Category Archives: chicanery

AJC Must-Read: “Secret report finds flaw in Georgia voting system, but state shows no interest”

Mark Niesse for the AJC:

A confidential report alleges that hackers could flip votes if they gained access to Georgia’s touchscreens, drawing interest from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Louisiana election officials and Fox News.

One key agency hasn’t asked the court to disclose the report: the Georgia secretary of state’s office.

There’s no sign that state election officials have done anything about the vulnerability, a potential flaw dangerous enough to be kept under seal, labeled in court as “attorneys’ eyes only” six months ago.

The vulnerability hasn’t been exploited in an election so far, according to examinations of the state’s Dominion Voting Systems equipment, but election security experts say it’s a risk for upcoming elections this year. Investigations have repeatedly debunked allegations of fraud in the 2020 election.

Georgia election officials won’t say what actions they’ve taken, if any, to improve security or detect tampering. State election officials declined to answer questions about the flaw, which was discovered as part of a lawsuit aimed at forcing the state to abandon its $138 million voting system that prints out paper ballots and instead use paper ballots filled out by hand.

Several election integrity advocates said Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger shouldn’t ignore the issue, even if he believes existing protections would prevent illicit access to voting equipment.

“It’s really concerning that the Georgia secretary of state and Dominion are kind of putting their head in the sand,” said Susan Greenhalgh, an election security consultant for plaintiffs suing over Georgia’s voting system. “Common sense would say you would want to be able to evaluate the claims and then take appropriate action, and they’re not doing any of that.”….

he vulnerability was first alleged in sealed court documents in July by Alex Halderman, a computer science professor at the University of Michigan. As an expert for plaintiffs in the election security lawsuit, Halderman gained access to Georgia voting equipment for 12 weeks and produced a 25,000-word secret report.

Halderman found that malicious software could be installed on voting touchscreens so that votes are changed in QR codes printed on paper ballots, which are then scanned to record votes, according to court documents. QR codes aren’t readable by the human eye, and voters have no way to know whether they match the printed text of their choices.

The vulnerability could be exploited by someone with physical access to a voting touchscreen, such as a voter in a polling place, or by an attacker who used election management system computers, Halderman said. A hacker in a polling place could only target one touchscreen at a time, limiting the number of votes that could be changed, but an attack on election management systems could have a broader impact.

“It is important to recognize the possibility that nefarious actors already have discovered the same problems I detail in my report and are preparing to exploit them in future elections,” Halderman wrote in a September declaration. Halderman has said there’s no evidence that Dominion voting machines changed votes in the 2020 election.

Georgia election officials have previously said their security precautions keep elections safe, though they won’t discuss Halderman’s findings in the ongoing court case….

An expert for the state, University of Florida computer scientist Juan Gilbert, said Georgia’s election audit process, which reviews the printed text of voters’ choices, would expose inconsistencies between QR codes and the text. Gilbert declined to comment on Halderman’s allegation but has previously addressed protections from hacking.

“If QR codes are inconsistent with the human-readable portion of the ballot, this will be detected during the (risk-limiting audit) and may signal a full manual recount,” Gilbert wrote in a November 2019 court declaration. “The general statement that computers can be hacked is no justification to remove all computers from any type of interaction with voting and election systems.”

But others say audits would be inadequate because they might not detect fraud on a small number of ballots that could swing a close election.

Share this:

“Former Pa. Treasurer Barbara Hafer’s PAC collected $2.3 million from investments, paid daughter $500K since she left office”

Nice work if you can get it dep’t:

In the 17 years since Barbara Hafer served in elected office, she’s all but disappeared from Pennsylvania politics.

A Republican elected four times to statewide office, she was never again on a ballot after switching parties and leaving the state treasurer’s office in 2005. Her 2017 guilty plea on charges that she lied to federal agents during a public corruption case has even barred her from holding public office in the state again.

But for nearly two decades, Hafer’s political action committee has not only remained open, it’s been thriving.

And what it’s being used for is a troubling practice benefitting Hafer’s daughter, according to a Caucus review of the committee’s reports and interviews with campaign finance experts and reform activists.

Since she left office, Hafer’s committee has collected $2.3 million — not from donors, but from investments that she made with her donors’ money.

Investing campaign cash is rare but legal in Pennsylvania and federally. What’s concerning, experts say, is that the committee has paid Bethany Hafer, who serves as the committee’s treasurer, a monthly consulting fee for the last decade that’s amounted to more than $500,000. Other expenses totalling more than $35,000 were listed as car and cell phone payments.

Pennsylvania’s election law requires that all campaign expenses be made “for the purpose of influencing the outcome of an election.”

The Friends of Barbara Hafer committee’s expenses, however, were made as neither Barbara nor Bethany Hafer were publicly considering running for any office, as Barbara Hafer was in the midst of a criminal case and as the committee significantly slowed down its contributions to other political campaigns

Share this:

Georgia: “Fulton judges greenlight special grand jury for Trump probe”


The judges on Fulton County’s Superior Court bench on Monday cleared the way for a special grand jury to be used for District Attorney Fani Willis’ investigation of former President Donald Trump and his efforts to overturn Georgia’s 2020 election results.

Chief Judge Christopher S. Brasher wrote that a majority of the judges had agreed to the request issued by Willis’ office late last week.

The special grand jury will be impaneled May 2 and can continue for a period “not to exceed 12 months,” Brasher wrote in an order.

“The special purpose grand jury shall be authorized to investigate any and all facts and circumstances relating directly or indirectly to alleged violations of the laws of the State of Georgia,” Brasher wrote.

Share this:

“Texas man charged with threatening election, government officials in Georgia”

Washington Post:

The Justice Department on Friday arrested a Texas man and charged him with threatening election and other government officials in Georgia, in the first case brought by a task force formed over the summer to combat such threats, according to court records and a department spokesman.

In an indictment, prosecutors alleged that Chad Christopher Stark posted a message on Craigslist on Jan. 5, 2021, saying it was “time to kill” an elections official, whose name is not included in the court documents.

“Georgia Patriots it’s time for us to take back our state from these Lawless treasonous traitors. It’s time to invoke our Second Amendment right it’s time to put a bullet in the treasonous Chinese [Official A]. Then we work our way down to [Official B] the local and federal corrupt judges,” Stark wrote, according to the indictment.

Share this:

Nothing to See Here, Folks, Dep’t: “Top GOP lawmaker relied on secret maps, later destroyed, NC gerrymandering trial reveals”

Charlotte Observer:

A political trial that has mostly been dominated by math and academic research erupted in drama late Wednesday, when a top Republican redistricting leader said on the witness stand that he had used secret maps, drawn by someone else, to guide his work.

That statement, made under oath, appears to directly contradict what he told Democratic lawmakers at the legislature in November, shortly before the Republican-led legislature passed those maps into law over Democrats’ objections.

A Durham Democrat and former judge, Rep. Marcia Morey, asked the GOP redistricting leader, Rep. Destin Hall, at the time if he had used any outside materials to help in drawing the maps. Hall said no.

On Wednesday, on the witness stand, he said he did — although under cross-examination by attorney Allison Riggs, Hall denied relying on the maps too much. He called them “non-consequential.”…

But on Wednesday Hall, a Lenoir Republican who leads the House redistricting committee, said that he would sometimes refer to “concept maps” that his top aide, Dylan Reel, had brought to him. Sometimes

Reel would bring the maps up on his phone for Hall to look at while drawing the official version of the map, Hall said in a deposition just before the trial, details of which came out during his testimony Wednesday.

Other times they would meet in a back room, to discuss the maps away from the public mapmaking terminals which were livestreaming video and audio. So the liberal challengers in the lawsuit asked if they could see those concept maps — to analyze them, potentially for signs that they used a process that violated the rules the legislature was supposed to be following.

But the legislature says those maps no longer exist.

Share this:

“Committee investigating Jan. 6 attack plans to begin a more public phase of its work in the new year”


The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol plans to begin holding public hearings in the new year to tell the story of the insurrection from start to finish while crafting an ample interim report on its findings by summer, as it shifts into a more public phase of its work.

The panel will continue to collect information and seek testimony from willing witnesses and those who have been reluctant — a group that now includes Republican members of Congress. It is examining whether to recommend that the Justice Department pursue charges against anyone, including former president Donald Trump, and whether legislative proposals are needed to help prevent valid election results from being overturned in the future.

“We have to address it — our families, our districts and our country demand that we get as much of the causal effects of what occurred and come up with some recommendations for the House so that it won’t ever happen again,” committee Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) said in a recent interview.

The committee has taken in a massive amount of data — interviewing more than 300 witnesses, announcing more than 50 subpoenas, obtaining more than 35,000 pages of records and receiving hundreds of telephone leads through the Jan. 6 tip line, according to aides familiar with the matter who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe details of the panel’s work….

“I think we may issue a couple reports and I would hope for a [full] interim report in the summer, with the eye towards maybe another — I don’t know if it’d be final or another interim report later in the fall,” said a second senior committee aide.

The five teams behind the investigation have begun to merge their findings. The topics include: the money and funding streams for the “Stop the Steal” rallies and events; the misinformation campaign and online extremist activity; how agencies across the government were preparing for the Jan. 6 rally; the pressure campaigns to overturn the election results or delay the electoral certification; and the organizers of the various events and plans for undermining the election.

Investigators said they are also pursuing questions outside of these lanes, including how Trump has been able to convince so many of his supporters that the election was stolen despite having no evidence to support that claim.

“I think that Trump and his team have done a pretty masterful job of exploiting millions of Americans,” said the second senior committee aide. “How do you get that many people screwed up that deeply? And continue to screw them up? Right? And what do we do about that? So there are some big, big-picture items that go well beyond the events of [Jan. 6] that the committee is also grappling with.”

Investigators have consulted with experts as they attempt to understand what might have happened if the electoral count was not completed that day and “we ended up in a constitutional gray zone,” said the first senior committee staffer.

With this in mind, the panel is expected to recommend legislative and administrative changes. Members have begun reviewing the Electoral Count Act, the 19th century law that dictates the procedure for counting electoral votes during a joint session of Congress. Legal scholars across the political spectrum have said the law is in need of reform.

Share this:

Some Skeptical Thoughts About “The Vote Collectors,” A New Book About Election Fraud in North Carolina’s Bladen County (Rerun 2018 Congressional Election in NC-09)

I just had a chance to read The Vote Collectors, by journalists Michael Graff and Nick Ochsner. I found it unsatisfying and I want to write a bit about why.

About two thirds of the book is an examination of alleged election fraud by McCrae Dowless and others in Bladen County and surrounding areas during the 2016 and 2018 elections. It also deals a fair bit with the Bladen County Improvement Association (also the subject of a recent podcast series by Serial’s Zoe Chace). The middle of the book gives earlier history about early voting disputes in North Carolina, with an emphasis on terrible acts of race discrimination and violence against African-Americans. (That second part seems weirdly out of place in the rest of the book.)

I was interested in reading the book because these authors had exclusive access to interview McCrae Dowless, who was at the center of the illegal ballot collection scheme (and is awaiting trial on voter fraud charges for both the 2016 and 2018 races; he was sentenced to six months for social security fraud for not reporting his income as a political consultant ). It’s clear from reading the book that Dowless ingratiated himself with the authors.

In the end, the authors offer no new insights on whether Dowless engaged in illegal activity (“Were ballots taken from voters illegally in Bladen County in 2018. Yes, we know that some low-level workers took ballots. Was McCrae Dowless actively and knowingly directing them to do that? We don’t know. He swears not. The best evidence to support it is in the words of people like Lisa Britt and others who have a history of drug abuse and other criminal offenses and who’d have reasons to give investigators what investigators hope to find.”). It strains credulity to believe that the desperate workers Dowless hired, often for things like gas money, collected ballots not at his direction.

The book also does not really explain how prevalent such schemes are in Bladen County (it discusses allegations that the Improvement Association engaged in similar conduct, but doesn’t offer its own evaluation of such evidence or bring new evidence) or in other counties (there is innunendo about problems in other counties, but nothing solid is offered). That of course matters for the bigger questions about election fraud in the U.S. (My sense, as I wrote in Election Meltdown, is that such schemes are quite rare, but most likely to happen in poor, rural areas where press coverage and oversight are scarce.)

In the end, the book is fodder for whatever people want it to be—that fraud can happen, and maybe it happens on a broad scale, but no one knows anything. I think the book will be used both in an attempt to exonerate Dowless and to make the claim that such fraud is so hard to find that therefore we need to make voting harder to stop even the risk of such fraud.

Share this:

“Kanye West’s ‘Independent’ Campaign Was Secretly Run by GOP Elites”

Daily Beast:

New documents show Kanye West’s doomed White House campaign—styled as an “independent” third-party effort—appears to have disguised potentially millions of dollars in services it received from a secretive network of Republican Party operatives, including advisers to the GOP elite and a managing partner at one of the top conservative political firms in the country.

Potentially even more alarming? The Kanye 2020 campaign committee did not even report paying some of these advisers, and used an odd abbreviation for another—moves which campaign finance experts say appear designed to mask the association between known GOP operatives and the campaign, and could constitute a violation of federal laws.

At the heart of Kanye’s political operation was Holtzman Vogel, one of the most powerful and well-connected law firms serving major Republican political and nonprofit organizations today. And weaved throughout his campaign, whether the multi-platinum rapper realized it or not, were Republican operatives who may have been less interested in seeing a President West than in re-electing President Donald Trump.

Paul S. Ryan, vice president of government watchdog Common Cause, called the revelations “a big deal.”

“The importance of disclosure in this matter can’t be overstated,” Ryan told The Daily Beast. “It’s no secret that Kanye West’s candidacy would have a spoiler effect, siphoning votes from Democrat Joe Biden. Voters had a right to know that a high-powered Republican lawyer was providing legal services to Kanye—and federal law requires disclosure of such legal work.”

Federal disclosures also show the campaign enlisted legal services from an array of firms with links to Trump and the Republican Party—including leading voter fraud conspiracy theorists and more than a half-dozen legal practices which went on to push baseless election fraud lawsuits on behalf of Trump or the GOP.

In fact, Holtzman Vogel played key roles in those efforts. They represented Trump in a Pennsylvania lawsuit in late September, while advising the West presidential campaign—advice which at one point included Pennsylvania ballot strategy. The firm is also tied to the Honest Elections Project, which has been involved with voter-suppression efforts.

The former “Birthday Party” contender’s campaign even paid roughly $60,000 to one of those firms—Minnesota-based Mohrman Kaardal—in early December, when it filed a baseless election fraud lawsuit. The suit was ultimately rejected with such vigor that it nearly cost the attorneys their license to practice. That outfit worked with another election challenging group, the Amistad Project, a function of Thomas More Society, which employed Trump attorney and Rudy Giuliani protégée Jenna Ellis. Kanye 2020 retained the firm within days of the Amistad Project’s August launch.

Share this:

“The Jan. 6 puzzle piece that’s going largely ignored”


As Donald Trump and his allies squeezed then-Vice President Mike Pence to single-handedly stop Joe Biden’s presidency in the weeks ahead of Jan. 6, they used one particular tool that’s been largely ignored ever since.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) sued Pence on Dec. 27, just as Trump was ratcheting up his pressure campaign against his vice president. Backed by a squad of lawyers associated with Trump ally and conspiracy theorist Sidney Powell, Gohmert argued Pence should assert unilateral control over certification, governed only by the vague wording of the Twelfth Amendment.

Pence allies have long believed that Trump played a role in Gohmert’s legal strategy, and they’ve indicated that Trump was frustrated that the Justice Department intervened to defend his vice president against Gohmert’s suit. But what remains unknown is just how involved Trump was in Gohmert’s legal strategy. A spokesperson for the former president did not respond to a request for comment.

And while it’s unclear whether the Jan. 6 select panel is probing the genesis of Gohmert’s suit — which was quickly rejected by federal district and appellate courts in Texas — one committee member described it as an important episode in the runup to the violence at the Capitol.

“It’s a significant detail in that it was part of a plan to isolate and coerce Pence,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.).

A litany of new details about Trump’s pressure campaign against Pence have emerged in recent weeks. Those include memos from Trump attorneys John Eastman and Jenna Ellis that lay out fringe legal rationales for halting certification, as well as proof of further public and private force exerted by Trump himself. Gohmert’s suit is rarely mentioned in the publicly available pre-Jan. 6 timetable.

Share this:

NYT Deep Dive: “Meadows and the Band of Loyalists: How They Fought to Keep Trump in Power”

Must-read with the subhead: “A small circle of Republican lawmakers, working closely with President Donald J. Trump’s chief of staff, took on an outsize role in pressuring the Justice Department, amplifying conspiracy theories and flooding the courts in an attempt to overturn the 2020 election.”

Share this:

“The military-intelligence veterans who helped lead Trump’s campaign of disinformation”


During the Afghan and Iraq wars, the careers of two military officers often intersected. Army General Michael Flynn and an Army Reserve colonel named Phil Waldron worked together on secret projects in both countries, Waldron said. When Flynn was appointed to run the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency in 2012, Waldron said he worked at the DIA’s clandestine service.

Flynn was an intel expert. Waldron’s specialty was psychological operations, or PSYOPs – targeting foreign adversaries, as an Army field manual describes, “to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately, the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”

Now the two military veterans, along with at least two other retired and reserve officers, are engaged in a new mission, this time with a domestic target: They are central to the far-right effort to persuade Americans that the 2020 election was stolen from then-President Donald Trump.

For the past year, Flynn, Waldron and other intelligence veterans have helped propagate some of the outlandish theories undercutting Americans’ faith in democracy. They pitched false accusations to lawmakers and the public about how the election had been compromised, pushed spurious lawsuits to challenge its outcome, and bankrolled efforts to conduct partisan audits of the results. They provided briefings to members of Congress on methods for overturning the election, and worked aside some of the leading actors in Trump’s “Stop the Steal” movement.

“I think we’re doing a huge service,” Waldron told Reuters in an interview.

In these efforts, Flynn, Waldron and their colleagues publicly touted their military-intelligence training, arguing that their expertise on the battlefield provided them special insight into alleged election fraud at home in America.

Share this:

“House Seeks Contempt Charge Against Meadows in Jan. 6 Inquiry”


The House voted on Tuesday night to recommend holding Mark Meadows, who served as chief of staff to former President Donald J. Trump, in criminal contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with its investigation into the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, escalating a legal battle against a potentially crucial witness in a widening inquiry.

The vote of 222 to 208 sent the matter to the Justice Department to consider whether to prosecute Mr. Meadows, who would be the first former member of Congress to be held in contempt of the body he once served in nearly 200 years, according to congressional aides.

Two Republicans — Representatives Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois, who serve on the committee investigating the attack over the objections of their party — joined Democrats in voting to find him in contempt.

But while the action indicated a stalemate between Mr. Meadows and Congress, his initial cooperation with the inquiry — including around 9,000 pages of documents he turned over — has already given the committee its first substantial burst of momentum and political traction as it tries to establish a full accounting of the events that led to the deadly riot.

More revelations emerged on Tuesday before the vote, as Ms. Cheney, the vice chairwoman of the committee, read aloud text messages that Republicans in Congress sent to Mr. Meadows on Jan. 6 as violence engulfed the Capitol.

“It’s really bad up here on the hill,” one said.

“The President needs to stop this asap,” another implored.

“Fix this now,” another said.

The committee also divulged a Nov. 4 message from an unidentified Republican member of Congress to Mr. Meadows — before states were even finished counting ballots — proposing an “aggressive strategy” in which Republican-controlled legislatures in Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and other states would “just send their own electors” instead of potential Biden electors chosen by voters.

“How did this text influence the planning of Mark Meadows and Donald Trump to try to destroy the lawful Electoral College majority that had been established by the people of the United States and the states for Joe Biden?” said Representative Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland and a member of the committee.

Share this:

Must-Read: “Far too little vote fraud to tip election to Trump, AP finds”


An Associated Press review of every potential case of voter fraud in the six battleground states disputed by former President Donald Trump has found fewer than 475 — a number that would have made no difference in the 2020 presidential election.

Democrat Joe Biden won Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and their 79 Electoral College votes by a combined 311,257 votes out of 25.5 million ballots cast for president. The disputed ballots represent just 0.15% of his victory margin in those states.

The cases could not throw the outcome into question even if all those votes were for Biden, which they were not, and even if those ballots were actually counted, which in most cases they were not.

The review also showed no collusion intended to rig the voting. Virtually every case was based on an individual acting alone to cast additional ballots….

The findings build on a mountain of other evidence that the election wasn’t rigged, including verification of the results by Republican governors….

Contacted for comment, Trump repeated a litany of unfounded claims of fraud he had made previously, but offered no new evidence that specifically contradicted the AP’s reporting. He said a soon-to-come report from a source he would not disclose would support his case, and insisted increased mail voting alone had opened the door to cheating that involved “hundreds of thousands of votes.”

“I just don’t think you should make a fool out of yourself by saying 400 votes,” he said.

These are some of the culprits in the “massive election fraud” Trump falsely says deprived him of a second term:

A Wisconsin man who mistakenly thought he could vote while on parole.

A woman in Arizona suspected of sending in a ballot for her dead mother.

A Pennsylvania man who went twice to the polls, voting once on his own behalf and once for his son.

The cases were isolated. There was no widespread, coordinated deceit.

The cases also underscore that suspected fraud is both generally detected and exceptionally rare.

“Voter fraud is virtually non-existent,” said George Christenson, election clerk for Milwaukee County in Wisconsin, where five people statewide have been charged with fraud out of nearly 3.3 million ballots cast for president. “I would have to venture a guess that’s about the same odds as getting hit by lightning.”

Even in the state with the highest number of potential fraud cases — Arizona, with 198 — they comprised less than 2% of the margin by which Biden won….

A state-by-state accounting:

—ARIZONA: Authorities have been investigating 198 possible fraud cases out of nearly 3.4 million votes cast, representing 1.9% of Biden’s margin of victory in the state. Virtually all the cases were in Pima County, home to Tucson, and involved allegations of double voting. The county has a practice of referring every effort to cast a second ballot to prosecutors, something other offices don’t do. In the Pima cases, only one ballot for each voter was counted. So far, nine people have been charged in the state with voting fraud crimes following the 2020 election. Six of those were filed by the state attorney general’s office, which has an election integrity unit that is reviewing an undisclosed number of additional cases.

—GEORGIA: Election officials in 124 of the state’s 159 counties reported no suspicious activity after conducting their post-election checks. Officials in 24 counties identified 64 potential voter fraud cases, representing 0.54% of Biden’s margin of victory in Georgia. Of those, 31 were determined to be the result of an administrative error or some other mistake. Eleven counties, most of them rural, either declined to say or did not respond. The state attorney general’s office is reviewing about 20 cases referred so far by the state election board related to all elections in 2020, including the primary, but it was not known if any of those overlapped with cases already identified by local election officials.

—MICHIGAN: Officials have identified 56 potential instances of voter fraud in five counties, representing 0.04% of Biden’s margin of victory in the state. Most of the cases involved two people suspected of submitting about 50 fraudulent requests for absentee ballots in Macomb, Wayne and Oakland counties. All the suspicious applications were flagged by election officials and no ballots were cast improperly.

—NEVADA: Local officials identified between 93 and 98 potential fraud cases out of 1.4 million ballots cast, representing less than one-third of 1% of Biden’s margin of victory. More than half the total — 58 — were in Washoe County, which includes Reno, and the vast majority involved allegations of possible double voting. The statewide total does not include thousands of fraud allegations submitted to the state by local Republicans. Republican Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske has said many of those were based “largely upon an incomplete assessment of voter registration records and lack of information concerning the processes by which these records are compiled and maintained.” It’s not known how many remain under investigation.

—PENNSYLVANIA: Election officials in 11 of the state’s 67 counties identified 26 possible cases of voter fraud, representing 0.03% of Biden’s margin of victory. The elections office in Philadelphia refused to discuss potential cases with the AP, but the prosecutor’s office in Philadelphia said it has not received any fraud-related referrals.

—WISCONSIN: Election officials have referred 31 cases of potential fraud to prosecutors in 12 of the state’s 72 counties, representing about 0.15% of Biden’s margin of victory. After reviewing them, prosecutors declined to bring charges in 26 of those cases. Meagan Wolfe, administrator of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, said the number of cases in 2020 was “fairly run of the mill.”

AP’s review found the potential cases of fraud ran the gamut: Some were attributed to administrative error or voter confusion while others were being examined as intentional attempts to commit fraud. In those cases, many involved people who sought to vote twice — by casting both an absentee and an in-person ballots — or those who cast a ballot for a dead relative such as the woman in Maricopa County, Arizona. Authorities there say she signed her mother’s name on a ballot envelope. The woman’s mother had died a month before the election.

The cases are bipartisan. Some of those charged with fraud are registered Republicans or told investigators they were supporters of Trump.

Share this:

“3 residents of The Villages arrested for casting multiple votes in 2020 election”

News from Florida:

Three residents of The Villages have recently been arrested as part of an ongoing investigation into voter fraud, court records show.

Jay Ketcik, Joan Halstead and John Rider are each charged with casting more than one ballot in an election, a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

The probe into the allegations of voting irregularities was initiated by the office of Sumter County Supervisor of Elections Bill Keen, according to prosecutors. Keen declined to comment about the cases, citing the ongoing investigation.

Ketcik, 63, is accused of voting by mail in Florida in October 2020 while also casting an absentee ballot in his original home state of Michigan, court records show.

Halstead, 71, voted in-person in Florida but also cast an absentee ballot in New York, prosecutors allege.

Ketcik and Halstead turned themselves in to the Sumter County jail on outstanding warrants, court records show….

All three are registered as Republicans in Florida, voter registration records show.

Facebook pages that appear to belong to Ketcik and Halstead contain several posts expressing support for former president Donald Trump….

Despite the recent arrests in Sumter County, very few Central Floridians have been prosecuted for casting multiple ballots, a News 6 review of court data reveals.

Between 2000 and 2020 there were no prosecutions for that statute in Brevard, Lake, Marion and Sumter counties, court data indicates.

Share this: