative. They’ve been claiming for years Republicans try to suppress minority votes, but they never say how. They just make conclusory declarations, like insisting voter ID suppresses the vote. OK, but how? Tell us how. They never tell us how. Never mind that minority voting doesn’t go down where voter ID is implemented. Never mind that most of Stacey Abrams’ voter suppression case in Georgia got thrown out of court for being bogus (AJC), and she now admits voter ID is not racist per se. Elias didn’t say one word last night about how, exactly, it is that Republicans suppress the vote. It was one conclusory declaration after another. All you have to do when you hear somebody doing that is say to yourself ‘I don’t believe you’ and the fairy dust they’re sprinkling can’t put you in a spell.
If you want to see real voter suppression, just look at the history of the Democrat Party - poll taxes, literacy tests, simply refusing to register blacks to vote - these are all Democrat tricks.
Elias claimed Republican states are passing voter suppression laws because they’ve bought Donald Trump’s ‘big lie’ the 2020 election was stolen. He doesn’t know that; he’s just speculating about motive. I can see state legislators voting for reforms because they want to make it harder to cheat. Nothing wrong with that, is there? There’s only one reason to oppose common sense election safeguards like voter ID and that’s because you want to steal elections.
Finally, Elias said, “the federal law set minimum standards for our military voters to receive absentee ballots.” What he didn’t tell you is Democrats do their best not to count those military votes because they know most of them are for Republicans.
All in all, a pretty lame performance from Elias last night. Democrats have been relying on the phony voter suppression narrative so long, they’ve gotten mentally lazy. They need some new shtick. People are starting to see right through their current bag of tricks.
4/27/21 - Election Reforms We Can All Get Behind
An independent team of experts has issued 30 recommendations to ensure free and fair elections. [Full report here.] Some are just common sense, and many could be supported by Americans of every political stripe unless, of course, your intent is to steal elections.
One recommendation is to require voter ID. Even Stacey Abrams now admits voter ID is not necessarily racist. She told a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing earlier this month that she supports voter ID laws, depending on how they’re written, and noted that 35 states already have them.
Other common sense measures recommended by the experts include not changing the rules within 180 days of the election, not allowing deficient ballots or envelopes to be fixed through alteration, maintaining chain of custody for all ballots for 22 months so election contests can be decided, and removing ineligible voters from the rolls annually.
Other recommendations would roll back the supposedly temporary measures adopted in the pandemic. The experts recommend no drop boxes and favor in-person early voting for three weeks, instead. Absentee balloting would go back to needing a good reason, instead of becoming a de facto substitute for early voting. Election observers from political parties would be assured complete access to the process, not effectively shut out like they were in several places in the 2020 election, supposedly because of the pandemic.
Other recommendations are directed at shutting down known avenues for fraud. Ballot harvesting would be prohibited, for example. State and local governments could not accept private money to stage elections. Private money became a real problem in the 2020 election where in Green Bay, for example, the entire election was turned over to private contractors and run by a Democrat Party operative.
The experts make two recommendations aimed at allowing genuine election contests. Citizens and state legislatures would have standing to challenge election results in court. I don’t know that’s the best answer for election contests, but it sure beats what happened in 2020, with courts first saying challengers were too early, and then later saying challengers were too late, in filing their contests.
As for electronic voting machines, the experts recommend making it illegal to allow them to be connected to the Internet. There were many claims in the 2020 elections that domestic and foreign agents tampered with machine results through the Internet, severely undermining confidence in the election. Other experts are recommending open source software for the machines, or doing away with the machines altogether and returning to paper ballots as other countries have done. Keep your eye on this one. Something will be done about the machines before this is all over.
Finally, the experts recommend tightening the rules preventing noncitizens from voting in our elections. I’ve never claimed, as some have, this occurs in great numbers. But I’m all in favor of preventing noncitizen voting because American citizenship should mean something, and every noncitizen vote wipes out a citizen vote, which shouldn’t be happening at all.
There are other reform ideas circulating the experts did not mention, like numbered ballots which make a lot of sense to me. Numbered ballots would prevent middle-of-the-night drops of fake ballots from out of state or China. But even though the experts’ recommendations are not complete, they are a good starting point for states currently considering reforming their voting laws.
4/12/21 - Election Integrity Advocates Racking Up Victories
There’s some good news on the election integrity front.
The forensic examination of voting machines in Michigan is continuing. You may recall that the forensic examiners earlier found the machines in Antrim County deliberately generated a 68 percent error rate elections officials could then fill in any way they wanted. In a new report, a forensic examiner announced he had discovered an algorithm in Michigan machines that was used to shift votes in the 2020 election. Further, he found over 66,000 ballots not associated with a registered voter were recorded in nine counties. In addition, a machine was discovered to have a modem installed on its motherboard allowing the machine to connect to the Internet without visible wires or other apparent means. The same equipment is used in eight Michigan counties. Remember, we heard repeatedly after the election that voting machines don’t connect to the Internet. Now there is hard evidence at least some of them do.
What is it the Democrats don’t want us to know about what transpired on the Internet on election day? What are they hiding? It’s interesting that another forensic investigator, working in other states, reports he was offered $10 million to just walk away. Somebody’s getting nervous. The forensic examination story is continuing in Michigan, so we should learn more over time.
The good news doesn’t stop there.
You might recall that, last month, a court found that the Democrat Secretary of State in Michigan violated the law when she loosened the signature verification requirements for absentee ballots without a formal rule or legislative authorization.
Wyoming’s Governor signed a bill requiring voter ID at the polls and for in-person early voting. Democrats can jump up and down about Jim Crow all they want, but voter ID is just common sense and everybody knows it.
Speaking of jumping up and down, Stacey Abrams is known for that, but large parts of her lawsuit alleging infringement of voting rights in the 2018 Georgia election was thrown out of court. AJC Running around yelling ‘voter suppression’ is easy. Proving it in court is quite a different matter.
Pennsylvania agreed to remove dead voters from the rolls to settle a lawsuit. Well, duh. Why such resistance to common-sense election safeguards? Because Democrats are trying to steal elections, that’s why.
Finally, a $160 billion class action lawsuit has been filed against Dominion Voting Systems, Facebook, and others over irregularities in the 2020 elections. Unhappy voters are invited to join the lawsuit.
That’s it for now but, as you can see, this story isn’t over, not by a longshot.
4/7/21 - The Left Doubles Down on Georgia Election Law and Loses
I can’t believe it. The Left actually doubled down on its war of words over the Georgia election reform law. It’s that old saying, if you can’t argue the facts, pound the table.
Let’s start with demolishing Joe Biden, first. There he goes again, comparing the new Georgia voter ID law to Jim Crow. I defy anyone to tell me how the Georgia law is anything like Jim Crow. What are Jim Crow laws? They were laws that racially segregated the South after the Civil War. Blacks couldn’t sit at white lunch counters, drink from white water fountains, or use other whites-only public facilities. To say requiring all voters to show ID is anything remotely like Jim Crow is the mother of all false equivalencies. Of course minority voters can get IDs; most already have one. The rest can get free government-issued non-driver IDs in many states. To say blacks aren’t capable of getting IDs like other people is blatantly racist. The comparison to Jim Crow is so outlandish, it exposes the emptiness of the Left’s rhetoric. They can’t make their case so they seek refuge in hyperbole, the last refuge of the morally bankrupt.
A fact check by the liberal BBC found, contrary to the Left’s claims, the Georgia law does not prevent voting after work, does not prevent ‘Souls to the Polls’ early voting on Sunday, and does not prevent election officials from handing out water to people standing in line. Further, the law institutionalizes drop boxes for early voting. Drop boxes didn’t exist before the pandemic.
A completely unbalanced story from the leftist Guardian repeats the lie the Georgia law prevents all water from being handed out to voters in line. The Guardian goes on to mischaracterize election integrity measures as blatantly racist voter suppression. Limiting early voting, removing ineligible voters from the rolls, and tightening requirements for absentee voting are all portrayed as attempts to keep minorities from voting. No, they are aimed at shutting down proven avenues of election fraud. Fraud has been known to occur with every one of these things and reformers are right to try to get a grip on the situation. Calling these things racist just doesn’t cut it. It’s no longer acceptable to have dead people voting, or more precisely, allowing fraudsters to use dead people’s names to vote. Why would anybody want that possibility to continue to exist? There’s only one reason the Left wants to strip away election safeguards like scrubbing the voter rolls, and that’s to steal elections.
Major League Baseball’s decision to move the All-Star game from Atlanta to Denver drew comparisons between the election laws in Georgia and Colorado. Georgia’s Governor said the move doesn’t make sense given that Georgia allows more days of early voting than Colorado does. NPR went through both sets of laws. It acknowledged both states have restrictions on early voting and both require voter ID in some instances. It went on to praise Colorado’s vote-by-mail approach as superior to Georgia’s traditional emphasis on voting in person. 99.3 percent of Colorado voters use mailboxes or dropboxes. But in praising Colorado’s mail-in approach and criticizing tighter restrictions in Georgia, NPR misses the forest for the trees. The forest is all the problems with universal mail-in balloting in the 2020 election NPR does not even mention:
- An audit in Missoula, Montana showed 7 percent of all mail-in ballots were missing the envelope, signature, or date
- 12,000 more mail-in ballots were returned in Pennsylvania than were officially sent out
- Also in Pennsylvania, 100,000 absentee and mail-in ballots were returned one day after, the same day, and even before they were supposedly sent out
- 25,000 nursing home residents in Pennsylvania requested mail-in ballots at the exact same time, suggesting extensive ballot harvesting
- 100,000 mail-in ballots were backdated and delivered after the election in Wisconsin
- Nevada’s largest county sent more than 200,000 mail-in ballots to outdated addresses in the 2020 primary election, which were returned ‘undeliverable’.
- signature verification thresholds were set so low in Nevada, almost every mail-in ballot was accepted
- a postal worker alleged an anti-Trump postmaster illegally ordered employees to back-date mail-in ballots so they could be counted
- A Democrat operative admitted to rigging elections in New Jersey with fake mail-in ballots and leading teams to commit voter fraud for years
- A New Jersey judge invalidated an entire election and ordered a new election for Paterson City Council due to pervasive mail-in voter fraud
NPR isn’t telling you any of this. It’s true election laws are tighter in Georgia than Colorado with its loosey-goosey mail-in approach. You can call me a racist, but I sure hope they are.
3/30/21 - The Left’s Phony Voter Suppression Narrative is Wearing Thin
It’s nice to see people on the political Right finally taking on the Left’s phony voter suppression narrative. The narrative has been out there for at least ten years and it’s making less and less sense by the day.
Senator Pat Toomey pointed out it’s a false narrative to say black people are not capable of getting voter ID. They get ID to drive a car and get on airplanes. “We’re not going to be cowed by being called racist over policy that has nothing to do with race,” he said.
Radio host Mark Levin observed the people calling for a vaccine passport are the same people who oppose voter ID. (3/29/21 show)
Congressman Mo Brooks said it’s racist to suggest whites, Asians, and Hispanics have no problem getting IDs, but somehow blacks need to be protected in this regard. The attitude “that somehow or another African Americans are inferior and unable to do what other races are doing” is racist, he said.
Black civil rights attorney Leo Terrell agrees. “I’m offended by anyone who tries to play the race card to protect me because I’m black,” he said. Anyone who tries to compare Georgia’s new voter ID requirement for absentee balloting to Jim Crow laws is way off base, he said. Jim Crow does not exist and voter ID requirements do not segregate by race. “I find it offensive for anyone to say that black people have a problem getting an identification card, a driver’s license, voter ID. You look at every demographic, everyone supports voter ID because we want to make sure that the people are the right person. Election integrity is to make sure we don’t have fraudulent voting,” Terrell said. He also pointed out that the long voting lines the Democrats complain about are in Democrat districts and the new Georgia law addresses them.
Phill Kline, director of the Amistad election integrity project, said private financing of elections by Mark Zuckerberg and others amounts to the government trying to increase the turnout of particular demographics, which is every bit as objectionable as targeting blacks to suppress their votes would be.
If these arguments don’t convince you, maybe facts will.
A watchdog report found that private money mixed up in administering public elections drove up Democrat turnout and may have swung Arizona to Biden. This is one reason a lot of people want to prohibit state and local governments from taking private money to administer elections.
The heavily Democratic town of Missoula, Montana had all mail-in balloting in the 2020 election. An audit showed that 7 percent were counted illegally because they were missing the envelope, signature, or dates, or had some other irregularity. That’s what happens when you strip away election safeguards for supposedly good reasons.
A court in Michigan ruled last week that 177,000 voter registrations were outdated and ordered them removed from the voter rolls. Too bad this didn’t happen before the 2020 election like it was supposed to.
Another court in Michigan ruled the Secretary of State unlawfully directed city clerks to ignore signature matching requirements on absentee ballots in the 2020 election.
Trying to keep ineligible voters on the rolls, ignoring signature requirements, and counting defective mail-in ballots - these things are being done, not to help minorities, but to help the Democrats steal elections and grab power, plain and simple. To deny this is reality suppression.
3/10/21 - Iowa Restores Important Election Safeguards
Lots of legislative proposals to promote election integrity have popped up in lots of states - 200 bills in 43 states, by one count - but it appears Iowa is first out of the gate with a new law signed on Monday.
The new law shortens early voting from 29 to 20 days. It requires most ballots to be received by Election Day, not noon the next Monday.
The new law also places restrictions on absentee voting. Election officials cannot send out absentee request forms unsolicited, and absentee ballots must now be returned by the voter, a family member, or a caregiver - not ballot harvesters hired by the Democrat Party or its minions.
The new law also removes voters from the voter rolls if they miss an election or don’t report a change in address.
The Democrats’ canned response to common sense election safeguards is ‘voter suppression’ - provisions like these make it harder for people to vote. To which my answer is, well, duh! Of course we want to make it harder for people who are not qualified to vote in our elections. There are good reasons for each and every one of the safeguards commonly used to secure elections. Requiring an ID makes it harder for people to buy beer, but we don’t want 12-year-olds buying beer. Requiring a Real ID makes it harder for people to get on an airplane, but we don’t want to raise the risk of terrorism by allowing people who are not who they say they are to fly. Requiring voter ID makes it harder to vote, but we don’t want dead people or noncitizens voting.
There’s only one reason the Democrats want to strip away all the safeguards - they want to steal elections and impose one-party rule forever. There’s only one reason Democrats want to make mail-in voting permanent everywhere - they want to cheat and are trying to exploit the pandemic to get their way. The Democrats want their ballot harvesters to be able to return absentee ballots, not because it will help minority voters, but because it will help the Democrats steal elections.
Loosey-goosey mail-in voting is no longer acceptable. Allowing Democrat ballot harvesters to traffic in absentee ballots is no longer acceptable. Leaving dead voters on the rolls is no longer acceptable. Each and every one of these things is a vector for election fraud.
If working to restore common sense safeguards to elections is voter suppression, I’ll eat my hat. Election integrity is a good message for everybody. Iowa just plugged some of the holes in its voting system, but there are lot’s more, there and everywhere. But if we’re going to restore confidence in our elections, this is the direction we need to be headed. Thank you, Iowa, for showing the way.
It’s nice to see people on the political Right finally taking on the Left’s phony voter suppression narrative. The narrative has been out there for at least ten years and it’s making less and less sense by the day.
Senator Pat Toomey pointed out it’s a false narrative to say black people are not capable of getting voter ID. They get ID to drive a car and get on airplanes. “We’re not going to be cowed by being called racist over policy that has nothing to do with race,” he said.
Radio host Mark Levin observed the people calling for a vaccine passport are the same people who oppose voter ID. (3/29/21 show)
Congressman Mo Brooks said it’s racist to suggest whites, Asians, and Hispanics have no problem getting IDs, but somehow blacks need to be protected in this regard. The attitude “that somehow or another African Americans are inferior and unable to do what other races are doing” is racist, he said.
Black civil rights attorney Leo Terrell agrees. “I’m offended by anyone who tries to play the race card to protect me because I’m black,” he said. Anyone who tries to compare Georgia’s new voter ID requirement for absentee balloting to Jim Crow laws is way off base, he said. Jim Crow does not exist and voter ID requirements do not segregate by race. “I find it offensive for anyone to say that black people have a problem getting an identification card, a driver’s license, voter ID. You look at every demographic, everyone supports voter ID because we want to make sure that the people are the right person. Election integrity is to make sure we don’t have fraudulent voting,” Terrell said. He also pointed out that the long voting lines the Democrats complain about are in Democrat districts and the new Georgia law addresses them.
Phill Kline, director of the Amistad election integrity project, said private financing of elections by Mark Zuckerberg and others amounts to the government trying to increase the turnout of particular demographics, which is every bit as objectionable as targeting blacks to suppress their votes would be.
If these arguments don’t convince you, maybe facts will.
A watchdog report found that private money mixed up in administering public elections drove up Democrat turnout and may have swung Arizona to Biden. This is one reason a lot of people want to prohibit state and local governments from taking private money to administer elections.
The heavily Democratic town of Missoula, Montana had all mail-in balloting in the 2020 election. An audit showed that 7 percent were counted illegally because they were missing the envelope, signature, or dates, or had some other irregularity. That’s what happens when you strip away election safeguards for supposedly good reasons.
A court in Michigan ruled last week that 177,000 voter registrations were outdated and ordered them removed from the voter rolls. Too bad this didn’t happen before the 2020 election like it was supposed to.
Another court in Michigan ruled the Secretary of State unlawfully directed city clerks to ignore signature matching requirements on absentee ballots in the 2020 election.
Trying to keep ineligible voters on the rolls, ignoring signature requirements, and counting defective mail-in ballots - these things are being done, not to help minorities, but to help the Democrats steal elections and grab power, plain and simple. To deny this is reality suppression.
3/10/21 - Iowa Restores Important Election Safeguards
Lots of legislative proposals to promote election integrity have popped up in lots of states - 200 bills in 43 states, by one count - but it appears Iowa is first out of the gate with a new law signed on Monday.
The new law shortens early voting from 29 to 20 days. It requires most ballots to be received by Election Day, not noon the next Monday.
The new law also places restrictions on absentee voting. Election officials cannot send out absentee request forms unsolicited, and absentee ballots must now be returned by the voter, a family member, or a caregiver - not ballot harvesters hired by the Democrat Party or its minions.
The new law also removes voters from the voter rolls if they miss an election or don’t report a change in address.
The Democrats’ canned response to common sense election safeguards is ‘voter suppression’ - provisions like these make it harder for people to vote. To which my answer is, well, duh! Of course we want to make it harder for people who are not qualified to vote in our elections. There are good reasons for each and every one of the safeguards commonly used to secure elections. Requiring an ID makes it harder for people to buy beer, but we don’t want 12-year-olds buying beer. Requiring a Real ID makes it harder for people to get on an airplane, but we don’t want to raise the risk of terrorism by allowing people who are not who they say they are to fly. Requiring voter ID makes it harder to vote, but we don’t want dead people or noncitizens voting.
There’s only one reason the Democrats want to strip away all the safeguards - they want to steal elections and impose one-party rule forever. There’s only one reason Democrats want to make mail-in voting permanent everywhere - they want to cheat and are trying to exploit the pandemic to get their way. The Democrats want their ballot harvesters to be able to return absentee ballots, not because it will help minority voters, but because it will help the Democrats steal elections.
Loosey-goosey mail-in voting is no longer acceptable. Allowing Democrat ballot harvesters to traffic in absentee ballots is no longer acceptable. Leaving dead voters on the rolls is no longer acceptable. Each and every one of these things is a vector for election fraud.
If working to restore common sense safeguards to elections is voter suppression, I’ll eat my hat. Election integrity is a good message for everybody. Iowa just plugged some of the holes in its voting system, but there are lot’s more, there and everywhere. But if we’re going to restore confidence in our elections, this is the direction we need to be headed. Thank you, Iowa, for showing the way.
3/1/21 - The Voter Suppression Narrative Has Run Its Course
NPR ran a story over the weekend about how Republicans are trying to pass laws in several states to make it harder to vote. The story is a masterpiece of left-wing propaganda, but is easily deconstructed.
The story cites how those mean Republicans want to reduce early voting, limit voting by mail, change the rules for drop boxes, and strengthen voter ID requirements for absentee ballots. Oh, the horror! The story goes on to impugn the motives of anyone who wants election integrity: they must be racist or afraid because the nation is becoming non-white.
There’s always something artificial in the arguments the Left makes. They hope you will overlook the obvious. In this case, it’s obvious that things like mail-in balloting, drop boxes, and early voting only came about because of the pandemic. Many of the reforms being sought merely seek to restore the status quo ante before these emergency election procedures were adopted, emergency procedures the Democrats are now trying to make permanent.
Here’s how the story should have been written: Republicans in many states are attempting to restore confidence in the elections. They seek to reverse emergency voting measures adopted in the pandemic that raised many questions about election integrity, such as chaotic mail-in balloting and unmonitored drop boxes.
There’s only one reason the Democrats want to strip away election safeguards permanently - they want to steal elections. They place the race card to silence anyone who dares to talk about election integrity - another favorite parlor trick of the Left. It’s funny how Democrats dismiss voter fraud, until it happens to them. There are plenty of examples of Democrat-on-Democrat voter fraud and the losing Democrat candidate screaming bloody murder about it.
The Left’s voter suppression narrative - out there doing its thing for the last 10 years - has just about run its course. It’s no longer acceptable not to require an ID to vote. It’s no longer acceptable not to match signatures on absentee ballots. It’s no longer acceptable not to have numbered ballots, so middle-of-the-night ballot dumps from out of state or China are no longer possible. It’s no longer acceptable to have voting machines that are deliberately designed to generate 68 percent error rates that elections officials can fill in any way they want, as happened in Antrim County, Michigan. It’s no longer acceptable to shut out Republicans from observing the election process. And it’s no longer acceptable to smear as racist half the country that wants the election safeguards stripped away in the pandemic to be restored.
These things are no longer acceptable. The Democrats are on notice. The Right is mobilizing to restore election integrity. There must be a hundred new election integrity projects that have sprung up around the country. We will not stop until safeguards have been restored and American citizens can have confidence in their elections once again. As for being afraid of the changing demographics of the country, the only color important here is gray, as in gray matter - how people think and whether the American Idea of freedom and individual rights will endure, and whether our Republic will endure regardless of who’s living here. Election integrity is a good message for everybody.
NPR ran a story over the weekend about how Republicans are trying to pass laws in several states to make it harder to vote. The story is a masterpiece of left-wing propaganda, but is easily deconstructed.
The story cites how those mean Republicans want to reduce early voting, limit voting by mail, change the rules for drop boxes, and strengthen voter ID requirements for absentee ballots. Oh, the horror! The story goes on to impugn the motives of anyone who wants election integrity: they must be racist or afraid because the nation is becoming non-white.
There’s always something artificial in the arguments the Left makes. They hope you will overlook the obvious. In this case, it’s obvious that things like mail-in balloting, drop boxes, and early voting only came about because of the pandemic. Many of the reforms being sought merely seek to restore the status quo ante before these emergency election procedures were adopted, emergency procedures the Democrats are now trying to make permanent.
Here’s how the story should have been written: Republicans in many states are attempting to restore confidence in the elections. They seek to reverse emergency voting measures adopted in the pandemic that raised many questions about election integrity, such as chaotic mail-in balloting and unmonitored drop boxes.
There’s only one reason the Democrats want to strip away election safeguards permanently - they want to steal elections. They place the race card to silence anyone who dares to talk about election integrity - another favorite parlor trick of the Left. It’s funny how Democrats dismiss voter fraud, until it happens to them. There are plenty of examples of Democrat-on-Democrat voter fraud and the losing Democrat candidate screaming bloody murder about it.
The Left’s voter suppression narrative - out there doing its thing for the last 10 years - has just about run its course. It’s no longer acceptable not to require an ID to vote. It’s no longer acceptable not to match signatures on absentee ballots. It’s no longer acceptable not to have numbered ballots, so middle-of-the-night ballot dumps from out of state or China are no longer possible. It’s no longer acceptable to have voting machines that are deliberately designed to generate 68 percent error rates that elections officials can fill in any way they want, as happened in Antrim County, Michigan. It’s no longer acceptable to shut out Republicans from observing the election process. And it’s no longer acceptable to smear as racist half the country that wants the election safeguards stripped away in the pandemic to be restored.
These things are no longer acceptable. The Democrats are on notice. The Right is mobilizing to restore election integrity. There must be a hundred new election integrity projects that have sprung up around the country. We will not stop until safeguards have been restored and American citizens can have confidence in their elections once again. As for being afraid of the changing demographics of the country, the only color important here is gray, as in gray matter - how people think and whether the American Idea of freedom and individual rights will endure, and whether our Republic will endure regardless of who’s living here. Election integrity is a good message for everybody.
2/25/21 - Electronic Voting Machines Can Be Used to Steal Elections
Today, I’m back to the subject of electronic voting machines. I did not focus on what supposedly happened in Germany, Italy, Spain, or China in the presidential election. I focused on Antrim County, Michigan where the only forensic examination of a machine used in the 2020 election was ordered by a court. The very first finding the forensic examiners made was that the machine, at the very outset, deliberately and by design, created a 68 percent error rate that elections officials could then fill in any way they wanted.
That’s not a machine that counts votes. That’s something else.
The news since then has not gotten any better.
A hand recount in a New Hampshire town showed Dominion machines cheated every Republican candidate out of roughly 300 votes. The same machines are used in 85 percent of all the towns in the state.
Data scientists testified in a Georgia Senate hearing in December that 30,000 votes were taken away from Trump and 12,000 more were switched to Biden through electronic voting machines. Another witness in the hearing debunked the notion electronic voting machines are not connected to the Internet, testifying his team was at that very moment inside a county machine, sending and receiving data.
A 2006 study found that Diebold machines can steal votes with little risk of detection.
The acting CIO of the federal agency responsible for certifying electronic voting machines worked for Dominion for 10 years. That may not prove anything by itself, but it doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.
There are also accusations several foreign countries, including China, interfered in the 2020 election through electronic voting machines. Democrats don’t seem to be scrambling to get to the bottom of that one.
Finally, Ireland and the Netherlands stopped using electronic voting machines years ago after finding them unreliable and unable to produce accurate results.
So what does all this mean? Half the country no longer has confidence in our elections. It’s pretty clear these machines don’t count votes, but allow election officials to make up any results they want. It’s also clear questions about foreign interference have not been answered. The best answer for these machines I’ve heard so far is to require open source software. The volunteer developers will be from all across the political spectrum and keep each other honest. But I’m hearing more and more calls to scrap the machines altogether and go back to paper ballots. There are at least a hundred new election integrity projects that have sprung up around the county, and you can bet we’re going to hear a whole lot more about these machines before it’s all over.
Today, I’m back to the subject of electronic voting machines. I did not focus on what supposedly happened in Germany, Italy, Spain, or China in the presidential election. I focused on Antrim County, Michigan where the only forensic examination of a machine used in the 2020 election was ordered by a court. The very first finding the forensic examiners made was that the machine, at the very outset, deliberately and by design, created a 68 percent error rate that elections officials could then fill in any way they wanted.
That’s not a machine that counts votes. That’s something else.
The news since then has not gotten any better.
A hand recount in a New Hampshire town showed Dominion machines cheated every Republican candidate out of roughly 300 votes. The same machines are used in 85 percent of all the towns in the state.
Data scientists testified in a Georgia Senate hearing in December that 30,000 votes were taken away from Trump and 12,000 more were switched to Biden through electronic voting machines. Another witness in the hearing debunked the notion electronic voting machines are not connected to the Internet, testifying his team was at that very moment inside a county machine, sending and receiving data.
A 2006 study found that Diebold machines can steal votes with little risk of detection.
The acting CIO of the federal agency responsible for certifying electronic voting machines worked for Dominion for 10 years. That may not prove anything by itself, but it doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.
There are also accusations several foreign countries, including China, interfered in the 2020 election through electronic voting machines. Democrats don’t seem to be scrambling to get to the bottom of that one.
Finally, Ireland and the Netherlands stopped using electronic voting machines years ago after finding them unreliable and unable to produce accurate results.
So what does all this mean? Half the country no longer has confidence in our elections. It’s pretty clear these machines don’t count votes, but allow election officials to make up any results they want. It’s also clear questions about foreign interference have not been answered. The best answer for these machines I’ve heard so far is to require open source software. The volunteer developers will be from all across the political spectrum and keep each other honest. But I’m hearing more and more calls to scrap the machines altogether and go back to paper ballots. There are at least a hundred new election integrity projects that have sprung up around the county, and you can bet we’re going to hear a whole lot more about these machines before it’s all over.
2/21/21 - DeSantis Proposals, Enforcement Actions, Innocent Explanations
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis proposals would ban mail-in balloting and ballot harvesting, guarantee election observers can watch the vote count
Michigan removes 177,000 inactive voters from the voter rolls in late January to settle litigation filed a year ago
Georgia election board refers 35 election violations for criminal prosecution; two involve minority voter registration efforts
Wisconsin, Michigan, and Georgia offer innocent explanations for election fraud claims, e.g., the claim ‘Detroit turnout was 139% of registered voters’ when official turnout was 51%
Resource - Here Is The Evidence crowdsourcing website aggregates publicly available evidence that would be admissible in court, e.g., 42,248 voters voted twice in Nevada
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis proposals would ban mail-in balloting and ballot harvesting, guarantee election observers can watch the vote count
Michigan removes 177,000 inactive voters from the voter rolls in late January to settle litigation filed a year ago
Georgia election board refers 35 election violations for criminal prosecution; two involve minority voter registration efforts
Wisconsin, Michigan, and Georgia offer innocent explanations for election fraud claims, e.g., the claim ‘Detroit turnout was 139% of registered voters’ when official turnout was 51%
Resource - Here Is The Evidence crowdsourcing website aggregates publicly available evidence that would be admissible in court, e.g., 42,248 voters voted twice in Nevada
2/7/21 - Evidence, Court Rulings, & Fighting H.R.1
Resource:
2020 Presidential Election Lawsuits Related to Election Integrity - parties, issue, disposition, etc.
http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm
Action Alert from Heritage Action:
H.R. 1 — Pelosi is planning a vote on H.R. 1 in February. This is the first battle in the fight to defend free and fair elections in our country. The bill is designed to rig the election system in favor of Democratic politicians by undermining America’s electoral process. Call your representative and tell them to “Vote NO on H.R. 1.”
News Round-Up:
Resource:
2020 Presidential Election Lawsuits Related to Election Integrity - parties, issue, disposition, etc.
http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm
Action Alert from Heritage Action:
H.R. 1 — Pelosi is planning a vote on H.R. 1 in February. This is the first battle in the fight to defend free and fair elections in our country. The bill is designed to rig the election system in favor of Democratic politicians by undermining America’s electoral process. Call your representative and tell them to “Vote NO on H.R. 1.”
News Round-Up:
- My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell’s video is going around like crazy - Absolute Proof: Exposing Election Fraud and the Theft of America by Enemies Foreign and Domestic https://michaeljlindell.com
- Sen. Rand Paul spars with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on evidence of election fraud
- Virginia state court rules counting ballots that arrived without a postmark up to three days after the election was illegal
1/26/21 - H.R. 1 Is an Instrument of One-Party Rule
Today, I return to the theme of one-party rule. A bill pending in Congress - H.R. 1 - would make sweeping changes to the nation’s election laws designed to game elections and keep the Democrat Party in power into perpetuity. The Elections Clause in the Constitution gives primary responsibility for regulating Congressional elections to the state legislatures, but allows Congress to make changes. H.R. 1 would induce states to go along by offering federal money to help them conduct elections, which have become increasingly expensive for states to undertake. It’s that old saying, ‘where federal money goes, federal control follows.’
H.R. 1 would give Congress “ultimate supervisory power over Federal elections”. The bill would set in stone the same practices that led half the country to believe the last presidential election was stolen - ignoring state laws, ballot harvesting, early voting, universal mail-in voting, repeal of voter ID laws, and no more signature matching. Every one of these things is fraught with possibilities for election fraud. There’s only one reason the Democrats want to get rid of all these election safeguards - to game, if not outright steal, every election from here on out.
Let’s take a closer look at ballot harvesting. Under H.R. 1, third parties would be allowed to collect an unlimited number of absentee ballots from voters and submit them through drop boxes. This means that vulnerable voters, like nursing home residents, could be brow-beaten, paid, or even blackmailed into voting a certain way without any protection whatsoever. The Democrats have a long history of voter fraud in nursing homes. I know. I’ve done the research. Nursing homes would be just the start of what the Democrats would exploit if H.R. 1 becomes law.
In addition, H.R. 1 would allow people to print their ballots at home, reduce the challenges election observers could make, make it more difficult to scrub the voter rolls of dead and ineligible voters, move the country to Internet-only voter registration, do away with the use of Social Security numbers to document voter identities, allow same-day registration and voting, lower the voting age to 16, and give the current Congress power over redistricting thereby perpetuating its rule. The icing on the cake would be new restrictions on political speech through radio, TV, newspapers and the Internet, and new donor disclosure rules which will cause people to drop out of the process and make it difficult to fund any kind of serious challenge to the party in power.
There’s only one reason the Democrats want all these things - to stay in power forever. If you like corruption and not being allowed to speak your mind freely, you’re going to love one-party rule. For the rest of us, however, this is a disaster in the making. Oppose H.R. 1.
1/24/21 - News Round-Up
1/24/21 - PACER member Ideas
there should be a set penalty (jail time?) for voter registration officials who fail to follow through on the requirements.
To ensure voter integrity, the states should have a chain of custody for handling the ballots and vote machines. Some states do have this requirement, but sadly no penalty for failure seems to be in place for that, either.
---, head of elections, has said that he would like to be able to use E-Verify to check those registering to vote.
1/24/21 - Heritage Foundation Recommendations
State and Federal -
https://www.heritage.org/solutions/
Election Integrity Policy Proposals (State):
1/19/21 - Election Fraud: More Evidence and Consequences
The pace of news about election fraud has slowed down, thankfully. Now the real work of analyzing what happened and how to assure free and fair elections going forward can begin. But today I go over the most recent stories describing the state of the evidence of election fraud in the November election, evidence that the major news outlets ignored and the Democrats want to sweep under the rug.
There’s a video showing election officials in Atlanta having a very strange conversation about ‘needing 3,000’, ‘pulling out boxes’, ‘unlocking the machines’, and ‘doing our thing’. If everything were on the up and up, they wouldn’t be having this conversation.
There’s a photo of a Wisconsin absentee ballot where the voter signature and the witness signature are the same. The ballot was counted.
That’s just a single vote, you say? Well, Trump advisor Peter Navarro published Parts 2 and 3 of his report describing mountains of evidence of election fraud.
Part 3 analyzes statistical anomalies in the election results. Part 2 describes various strategies the Democrats used to game the election, strategies like ballot harvesting and removing election safeguards.
Of greater interest for present purposes is Part 1 which talks about the bribery, fake ballots, elder abuse, ineligible voters, people who voted in multiple states, dead voters, and counting ballots multiple times - all occurring in key states.
Saying there is no evidence of election fraud isn’t going to cut it. You have half the country thinking the election was stolen. The other half that likes the result had better start seriously thinking about what it would really mean to live - and suffer - under one-party rule. If one party can rig every election in the future using techniques they perfected in 2020, then the first question will be how bad the corruption is going to get. I’ll take up the unlivable consequences of one-party rule in future commentaries.
1/8/21 - Numbered Ballots
We were warned. Jimmy Carter and James Baker headed up a bipartisan commission on election reform in 2005. They wrote a report urging all states to adopt voter ID laws, not use mail-in balloting, outlaw ballot harvesting by third parties, and clean up their voter rolls. They also said election observers should be allowed to monitor ballot-counting unhindered, and that electronic voting machines should be accurate. The Left must have taken all this as a roadmap because all these vectors to fraud cast a cloud over the 2020 election results. Meanwhile, the political Right fell down on the job and steadily allowed election integrity to deteriorate to the point we now have half the country calling Joe Biden an illegitimate president because of election fraud.
The fraud we saw this time around is a result of the Democrats’ deliberate strategy to weaken election safeguards. They filed almost 300 lawsuits all over the country, including the key battleground states, to institute universal mail-in balloting without legislative authority, loosen the restrictions on mail-in balloting, extend early voting, eliminate signature verification and witness requirements, ramp up ballot harvesting, get rid of voter ID laws, and allow Democrat voters to cure defects in their mail-in ballots. It’s as if Democrats read the 2005 bipartisan report as a manual on how to steal elections.
One key reform I am exploring is the common sense idea of issuing numbered ballots and instituting internal controls to track the disposition of every single one. With numbered ballots, you couldn’t have thousands of fake ballots trucked in from out of state or China in the middle of the night. Like I said, common sense. A proposal for numbered ballots will soon be put forth in North Dakota. The ballots would be pre-numbered in a range only the state would know, preventing others from printing ballots and shipping them in. Voters can go to a state website the next day, put in their number, and view their ballot to make sure it was recorded correctly. Sounds like common sense to me. My election integrity group is putting together a short list of election reforms all uncorrupted people can get behind and numbered ballots may be high on the list.
1/7/21
Only One Reason (Election Fraud)
The election may be over, but I’m not done talking about election fraud, not by a long shot.
The claim is being made mail-in ballots were received in the 2020 election that were filled in by machine, not individuals as they are supposed to be. If true, it would be another dimension of election fraud. Where are the internal controls that would prevent processing ballots filled in by machine?
Voter data shows over 4,700 absentee voters in the presidential election in Georgia gave non-residential locations for their address. Why are voters allowed to register at non-residential addresses? Can you say with any confidence they are real voters? Or is there a real possibility they are phony made-up voters whose only purpose is to steal elections?
Absentee ballots were also a problem in Wisconsin. Many were accepted without the proper information required on the certificates. This is illegal.
Wisconsin also eliminated safeguards when it mailed ballots to nursing homes, instead of having voting deputies deliver them in person. Democrats have a long history of committing voter fraud in nursing homes.
Why is government doing such a bad job on elections? Why do Democrats want to tear up every election safeguard they can? Two excellent questions, and they’re not going away.
Earlier this week, I argued there is only one reason Democrats want to dismantle voter ID and other election safeguards. They want to steal elections. I listened as President Trump said exactly the same thing to the crowd at the rally in Washington yesterday:
“There’s only one reason the Democrats could possibly want to eliminate signature matching, oppose voter ID and stop citizenship confirmation.... Because they want to steal the election.”
He went on to say: “We want voter ID by the way. But no longer is there signature verification, 11 days before the election! They say, ‘We don’t want it.’ You know why they don’t want it? Because they want to cheat. That’s the only reason.”
The Democrats have been telling us for years that anyone interested in election integrity is trying to suppress votes. That’s crazy-talk. Here’s the issue as I see it: Why do Democrats want to strip away every election safeguard they can get their hands on? There’s only one reason. They want to steal elections. That’s the issue, and its past time the Democrats speak to it. Tell us why it’s a good thing not to ask voters for identification, not to verify signatures, and for everyone to vote even if they’re not eligible. Why is that a good thing, Democrats? Let’s hear it. Let’s hear you defend the indefensible.
1/5/21
Invasion of the Election Snatchers
Today we take a look at more evidence the election snatchers don’t want you to see, then wrap up with a comment about the inability of our institutions to deal with stolen elections.
More than 12,000 more mail-in ballots were returned in Pennsylvania than were officially sent out. How is that possible?
Multiple absentee ballots returned in Houston all had the same signature and the same address. If there’s an innocent explanation for that, I’d like to hear it.
After the forensic examination showing a 68 percent error rate in the Dominion voting machines in Antrim County, there was an audit by the Michigan Secretary of State’s office. During the audit, it was observed there were fewer ballots in the bin than were reported in a previous recount. A representative of the Secretary of State’s office then pulled out a bag of spoiled ballots and told audit volunteers to count them. This was recorded on video, as was the representative’s demand that the volunteers count over a hundred ballots that all had the same signature. Otherwise, the process couldn’t move forward, the representative said. Huh? What?
These three stories reinforce several conclusions about our electoral process. First, it’s a complete mess, another example of government doing its usual bad job at everything. Second, the process is broken and badly in need of reform. Where are the internal controls that would prevent counting more mail-in ballots than were sent out? Third, you are living the consequences of the Democrats shredding every election safeguard they can get their hands on. Attacking voter ID laws and dispensing with signature requirements - these are recipes for wholesale fraud and stolen elections.
Finally, it’s now abundantly clear our institutions are not any good at handling contested elections, and that’s another reason not to dismantle election safeguards. Fewer safeguards, more contested elections and distrust of election results, it’s that simple. Secretaries of State and state election boards are too partisan to be honest brokers. Courts don’t want to get involved in deciding elections, and maybe that’s a good thing. They’ll tell you you’re too early or too late with your complaints. They’ll refuse to look at the evidence or apply standard legal doctrine. Evidence is supposed to be viewed in the most favorable light and all inferences drawn in favor of the plaintiff to get past a motion to dismiss, but courts are intellectually dishonest and perform judicial backflips to shut election contests down. State legislatures won’t invoke their constitutional powers to decertify fraudulent results. They take the coward’s way out and just hold hearings, instead. And they have to be dragged kicking and screaming just to do that much. Congress critters make a big show and huff and puff a lot, but they aren’t serious. After the contested election of 1876, a commission was appointed and decided the next President, but making up new institutions on the spot is not a good answer. The only real answer is to keep election safeguards in place. The fewer contested elections the better. So says me, but I’m not just yakking. I’ve gathered a small group of people to start working on a short list of electoral reforms that should draw broad public support, and I will have more to say about this effort in the future.
1/4/21
The Okefenokee Swamp
I have zero confidence we will see a free and fair election in Georgia tomorrow. I will lay out the evidence of election fraud in Georgia reported over the holidays but, before I do, let me quickly list three round-ups of evidence from around the country, if you want to know just how silly the people who say there is no evidence of election fraud sound.
A round-up at FrontPage Mag describes how 100,000 absentee and mail-in ballots were returned one day after, the same day, and even before they were supposedly sent out in Pennsylvania. Tell me how that’s possible in a free and fair election.
A round-up at Economic War Room recalled how Barack Obama, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Chris Matthews all warned about the dangers of mail-in balloting without safeguards like signature verification. So why were safeguards deliberately removed for the 2020 election?
A group of independent scientists and experts reviewed the evidence and found unusual and unexplained vote dumps, all in favor of Joe Biden, occurring in 14 states. Where’s the innocent explanation for that? I haven’t seen it yet.
Now on to Georgia.
Election workers in Georgia were caught on video running ballots through machines several times. What’s the innocent explanation for this? Let’s hear it.
Authorities picked up and shredded fake ballots from a warehouse in Georgia, but not before investigative journalists managed to take samples and photos of the ballots. The Arizona firm that sent the fake ballots to Georgia has close ties to the Democrat Party. The fake ballots were addressed to an election official tied to the supposed water main break used to justify stopping the vote count and also to the termination of an election whistleblower.
Georgia officials still have not produced chain of custody documents for 600,000 absentee ballots put in 300 drop boxes around the state. This does not exactly inspire confidence in the run-off elections, since the same procedures will be used tomorrow.
A judge who is Stacey Abrams’ sister ruled that Georgians who have moved can still vote from their old address. The ruling is not surprising, given that Democrats shred every election safeguard they can get their hands on. It means that thousands of voters who have likely moved to other states will stay on Georgia’s voter rolls in tomorrow’s run-off elections. If that isn’t an invitation to voter fraud, I don’t know what is.
Several witnesses testified in a hearing in Georgia that Democrats altered military ballots to cheat in the 2020 election. Where’s the innocent explanation for that?
The Georgia Senate Election Subcommittee unanimously concluded that the "November 3, 2020 election was chaotic and the results cannot be trusted."
What on earth is going on in Georgia? Is it corruption as has been alleged, or just the government doing its usual bad job at everything?
This is why it burns my cork to hear powerful nincompoops like Chuck Todd and Jake Tapper call people who challenge obviously fraudulent election results “arsonists” and ‘seditious’. Here’s what’s seditious: systematically dismantling every election safeguard you can. There’s only one reason you would want to do that - to steal elections. Only one reason state officials would change all the rules without legislative authority before the election. Only one reason why Democrats in Virginia would get rid of the state’s voter ID law. Only one reason to throw Republican election observers out of the vote counting center in Detroit. Only one reason to bully nursing home residents into voting for Biden against their will. Only one reason to implement a pervasive cash-for-votes scheme in Ilhan Omar’s district directed by her staff. Only one reason to adopt voting machines that have used to steal elections in other countries. Only one reason to use voting machines that automatically generate a 68 percent error rate you can fill in any way you want. Only one reason: You want to steal elections, plain and simple. But here’s my message to you, as I’ve said before - it’s a banana republic, if you can keep it.
Today, I return to the theme of one-party rule. A bill pending in Congress - H.R. 1 - would make sweeping changes to the nation’s election laws designed to game elections and keep the Democrat Party in power into perpetuity. The Elections Clause in the Constitution gives primary responsibility for regulating Congressional elections to the state legislatures, but allows Congress to make changes. H.R. 1 would induce states to go along by offering federal money to help them conduct elections, which have become increasingly expensive for states to undertake. It’s that old saying, ‘where federal money goes, federal control follows.’
H.R. 1 would give Congress “ultimate supervisory power over Federal elections”. The bill would set in stone the same practices that led half the country to believe the last presidential election was stolen - ignoring state laws, ballot harvesting, early voting, universal mail-in voting, repeal of voter ID laws, and no more signature matching. Every one of these things is fraught with possibilities for election fraud. There’s only one reason the Democrats want to get rid of all these election safeguards - to game, if not outright steal, every election from here on out.
Let’s take a closer look at ballot harvesting. Under H.R. 1, third parties would be allowed to collect an unlimited number of absentee ballots from voters and submit them through drop boxes. This means that vulnerable voters, like nursing home residents, could be brow-beaten, paid, or even blackmailed into voting a certain way without any protection whatsoever. The Democrats have a long history of voter fraud in nursing homes. I know. I’ve done the research. Nursing homes would be just the start of what the Democrats would exploit if H.R. 1 becomes law.
In addition, H.R. 1 would allow people to print their ballots at home, reduce the challenges election observers could make, make it more difficult to scrub the voter rolls of dead and ineligible voters, move the country to Internet-only voter registration, do away with the use of Social Security numbers to document voter identities, allow same-day registration and voting, lower the voting age to 16, and give the current Congress power over redistricting thereby perpetuating its rule. The icing on the cake would be new restrictions on political speech through radio, TV, newspapers and the Internet, and new donor disclosure rules which will cause people to drop out of the process and make it difficult to fund any kind of serious challenge to the party in power.
There’s only one reason the Democrats want all these things - to stay in power forever. If you like corruption and not being allowed to speak your mind freely, you’re going to love one-party rule. For the rest of us, however, this is a disaster in the making. Oppose H.R. 1.
1/24/21 - News Round-Up
- Trump to lead national election integrity drive as first post-presidential move, says adviser
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/top-trump-adviser-details-first-move-former-presidents-post-white
- Democrats Have Released a Roadmap to One-Party Rule (H.R. 1)
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/01/23/democrats_have_released_a_roadmap_to_one-party_rule_145102.html - Voter ID laws won in court again yesterday, with a federal appeals court upholding North Carolina’s and ruling it was not motivated by racist intent
- https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/dec/2/appeals-court-gives-ok-north-carolina-voter-id-law/
- Supreme Court Rebuffs Bid for Universal Vote-by-Mail in Texas
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-11/supreme-court-rebuffs-bid-for-universal-vote-by-mail-in-texas - TX - Rachel Rodriguez, who appeared in Project Veritas footage released in October, was arrested for election fraud, illegal voting, unlawfully assisting people voting by mail, and unlawfully possessing an official ballot
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/13/texas-ag-ken-paxton-declares-victory-election-inte/ - Ga. County orders enough ballots to register entire state 2.5 times over after election
https://www.oann.com/ga-county-orders-enough-ballots-to-register-entire-state-2-5-times-over-after-election/
1/24/21 - PACER member Ideas
there should be a set penalty (jail time?) for voter registration officials who fail to follow through on the requirements.
To ensure voter integrity, the states should have a chain of custody for handling the ballots and vote machines. Some states do have this requirement, but sadly no penalty for failure seems to be in place for that, either.
---, head of elections, has said that he would like to be able to use E-Verify to check those registering to vote.
1/24/21 - Heritage Foundation Recommendations
State and Federal -
https://www.heritage.org/solutions/
Election Integrity Policy Proposals (State):
- Require all voters to present photographic identification, issued by the federal, state, or local government, when they vote at their polling place and to send copies of such identification or their driver’s license number when submitting an absentee ballot. Any individual who does not have identification should be entitled to receive it free from state authorities. Both academic studies and election results show that identification requirements do not depress the turnout of voters, including minority voters. The vast majority of voters of all parties, races, and ethnic backgrounds support such a requirement, which increases public confidence in the integrity of elections.
- Require all individuals who register to vote to provide documentation establishing that they are U.S. citizens. States have an interest in preventing dilution of the votes of their citizens at the state level and must maintain citizen-only voting rolls for federal elections. When a state issues a driver’s license to a noncitizen who is in the country legally or illegally, the license should indicate on its face that the holder is not a U.S. citizen.
- Require state and local election officials to verify the accuracy of new voter registration information against other available state and federal databases. Section 303 of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2001 requires states to coordinate their voter registration lists with “other agency databases” and to “verify the accuracy of the information provided on applications for voter registration.” Some election officials are not complying with this law and not verifying new voter registration information against other available databases, such as Department of Motor Vehicles driver’s license records and Social Security Administration records. Legislators should implement this requirement as a state law to ensure that their state election officials will follow this commonsense requirement.
- Require individuals who register by mail to vote in person the first time they vote. Section 6 of the National Voter Registration Act allows states to implement such a requirement, although it cannot apply to any voter entitled to vote by absentee ballot under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act or the Voting Accessibility of the Elderly and Handicapped Act.
- Require all individuals who register to vote by mail-in forms, whether mailed back to election officials or hand-delivered by the individual or third-party organizations, to comply with the applicable HAVA provision. HAVA requires persons who register to vote by mail and who have not previously voted in a federal election to provide a copy of certain identification documents when they register or the first time they vote, but some states have interpreted this to apply only to voter registration forms received through the mail and not to such forms when they are delivered through other means.
- Require all third-party organizations that conduct voter registration drives to write the name of their organization, as well as that of the volunteer or employee handling each registration, on the voter registration form and that all completed forms be returned to election officials within 10 days of the date on which the forms are signed by the person registering. This would allow election officials to identify which organization and individual handled voter registration forms that are found to be incomplete or fraudulent and to ensure that completed registration forms are provided to election officials on a timely basis so that they can be properly processed before the state’s pre-election registration deadline.
- Require all state courts to notify election officials when individuals whose names are drawn from the registration rolls are excused from jury duty because they are not U.S. citizens or no longer live in the jurisdiction. This would allow local election officials to remove ineligible voters and refer them for possible prosecution. Running data comparisons between voter registration addresses and property tax rolls is also recommended to detect individuals who are registering illegally at commercial addresses or vacant lots.
- Require the state to enter into agreements with other states, such as the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program, to compare voter registration lists to find people who are registered in more than one state. Because there is no national voter registration list, it is relatively easy for individuals to register in more than one state without detection. Such agreements are critical to detecting and deterring double registration and possible double voting.
1/19/21 - Election Fraud: More Evidence and Consequences
The pace of news about election fraud has slowed down, thankfully. Now the real work of analyzing what happened and how to assure free and fair elections going forward can begin. But today I go over the most recent stories describing the state of the evidence of election fraud in the November election, evidence that the major news outlets ignored and the Democrats want to sweep under the rug.
There’s a video showing election officials in Atlanta having a very strange conversation about ‘needing 3,000’, ‘pulling out boxes’, ‘unlocking the machines’, and ‘doing our thing’. If everything were on the up and up, they wouldn’t be having this conversation.
There’s a photo of a Wisconsin absentee ballot where the voter signature and the witness signature are the same. The ballot was counted.
That’s just a single vote, you say? Well, Trump advisor Peter Navarro published Parts 2 and 3 of his report describing mountains of evidence of election fraud.
Part 3 analyzes statistical anomalies in the election results. Part 2 describes various strategies the Democrats used to game the election, strategies like ballot harvesting and removing election safeguards.
Of greater interest for present purposes is Part 1 which talks about the bribery, fake ballots, elder abuse, ineligible voters, people who voted in multiple states, dead voters, and counting ballots multiple times - all occurring in key states.
Saying there is no evidence of election fraud isn’t going to cut it. You have half the country thinking the election was stolen. The other half that likes the result had better start seriously thinking about what it would really mean to live - and suffer - under one-party rule. If one party can rig every election in the future using techniques they perfected in 2020, then the first question will be how bad the corruption is going to get. I’ll take up the unlivable consequences of one-party rule in future commentaries.
1/8/21 - Numbered Ballots
We were warned. Jimmy Carter and James Baker headed up a bipartisan commission on election reform in 2005. They wrote a report urging all states to adopt voter ID laws, not use mail-in balloting, outlaw ballot harvesting by third parties, and clean up their voter rolls. They also said election observers should be allowed to monitor ballot-counting unhindered, and that electronic voting machines should be accurate. The Left must have taken all this as a roadmap because all these vectors to fraud cast a cloud over the 2020 election results. Meanwhile, the political Right fell down on the job and steadily allowed election integrity to deteriorate to the point we now have half the country calling Joe Biden an illegitimate president because of election fraud.
The fraud we saw this time around is a result of the Democrats’ deliberate strategy to weaken election safeguards. They filed almost 300 lawsuits all over the country, including the key battleground states, to institute universal mail-in balloting without legislative authority, loosen the restrictions on mail-in balloting, extend early voting, eliminate signature verification and witness requirements, ramp up ballot harvesting, get rid of voter ID laws, and allow Democrat voters to cure defects in their mail-in ballots. It’s as if Democrats read the 2005 bipartisan report as a manual on how to steal elections.
One key reform I am exploring is the common sense idea of issuing numbered ballots and instituting internal controls to track the disposition of every single one. With numbered ballots, you couldn’t have thousands of fake ballots trucked in from out of state or China in the middle of the night. Like I said, common sense. A proposal for numbered ballots will soon be put forth in North Dakota. The ballots would be pre-numbered in a range only the state would know, preventing others from printing ballots and shipping them in. Voters can go to a state website the next day, put in their number, and view their ballot to make sure it was recorded correctly. Sounds like common sense to me. My election integrity group is putting together a short list of election reforms all uncorrupted people can get behind and numbered ballots may be high on the list.
1/7/21
Only One Reason (Election Fraud)
The election may be over, but I’m not done talking about election fraud, not by a long shot.
The claim is being made mail-in ballots were received in the 2020 election that were filled in by machine, not individuals as they are supposed to be. If true, it would be another dimension of election fraud. Where are the internal controls that would prevent processing ballots filled in by machine?
Voter data shows over 4,700 absentee voters in the presidential election in Georgia gave non-residential locations for their address. Why are voters allowed to register at non-residential addresses? Can you say with any confidence they are real voters? Or is there a real possibility they are phony made-up voters whose only purpose is to steal elections?
Absentee ballots were also a problem in Wisconsin. Many were accepted without the proper information required on the certificates. This is illegal.
Wisconsin also eliminated safeguards when it mailed ballots to nursing homes, instead of having voting deputies deliver them in person. Democrats have a long history of committing voter fraud in nursing homes.
Why is government doing such a bad job on elections? Why do Democrats want to tear up every election safeguard they can? Two excellent questions, and they’re not going away.
Earlier this week, I argued there is only one reason Democrats want to dismantle voter ID and other election safeguards. They want to steal elections. I listened as President Trump said exactly the same thing to the crowd at the rally in Washington yesterday:
“There’s only one reason the Democrats could possibly want to eliminate signature matching, oppose voter ID and stop citizenship confirmation.... Because they want to steal the election.”
He went on to say: “We want voter ID by the way. But no longer is there signature verification, 11 days before the election! They say, ‘We don’t want it.’ You know why they don’t want it? Because they want to cheat. That’s the only reason.”
The Democrats have been telling us for years that anyone interested in election integrity is trying to suppress votes. That’s crazy-talk. Here’s the issue as I see it: Why do Democrats want to strip away every election safeguard they can get their hands on? There’s only one reason. They want to steal elections. That’s the issue, and its past time the Democrats speak to it. Tell us why it’s a good thing not to ask voters for identification, not to verify signatures, and for everyone to vote even if they’re not eligible. Why is that a good thing, Democrats? Let’s hear it. Let’s hear you defend the indefensible.
1/5/21
Invasion of the Election Snatchers
Today we take a look at more evidence the election snatchers don’t want you to see, then wrap up with a comment about the inability of our institutions to deal with stolen elections.
More than 12,000 more mail-in ballots were returned in Pennsylvania than were officially sent out. How is that possible?
Multiple absentee ballots returned in Houston all had the same signature and the same address. If there’s an innocent explanation for that, I’d like to hear it.
After the forensic examination showing a 68 percent error rate in the Dominion voting machines in Antrim County, there was an audit by the Michigan Secretary of State’s office. During the audit, it was observed there were fewer ballots in the bin than were reported in a previous recount. A representative of the Secretary of State’s office then pulled out a bag of spoiled ballots and told audit volunteers to count them. This was recorded on video, as was the representative’s demand that the volunteers count over a hundred ballots that all had the same signature. Otherwise, the process couldn’t move forward, the representative said. Huh? What?
These three stories reinforce several conclusions about our electoral process. First, it’s a complete mess, another example of government doing its usual bad job at everything. Second, the process is broken and badly in need of reform. Where are the internal controls that would prevent counting more mail-in ballots than were sent out? Third, you are living the consequences of the Democrats shredding every election safeguard they can get their hands on. Attacking voter ID laws and dispensing with signature requirements - these are recipes for wholesale fraud and stolen elections.
Finally, it’s now abundantly clear our institutions are not any good at handling contested elections, and that’s another reason not to dismantle election safeguards. Fewer safeguards, more contested elections and distrust of election results, it’s that simple. Secretaries of State and state election boards are too partisan to be honest brokers. Courts don’t want to get involved in deciding elections, and maybe that’s a good thing. They’ll tell you you’re too early or too late with your complaints. They’ll refuse to look at the evidence or apply standard legal doctrine. Evidence is supposed to be viewed in the most favorable light and all inferences drawn in favor of the plaintiff to get past a motion to dismiss, but courts are intellectually dishonest and perform judicial backflips to shut election contests down. State legislatures won’t invoke their constitutional powers to decertify fraudulent results. They take the coward’s way out and just hold hearings, instead. And they have to be dragged kicking and screaming just to do that much. Congress critters make a big show and huff and puff a lot, but they aren’t serious. After the contested election of 1876, a commission was appointed and decided the next President, but making up new institutions on the spot is not a good answer. The only real answer is to keep election safeguards in place. The fewer contested elections the better. So says me, but I’m not just yakking. I’ve gathered a small group of people to start working on a short list of electoral reforms that should draw broad public support, and I will have more to say about this effort in the future.
1/4/21
The Okefenokee Swamp
I have zero confidence we will see a free and fair election in Georgia tomorrow. I will lay out the evidence of election fraud in Georgia reported over the holidays but, before I do, let me quickly list three round-ups of evidence from around the country, if you want to know just how silly the people who say there is no evidence of election fraud sound.
A round-up at FrontPage Mag describes how 100,000 absentee and mail-in ballots were returned one day after, the same day, and even before they were supposedly sent out in Pennsylvania. Tell me how that’s possible in a free and fair election.
A round-up at Economic War Room recalled how Barack Obama, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Chris Matthews all warned about the dangers of mail-in balloting without safeguards like signature verification. So why were safeguards deliberately removed for the 2020 election?
A group of independent scientists and experts reviewed the evidence and found unusual and unexplained vote dumps, all in favor of Joe Biden, occurring in 14 states. Where’s the innocent explanation for that? I haven’t seen it yet.
Now on to Georgia.
Election workers in Georgia were caught on video running ballots through machines several times. What’s the innocent explanation for this? Let’s hear it.
Authorities picked up and shredded fake ballots from a warehouse in Georgia, but not before investigative journalists managed to take samples and photos of the ballots. The Arizona firm that sent the fake ballots to Georgia has close ties to the Democrat Party. The fake ballots were addressed to an election official tied to the supposed water main break used to justify stopping the vote count and also to the termination of an election whistleblower.
Georgia officials still have not produced chain of custody documents for 600,000 absentee ballots put in 300 drop boxes around the state. This does not exactly inspire confidence in the run-off elections, since the same procedures will be used tomorrow.
A judge who is Stacey Abrams’ sister ruled that Georgians who have moved can still vote from their old address. The ruling is not surprising, given that Democrats shred every election safeguard they can get their hands on. It means that thousands of voters who have likely moved to other states will stay on Georgia’s voter rolls in tomorrow’s run-off elections. If that isn’t an invitation to voter fraud, I don’t know what is.
Several witnesses testified in a hearing in Georgia that Democrats altered military ballots to cheat in the 2020 election. Where’s the innocent explanation for that?
The Georgia Senate Election Subcommittee unanimously concluded that the "November 3, 2020 election was chaotic and the results cannot be trusted."
What on earth is going on in Georgia? Is it corruption as has been alleged, or just the government doing its usual bad job at everything?
This is why it burns my cork to hear powerful nincompoops like Chuck Todd and Jake Tapper call people who challenge obviously fraudulent election results “arsonists” and ‘seditious’. Here’s what’s seditious: systematically dismantling every election safeguard you can. There’s only one reason you would want to do that - to steal elections. Only one reason state officials would change all the rules without legislative authority before the election. Only one reason why Democrats in Virginia would get rid of the state’s voter ID law. Only one reason to throw Republican election observers out of the vote counting center in Detroit. Only one reason to bully nursing home residents into voting for Biden against their will. Only one reason to implement a pervasive cash-for-votes scheme in Ilhan Omar’s district directed by her staff. Only one reason to adopt voting machines that have used to steal elections in other countries. Only one reason to use voting machines that automatically generate a 68 percent error rate you can fill in any way you want. Only one reason: You want to steal elections, plain and simple. But here’s my message to you, as I’ve said before - it’s a banana republic, if you can keep it.