Election Manipulation and Fraud Alive and Well in Texas

For months now we have heard of and shared dozens of examples of voter fraud, ballot problems, harvesting ballots, buying ballots, and numerous other plots to impact the November 3 election results. Most of those surround the distribution and completion of mail-in ballots. But there are tens of thousands of examples of the actual manipulation of voters’ ballots that are often purchased, completed, signed, and submitted illegally.

“There’s no mass voter fraud. Any person that thinks someone can change votes that impact election results is wrong!” (former President Barack Obama in 2016)

Obama was wrong!

James O’Keefe of Project Veritas has been on the prowl looking for (and documenting) incidents of voter fraud and manipulation. Project Veritas journalists went undercover to expose ballot fraud in Minneapolis among the Somali immigrant population. A worker purportedly working for Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) was caught via hidden camera recounting how he and his charges harvested absentee ballots from Somali immigrants who live in three large multi-story apartment complexes. They sometimes even applied via mail for those immigrants. And when those requested absentee ballots were sent back, Omar’s “people” would go back and retrieve the ballots paying for them, then complete the ballots and return those to voter registration offices.

We then covered a story of massive ballot harvesting in Houston, Texas. In that plot, a group of people working for the Texas Director of the Joe Biden Campaign operation would conduct similar actions as have those in Minneapolis. How many ballots were at stake in Houston? It’s not known for certain, but they bragged on camera it was 700,000!

This week — again in Texas — a monstrous election fraud project in Texas was uncovered — once again by Project Veritas. This fraud has been conducted for years in the good old fashion way: buy votes. A journalist for Project Veritas went undercover and obtained actual unfettered access to the leader of this voter fraud operation, Raquel Rodriguez.

We’ll go undercover with Project Veritas and let you see and hear Rodriguez’s own words:

“Raquel Rodriguez was recorded with hidden camera explaining how she and her confederates pressure and reward targeted voters to meet the vote totals campaigns and candidates have contracted them to meet,” said James O’Keefe, the founder and CEO of Project Veritas.

“Raquel Rodriguez boasts about all the other political power brokers who are in her pocket, and she told our journalists she has already brought in 7,000 votes,” he said.  “If Rodriguez is truly responsible for 7,000 votes delivered in Bexar County so far, it is a stunning example of how fragile our republic has become,” O’Keefe said.

Rodriguez, a political operative who described herself as a ballot chaser, told Project Veritas undercover journalists, posing as potential clients, that one of her main jobs is helping Mauro Garza, the Republican House hopeful for Texas’ 20th District.  Garza, who owns San Antonio’s Pegasus nightclub, met with Rodriguez to discuss what she could do for him as he was launching his congressional campaign, she said.

“Mauro, right now, he said: ‘OK, Raquel, if you were running, what would you do?’  So, he sat me down, and I said: ‘I would do this, this, this, this, and this.’ He said: ‘How much money do you think you would need?’ And I budgeted everything, right? OK, so you do it,’” she said. “He was paying me $5,000 a month, but now he’s paying me $8,000 a month; why? Because I took on his extra jobs,” she said.

Garza’s campaign responds to Project Veritas probe, blasts Rodriguez.

After Tuesday’s release of the first part of the Project Veritas investigation into voter fraud in Texas, which exposed the corrupt practices of ballot chaser Raquel Rodriguez, GOP House hopeful Mauro Garza condemned those practices and said that Rodriguez was no longer working for his campaign.

“A former Mauro Garza campaign volunteer was recorded alleging voter fraud in our local elections. I welcome any investigation and accountability to expose these outlandish allegations.

I do not endorse or support any wrongdoing or voter fraud. If any member of my campaign team, paid or volunteer, engages in or gives the perception of any negligent behavior or threatens the integrity of voter registration or engages in voter fraud, they will be immediately fired and turned over to the County elections office and law enforcement. The volunteer in the investigative video no longer serves on my campaign. I hope that this story encourages the news media and legal authorities to investigate all evidence of voter fraud and suppression as it has been a rampant problem for decades in South Texas. I have been a long-time advocate for voter integrity and will continue my fight to make our voices as citizens heard, fairly and honestly.

All I can ask for is patience from our supporters and a thorough investigation to secure the integrity of our elections.”

Texas Republicans secretly working for Democrats

Rodriguez told a Project Veritas journalist she would not work for President Donald J. Trump. Rodriguez did not say directly that she was paid by former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s campaign or the campaign for Democratic Senate candidate Mary Jennings “MJ” Hegar. Still, she said she was working for both candidates, and she does not work for free. “Yeah, I’m getting the Biden vote out, but I mean I’m not going to do it for free — in other words, if they don’t pay me, I’m like excuse me?” she said.

“I’m against Trump. OK. I’m with Biden, and I’m with Hegar. That’s the truth,” she said. “I’ve got three Democrats; three Republicans, and the rest are Democrats.” Hegar is running against Republican Sen. John Cornyn III.

Rodriguez said it is not about party loyalty. It is about the money when a Project Veritas journalist asked about what it would take to hire her — and among her clients are Texas Republicans secretly helping the Democrats win, she said.

“My people are undercover because some of them are Republicans,” she said. “Some of them are Democrats. Some of them are just wanting to get the right people in office, so some of the Republicans are precinct chairs that cannot be known because they could get kicked out, but they want to help Biden — and so that’s how they’re helping me.”

Rodriguez said she was also hired to help candidates running for judge.

“So, those three judges that you’re talking about, and that’s her name? Renee Yanta, Nicole Garza, right? They’re paying me $3,500. Me, $3,500 to make sure that their name is on the ballot,” she said. Yanta is a Republican and Garza is a Democrat. Rodriguez even said she looks forward to judges, like Yanta, being in her debt. “Renee Yanta, she’s running for [judge], so the thing is, I’m going to have people like that with me, like in my pocket, you know what I’m saying?” she said.

Yanta denies she hired Rodriguez, Ramon to harvest ballots for her

Yanta told Project Veritas that she hired Raquel Rodriguez to help with her campaign, such as running an information table with workers wearing her campaign tee-shirts and holding signs. She said she hired Rodriguez on the recommendation of Joanne Ramon, who she also hired for her campaign — but then fired Ramon when she learned that Ramon was also working for her opponent. The candidate for judge said she was stunned that Rodriguez would speak about her being in her debt as a sitting judge. “I would never be in her debt, and I would never be in her pocket. I have run five campaigns. I have always run them ethically. I have always been a rule-of-law judge. It is extremely disturbing to me that she would say such a thing.”

Yanta said, “I did not hire either Joanne Ramon or Raquel Rodriguez or anyone else to chase ballots or for ballot harvesting.”

Rodriguez describes her ballot harvesting operation

O’Keefe said, “Rodriguez is more than just a political consultant. She directs a team of more than a dozen operatives, who act as hired guns for Republicans and Democrats looking to pay for votes.”

In one conversation with a Project Veritas journalist, Rodriguez said how much her services cost.

Raquel Rodriguez: “Let’s say $6 per vote, right? And I’m going to bring in 5,000 votes.”

Journalist: “5,000?”

Rodriguez: “5,000 votes, that’s county-wide.”

O’Keefe said Project Veritas journalists exposed election and voter fraud going on right now in real-time.

“We’ve just seen in our undercover reporting that a small handful of people can manipulate thousands of votes for one of the most important elections of our time,” he said.

“If we don’t stop this abhorrent illegal activity now, buying votes will become the new normal, and the voter’s right to choose will be a relic of the past,” he said.

Rodriguez helps Liz Campos

Another candidate Rodriguez said she agreed to help is Elizabeth Campos, the Democratic hopeful for the 119th District seat in the Texas House of Representatives.

“I told her: ‘Are you tired of losing?’ Because she lost twice, three strikes you’re out. I said: ‘You’ve never had me on your team.’ She said: ‘Let’s try it.’”

Rodriguez said she was committed to Campos — as long as Campos understood she owed her.

“And I brought her, listen to this, I brought her through the general, to the primary, and she was in runoff, and I got her out of the runoff. Now she couldn’t afford me. The average person would have said: ‘You know what, f*ck you, I’m not gonna help you run against your opponent.’ Do you know what I told her? ‘I respect you. You’re going to owe me — OK? Just remember what I am doing for you,’” she said.

Rodriguez said Campos was smart to take the deal. Early voting has become a wildcard, she said.

“She’s brilliant. She may have done it on purpose, but she knew she was going to win, but right now, they’re scared because of all the people that could have voted,” she said.

Another challenge, Rodriguez said, is working on the cheap, but other members of the team are not in on her deal with Campos.

“They don’t know how that’s going to go,” Rodriguez said. “But I told her like: ‘You know what? I’m pushing you as much as I can, but I can’t make everybody else push you because everybody else is getting paid.’”

Rodriguez said to a Project Veritas journalist that she would not work to re-elect President Donald J. Trump. But besides Garza, there are other Republicans she will help — such as state Sen. Peter P. Flores, who represents the 19th District.

Raquel Rodriguez: “The senator is Pete Flores.” 

Journalist: “Pete Flores.”

Rodriguez: “He’s a Republican; he’s going to win.”

Journalist: “OK, has he won already?”

Rodriguez: “Yeah, he’s already won.”

Journalist: “So, you’ve got Pete in your –“

Rodriguez: “He called me and said: ‘Raquel, what do you need?’ I told him I needed some face masks that he’s giving out; he gave me like, 22 dozen.”

Journalist: “You got Pete in the pocket.”

Rodriguez: “Pete in the pocket.”

Texas Attorney General Paxton launches investigation into ballot abuses 

Texas Attorney General W. Kenneth Paxton Jr. announced Monday that his Election Fraud Unit is probing the organized election fraud scheme exposed by Project Veritas.

“What’s shown in the video is shocking and should alarm all Texans who care about election integrity,” Paxton said. “We are aggressively investigating the serious allegations and potential crimes that Project Veritas’s documentary audio and video recordings shed light on today.”

Paxton said his office was fiercely committed to ensuring that the voting process is secure and fair in all Texas elections after the Project Veritas investigation casts a shadow of doubt on the integrity of the elections.

“Election integrity has been a top priority of mine since I first took office in 2015. Anyone who attempts to defraud the people of Texas, deprive them of their vote, or undermine the integrity of elections will be brought to justice and penalized to the fullest extent of the law,” he said.

O’Keefe said, “We hope the legal authorities in the state of Texas take note of this investigation — voter fraud and election fraud are real, and this country needs to wake up and do something about it.”


I’m sure there’s more: FAR more than what Project Veritas has uncovered; probably hundreds of thousands of votes. Where are they? Who are the guilty parties trying to steal these elections? How many votes and voters are actually impacted? We probably will never know. All we can do is commit to doing the right things ourselves and demand and then facilitate for our law enforcement folks to find, stop, and prosecute each and every person and organization responsible for the manipulation of and theft of voters’ rightful votes.

Today (Thursday) on “TNN Live,” we will play a portion of the undercover conversations secretly recorded between Rodriguez and a Project Veritas operative. Our show airs from 9:00 AM to 11:00 AM Central Time. Join our streaming radio show a few minutes before 9:00 AM by clicking on this link:


Stay tuned: I’m certain there will be much more!

Nancy Pelosi and Osama bin Laden’s niece : What a Pair!

It’s hard to believe, but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Osama bin Laden have something in common: they each have an opinion of Donald Trump! Without knowing either personally, it’s hard for me to confirm this factually. Still, based on the public statements and personas of each, I’m pretty sure the pair don’t find themselves on the Christmas card list of the other. And it’s doubtful they’ll be sharing Thanksgiving dinner.

So what’s this all about? Thursday, each weighed in with their thoughts about President Trump. While it certainly will come as no surprise that Nancy Pelosi despises Donald Trump and that she’ll do just about anything within her powers to remove him from the presidency, you just MIGHT be surprised at what she has up her sleeve today.

A “New” Arrow in Democrats’ Quiver

Pelosi made a dramatic announcement during her weekly press conference Thursday by telling reporters that she intends to discuss a constitutional measure to remove President Trump from office, following questions regarding Trump’s health as he recovers from coronavirus! The 25th Amendment allows the vice president to become acting president if it is determined that the president “is unable to discharge his office’s powers and duties.”

“Tomorrow, by the way, tomorrow, come here tomorrow,” Pelosi said. “We’re going to be talking about the 25th Amendment.”

Pelosi had earlier questioned the status of Trump’s health and exactly how long he has had COVID-19. “I think that the public needs to know the health condition of the President,” Pelosi said. “There’s one question that he refused to answer … when was his last negative test?” Pelosi said that this information is necessary to “make a judgment about the actions taken after that.”

“Let us see a date, a time when you last tested negative,” she added.

The 25th Amendment requires a declaration of the president’s inability from the vice president and either a majority of either the heads of executive branch departments “or of such other body as Congress may by law provide,” to be sent to the speaker of the House — in this case, Pelosi — and the president pro tempore of the Senate — currently Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). While the amendment allows for Congress to pass a law that would create a body to sign off on such a declaration, Pelosi would have to convince Senate Republicans to go along with it. Plus, Vice President Mike Pence would also have to sign the declaration as well, which would be highly unlikely.

So how is the President doing? During a Fox Business interview Thursday morning, Trump said that he is “feeling good,” and does not believe he is “contagious at all.”

During a recent interview on ABC News’ “This Week,” Pelosi discussed Trump’s nomination of a new Supreme Court justice to replace the late Justice  Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Pelosi gave a cryptic response when asked whether she and House Democrats would move to impeach the president or Attorney General Bill Barr to prevent the Senate from acting on the nomination. “We have our options. We have arrows in our quiver that I’m not about to discuss right now, but the fact is we have a big challenge in our country,” Pelosi said.

Are you somehow surprised? Is it shocking to hear the Speaker of the House — even if in jest, which it certainly was not — discuss the President’s removal with NO knowledge of anything to do with his physical or mental health. In doing so, Pelosi is ignoring the reports of the President’s health given by multiple doctors when at Walter Reed Medical Center and by his personal physician after his return to the White House.

The President is an American citizen. Every American must abide by every law duly passed by Congress and signed into law by the applicable president. In 1996 as part of the Balanced Budget Amendment Act, HIPPA was implemented as part of that law. What is HIPPA? “Health Information Protection and Portability Act.HIPPA is the section of that law that protects EVERYONE from any person accessing, transmitting, or using the private health information of anyone without the patient’s “expressed, written permission to do so.” I’m pretty certain President Trump has not and will not authorize for any of his personal health records to be given to Pelosi. Doing so would be the same as giving it to the World.

What is Pelosi doing? She knows this charade is not going to happen. And even if she attempts this process, it will fail and fail miserably.

She’s posturing politically!

My opinion: she KNOWS Trump is going to win. But there’s more than the presidency in play here: the House Speaker’s position is in play.

Do you remember when AOC and “The Gang” took on Pelosi after the 2018 midterm election? They wanted her gone from being Speaker. So Pelosi cut a deal with the hard-left in Congress — The “Gang.” That deal, among other things, included her promise to move the House of Representatives further to the left. That included allowing legislative bills that include leftist concepts such as Medicare for All, The Green New Deal, and even impeachment of Donald Trump several times if necessary. Pelosi agreed to it all to protect the House Speaker position.

So why such lunacy just ahead of the election? By pushing the possibility of a second impeachment — which she has done already — and now adding the attempt to remove Trump through the 25th Amendment, she can honestly say to the House leftist “Gang,” “I did my best. I tried hard through impeachment and even the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office, but I could NOT get enough support from members of Congress.” With those attempts, she feels she can quell any mutiny by AOC and “The Gang” to remove her as Speaker next year.

Don’t discount that idea! We know she’s smart and crafty. Couple those with her hatred for Trump, and Pelosi is willing to do just about anything to rid the nation of “President” Trump.

In fact, Speaker Pelosi said Thursday she’s backing a measure that would give Congress the power to determine whether the president is fit to remain in office by requiring him to undergo a medical exam.

Pelosi, will hold a press conference Friday to unveil “The Commission on Presidential Capacity to Discharge the Powers and Duties of Office Act.”

The bill, first introduced by Rep. Jamie Raskin in 2017, would create a commission appointed by Congress with the authority “to determine whether the President is mentally or physically unable to discharge the powers and duties of the office.” It would require the president to undergo a medical examination if ordered by a vote in the House and Senate.

Do you understand why she’s doing this? Her plan is principally to cover her left-wing base to attempt to preserve her Speakership. But she feels it simultaneously may make some voters who are on the fence about voting for Trump to reconsider.

Even if such a bill passes in the House it will never even make it to the floor of the Senate.

One really good thing popped up with this action:

Do you see now why a one-party system would destroy our nation?

180 Degrees Away…

Who would imagine that Osama bin Laden’s family member would support Donald Trump? But one is doing so now and has written another letter explaining that she receives more angst from Americans for her support of Trump than because she is the niece of Osama bin Laden!

Noor bin Laden took to ink and pen and authored another letter to Americans. But this time, it was to discuss Donald Trump and what is happening in America today. We publish it here because no one can better explain her feelings about Donald Trump and the United States.

In my experience, Americans are the warmest, most kind-hearted, and open-minded people in the world. I have found this to be true for my whole life, despite being the niece of Osama bin Laden and sharing the same last name (albeit spelled slightly differently — bin Ladin is the original translation). Americans base their judgment on the content of someone’s character and actions, not on their skin color — or their last name. This was reaffirmed last month after I voiced my love for America and support for President Trump. The response to ‘My Letter to America’ has been overwhelmingly wonderful, and I am most thankful to all those who took the time to read it and send kind messages, including Spectator readers. But in my private life, I have lost a few so-called friends for backing Donald Trump over the past five years. Coming out publicly was a step too far for some, and the vitriol I received for stating my political beliefs revealed unflattering sides to certain characters. From a sociological standpoint, it is quite interesting that in some elitist circles, being pro-Trump has caused me more grief than carrying the name bin Laden.

Even more striking were the contrasting reactions to President Trump’s COVID diagnosis. Gleeful comments devoid of compassion flooded social media, some even going as far as to wish for his death. Kim Jong-un showed more sympathy than many of the President’s detractors. Yet, for all the hate, there was an outpouring of love and well-wishes from his supporters. One take from a favorite Twitter account of mine (@HonorAndDaring) expressed it best: ‘Trump is the first and only President that I’ve actually cared about. That’s because he’s the first President in recent memory that seems to care more about Americans than an abstract ideology or just enriching his donors.’ Many Americans clearly feel this sentiment, who come out in droves for the President wherever he goes, including Walter Reed Medical Center during his stay: if he can’t hit the road, the rally comes to him.

And why do I support Donald Trump? Look at his record. He has stood up to China, kept America out of new wars, solidified ties with Israel, overturned the disastrous Iran deal, and obliterated Isis. Domestically, he removed handicapping regulations to American economic growth, rebuilt a depleted military, brought back manufacturing, and revamped dying industries by renegotiating trade deals and cutting taxes; he has achieved energy independence, curbed immigration — all of which contributed to setting record unemployment rates. He has tackled neglected issues such as human trafficking and unjust incarceration — and given America a chance at restoring her principles, pride, independence, and true place in the world as a beacon of liberty and hope for all.

I had intended to write this from London, but COVID quarantine restrictions prevented me from flying into the U.K. from Switzerland. I did try to skirt the rules, I admit, via neighboring countries, but to no avail. In proper Orwellian fashion, all traveling nowadays is monitored with mandatory governmental forms throughout Europe, even if your country isn’t on the quarantine list. I missed my goddaughter’s baptism as a result. Besides the sadness I felt from missing out on this, I thought of all those who couldn’t be with their loved ones before passing away during the lockdown, and was filled with dread at the prospect of what the future might hold: is the next step ‘no vaccine, no travel’?

At least I wasn’t subjected to a two-hour Black Lives Matter-themed play, The New Tomorrow at the Young Vic, unlike my friend who wasn’t so lucky last weekend. She was invited by a leftist friend of hers and, unknown to her before accepting the invitation, and the entire play was a BLM manifesto. Not surprisingly, she described the experience as a form of torture; her friend was enthralled. While I’m glad to miss out on London’s latest cultural trends, I was disappointed at having to cancel my reunion with friends — not least with Douglas Murray, whose book launch for The Madness of Crowds at the Spectator offices remains a firm highlight of last year.

Thankfully, these frustrations and let-downs are outweighed by hope, love, and trust. Seeing the uplifting images of Americans rallying around the President also warms my heart and lifts my spirits. I wish I could be there with them. You can be sure I’ll be on one of the first flights to America once restrictions are lifted — via London, to meet my goddaughter, of course.

Noor bin Laden

Trump Hollering About Voter Fraud is Simply Fulfilling American History

Seldom does a day go by now without some sordid tale of November 3rd mail-in or absentee ballots being found in a dumpster, in a ditch, or piled up beside the mass mail receptacle for a large apartment complex. We also hear horror stories — like the one from New York during a primary election this cycle — of mailed ballots being rejected by the tens of thousands for various reasons: voter signatures not matching, parts of the ballot completed incorrectly or left blank, and even some postmarked after election day or not postmarked at all.

These do not even consider the raunchy cases of mass ballot-harvesting that have already been proven, the ballots completed and turned in by the dead or by other than those whose ballots are presented. And then there are the mass coordinated ballot thefts, like the one just discovered in Harris County, Texas (Houston) that could include as many as 700,000 fraudulent ballots before finalization.

Despite what Democrats tell us, voter fraud is real, is historical, and is widespread. And voter fraud has existed throughout our nation’s history.

Voter Fraud is Real?

Donald Trump was making modern political history even before his COVID-inspired stay at Walter Reed Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland. By suggesting voter results could be fraudulent — and therefore invalid — the incumbent President was bombarding the historical election framework that, for more than 200 years, has eased the transition from one administration to another in the United States. There is no doubt Mr. Trump’s cries of voter fraud have been epic in number, constant, and LOUD!

Democrats and others on the Left have been just as insistent (and just as loud) in response to the President. They in unity proclaim that “there is no proof of any voter fraud! Even President Obama said that voter fraud in the American election system is impossible!” Yet, more than 300 voter fraud cases during the Obama eight-years have been investigated, documented, and prosecutions of the guilty took place.

So much for that Obama Administration “scandal-free” claim that Obama quietly stopped proclaiming in the past few months. I wonder why?

There has been nothing like Trump’s 2020 incessant shouts of voter fraud in living memory — other than Trump’s allegations of voter fraud after his 2016 win. But the United States certainly does have a history of messy politics — electoral fraud was as American as apple pie throughout the 19th and into the early 20th century. Since then it has been much less corrupt than it was before the 1920s. Ballot stuffing, repeat voting, Election Day violence, and the intimidation of entire populations were all familiar measures used in the bad old days, especially when racial issues were in dispute.

Take the election of 1876. The outgoing Republican president, Ulysses S. Grant, was surrounded by dirty politicians and bribe-takers. White Southerners were on fire with resentment for a decade over the fact that their ex-slaves that were freed by the Civil War results were allowed to vote. Some of them had even become politicians! Federal army forces stationed in the South protected these racially mixed groups against white terrorists like the Ku Klux Klan.

The Republican presidential candidate of 1876, Rutherford B. Hayes was a Union hero of the Civil War and was the governor of Ohio. His Democratic opponent Samuel Tilden had been a pro-Union Democrat in the 1860s and was now governor of New York. Both candidates had a reputation for honesty and for favoring good-government reforms. Nevertheless, they got caught up in what has been remembered ever since as the Corrupt Bargain of ’77.

Shortly after the election, the Electoral College declared that Tilden was just one vote short of the 185 he needed for victory. Hayes had only 165. Tilden also had a clear majority of the popular vote. However, in three Southern states — Florida, South Carolina, and Louisiana — both parties claimed victory and both asserted their right to the crucial 20 Electoral College votes that had not yet been included in the totals.

A commission made up of congressmen, senators, and Supreme Court justices tried to break the deadlock. It had one more Republican member than Democrat, which enabled it (voting on straight party lines) to give all the contested votes to Hayes. That made him the winner by just one: 185 to 184. Not until March 1, 1877, was the result finally announced, five months after Election Day. Are we looking at what might happen in 2020?

Behind the scenes, Republicans were looking for a way to lower the blow to the Democrats. Their answer was to promise an end to Reconstruction, the political movement that had struggled to transform race relations in the South over the previous and post-Civil War years. In exchange for getting their candidate into the White House, the Republicans promised to withdraw all remaining troops from the South. Hayes was sworn in on March 4. Within a month he ordered the military evacuation of the South.

The white Southern Democrats might have lost the White House but they amped-up their power at home, restoring white-only rule, intimidating black voters, and legislating in favor of racial segregation. They called themselves “the Redeemers,” and claimed to be rescuing their states from barbarism, while actually creating a society built on exclusion, intimidation, and lynching. For a few years, black lives had mattered, but now they were sacrificed to the needs of party politics. Not until the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, nearly a century later, did it become possible once more for African Americans to vote and to run for electoral office in the South.

President Hayes enjoyed just one term as president, during which running water and the first telephone was installed in the White House. His wife, Lucy, was a non-drinker, and the couple served no alcohol at official functions. One disappointed visitor to a presidential reception wrote later: “The water flowed like champagne.”

A group of northern Democrats, still sore at being cheated, created the “Potter committee,” named after its chairman Clarkson Nott Potter, to investigate election corruption in 1876. Telegrams were to the 1870s what emails are to the 2020s and the committee read hundreds of them, sent by party operatives during the 1876 campaign, usually in code. Unfortunately, the decoded telegrams disclosed widespread bribery of election officials — mostly by the Democrats — making it difficult for them to claim that they occupied the moral high ground.

Elections in the 1870s were very different from those of today. The turnout in 1876 was a whopping 80 percent and it was preceded by months of campaign parades, big public dinners, and speeches that often lasted well over an hour. Candidates had to speak with enough power, without microphones, that audiences in their thousands could hear them.

When it was time to vote, the ritual was as public as the campaigning. Voters who identified with a particular party would step forward holding brightly-colored tickets, showing their party affiliation, and place them in the ballot box in front of hundreds of onlookers. In those days, men who had bribed voters could be certain that they were getting value for money. Not until the 1890s would the secret ballot come along, dismaying many of those who witnessed earlier elections. The drama diminished in addition to the massive number of types of voter fraud.

Our Representative Republic depends on an honest count of the votes. Losers should certainly leave gracefully, while winners must promise that they will observe the rules when their terms end. Fraudulent elections, by contrast, endanger the nation itself, and, as the events of 1876 show, they can have horrible consequences that last decades into the future.


I’d certainly like to be grandiose and generous to President Trump and say that his chief concern in 2020 voter fraud is solely to assure our children and grandchildren that America’s historically ethical election system is pure and without scourge. Therefore it will continue into the future.

But I think President Trump wants to be “President” Trump for four more years!

That’s just my opinion. But, after all, shouldn’t election results be based solely on the final count of every vote cast in any election? Isn’t it appropriate for any American — not just President Trump — to demand that our government assure us all that every legal vote will be cast and that every vote cast will be legal?

Hey: there is no way for me to know the content of President Trump’s heart. Nancy Pelosi nor Chuck Schumer can possibly know its content either. But, in this case, the reason for the President’s howls about voter fraud seems to more and more each day be cries against real illegalities that are revealed regularly!

I hate to rub mud in the eys of any Trump-haters, but isn’t he as President supposed to make certain that all three branches of government are busy making certain the Peoples’ business is carried out within the exact parameters written in the U.S. Constitution?

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Even if a portion (or even in entirety) Mr. Trump is howling about voter fraud is to protect his serving a second term in office, isn’t he supposed to go after any voter fraud anyway?

And, God knows, there’s a bunch of it going on!

Some Democrat Party Leaders: Second-Thoughts on Mail-In Voting

Who would have thought it? It’s happening! There are finally some leaders in the Democrat Party who are questioning the wisdom of this massive push for Mail-In Voting. For reasonable thinkers, there has NEVER been any question that the process of mailing ballots to voters, voters filling them out in total and accurately, and then returning them in the proper format and method would be a nightmare experience. Yet these sycophantic Trump-haters, to tip the scales of partisanship in their favor, discarded reason and opted to ignore planning and preparation and said, “Let’s just force it down the throats of Americans!”  After initially singing the praises of voting by mail in the Nov. 3 elections, some Democratic Party leaders are reluctantly backing away from the idea as enthusiasm for that method of voting fades.

  • Pennsylvania’s Democratic Lt. Gov. John Fetterman blames Republicans for the declining interest in voting by mail, accusing them of exaggerating problems associated with sending ballots through the mail.
  • President Trump has been incredibly vocal in his criticism of voting by mail, asserting that it’s not secure and that ballots often get misdirected or fail to be delivered.
  • Some observers are concerned about whether a government agency, the U.S. Postal Service, long-criticized for its lack of efficiency, can handle an unprecedented onslaught of mail-in-ballots.
  • Also, experts say voting-by-mail is fraught with problems. That method of voting gives wrongdoers more significant opportunities for fraud compared to in-person balloting.

The bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, found in 2005 that “absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud” and that “vote-buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail.”

Reports of widespread problems with voting by mail may be forcing Democrats to change their tune.


In the 2020 primaries, more than 550,000 mail-in and absentee ballots were disqualified, much more than four years ago. The problem is especially severe in some swing states. More than 23,000 mailed ballots were rejected in the presidential primaries in Wisconsin — more than Donald Trump’s margin of victory in that state in 2016. Deep-blue districts have had the same problem: New York City alone threw out more than 84,000 ballots this primary season. Now party officials, mostly Democrats, are reportedly worried that too many people will vote on Election Day and overwhelm the systems in place, leading to unsafe crowding in the pandemic era and long lines.

“I’m getting people saying, ‘Screw it. I don’t want to vote by mail anymore. I want to do it in person.’ That’s what [Republicans] want,” Pennsylvania’s Lt. Governor Fetterman told The Intercept. “It’s truly diabolical. And I choose that word very deliberately. It’s diabolical. They know that you’ve got to bring everything: your ballot, the envelope, everything. If you don’t, you can’t vote. And most people don’t know that you can demand a provisional ballot. And if you do, that’s going to blow up the lines and create chaos.”

Quentin James, founder and president of the Collective PAC, told The New York Times that the GOP is trying to suppress voter turnout. “I’m concerned with Donald Trump and the Republican Party’s attempt to limit votes,” said James. “They’re afraid of the almost 5 million African-Americans who didn’t vote in 2016 coming out and voting.” His group reportedly intends to spend $7 million in large cities in battleground states to get out the black vote, focusing on in-person voting.

Interest in voting by mail has been sliding in recent months.

A Pew Research poll in springtime found “broad bipartisan support for voting by mail with almost 3 out of 4 Americans favoring universal access to absentee ballots,” according to NPR.

An NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll released September 18 found that among registered voters, 35 percent say they will vote by mail or absentee, down from 50 percent in May. Broken down by party affiliation, that’s 50 percent of Democrats, 25 percent of Republicans, and 32 percent of independents. These figures are lower than in May when 11 percent more Democrats said they would vote by mail or absentee. In May, the figures were 17 percent higher among Republicans, and 32 percent higher among Independents. In the poll, half of the voters specifically said they would vote in person on election day. The partisan breakdown is that 56 percent of Republicans said they would vote in person on Election Day, compared to 38 percent of Democrats and 3 percent from the “other” category. A Citizen Data poll from earlier the same month generated similar findings. Among all likely voters, 35 percent plan to vote by mail. Of those planning to vote in person, 34 percent plan to vote early in person, and 60 percent plan to vote in person on election day. The poll indicates Democrats are twice as likely to vote by mail as Republicans in the forthcoming election. Of Democrats, 61 percent intend to vote by mail, compared to 30 percent of Republicans.

Why the Rush for Mail-in Balloting?

We can only give suggested possibilities for answers to that question. But, at this point in the 2020 election process, the number of options is getting slimmer daily. Let’s “assume” a few of those possibilities:

  1. As given originally for the push for all mail-in voting, the motivation might be truthfully to protect voters and poll workers from the infection of COVID-19.
  2. The fear of COVID-19 will undoubtedly keep many from voting at all — many of those potential voters are elderly and will NOT risk COVID-infections in voting.
  3. Democrat Party voter registrations have dropped significantly, causing party leaders to push hard to find new voters quickly and “enhance” those voters’ abilities to vote, and not just to vote, but vote Democrats because “Democrats care more for average Americans than do Republicans.” That’s somewhat a “quid pro quo.”
  4. Last but certainly not least: As was discovered by the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, mail-in voting gives those who wish to “fix” elections far more opportunities to do so in mail-in voting than in-person or electronic voting.


Numbers one, two, and three, and four above, the first two seem to be the most benign suggestions for the sudden support of Democrats and the race to push mail-in for 2020. But it is becoming more evident daily that is NOT the purpose of Democrat Party leadership. Why? The single purpose for adjusting the way American voters cast their ballots should be based on only ONE thing: the guarantee voters every legal vote will count and NO vote cast illegally in any way will be counted.

That’s NOT the reason for these mail-in demands from Democrats.

How can I say that? Think about it: Democrat Party leaders and Democrats in Congress know that blowing up the current voting systems and replacing them with manual mail-in voting to achieve an honest objective is a massive undertaking. Any voting process for national elections must accommodate up to 200 million potential voters in any election! How could that be accomplished in less than one year?!

Number Four above is most likely the reason for this Mail-in voting demand.

Yes, that is opinion. But as soon as an expressed opinion is proven to be accurate, it automatically ceases to be a “conspiracy theory” or an “opinion.” To what does it morph? A Fact!

I’m not crazy about any U.S. leaders using (without any legal authority) a national system such as election voting itself as a partisan tool to alter the results of an election. Further, I am certain THIS election and what is at stake is considered by Democrats to be their last chance to intervene in this process to salvage their utopian dreams of some type of united government to serve globally instead of to serve America.

Their view that they can do this frightens me almost as much as the thought that they just might pull it off!

Let’s Hope We Actually Get an Accepted Election Result

Tuesday night’s debate between President Donald Trump and Joe Biden was a hopeless mess — a national embarrassment. For 90 minutes, two cantankerous old men ignored the rules, shouted over each other and ruined the event. Trump insulted Biden’s intelligence and his children. Biden told Trump to “shut up” and called him “a clown.”

The debate may prove useful in one sense, however — as a foretaste of the democratic meltdown that is coming America’s way after the election on November 3. Again, the rules of the contest will probably not be accepted, each side will certainly accuse the other of cheating and the whole occasion will probably turn into a disastrous farce.

If you think that’s unrealistic and, just listen to what our would-be leadership has been saying. A few weeks ago, Hillary Clinton offered an extraordinary piece of advice to her successor. “Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances,” she said. “I think this is going to drag out, and eventually I do believe he will win — if we don’t give an inch and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is.” She was referring not just to the election, but what could come after. Her scenario: election night is inconclusive, as postal votes flood in, and with them a debate about their legitimacy. It’s a debate she wants the Democrats to win. ‘We’ve got to have a massive legal operation,’ she said, “I know the Biden campaign is working on that.”

For his part, Donald Trump is also gearing up for this fight. “We have to be very careful with the ballots,” he said. “That’s a whole big scam.” A couple of weeks ago, he went even further, questioning not just the election’s legitimacy, but whether there would be a peaceful transfer of power afterwards. He reiterated that point in the debate, saying of the election: “This is going to be a fraud like you’ve never seen. This is not going to end well.”

Welcome to America in our “Election Soap Opera.” This brutal year has seen a pandemic lock us down, unrest ravage our streets, culture wars that seem intractable — and now the chilling possibility of an Election Day that leads to more chaos.

The big problem centers on the 80 million Americans who are expected to vote by mail this year — more than twice as many as last time — amid fears that polling stations could become coronavirus hotspots. Yet because such a deluge of postmarked ballots is unprecedented and thus untested, concerns have been raised as to how accurate the count will be.

Trump himself has warned of mail-in voting fraud. He’s pointed as evidence to New York’s primary elections on June 23, which featured an unusually high number of postmarked ballots due to the state’s status as a COVID epicenter. The results there were disquieting: weeks passed without winners being declared, and thousands of votes were believed to have been wrongly discarded.

What happened in New York has raised questions about the government’s ability to count mail-in votes accurately and speedily. Throw in a confusing patchwork of state-level rules, along with recent cuts to the U.S. postal service, and you can almost hear the challenges issuing forth, the candidates digging in their heels.

What happens if the election results are contested? The answer is that Americans will turn to one of their most cherished pastimes: not guns (not yet anyway) but lawsuits. Biden has said that his campaign has “put together 600 lawyers” and a team of volunteers, who will go “into every single state to try to figure out whether chicanery is likely to take place.” The GOP has thousands of volunteer attorneys, and the chief counsel at the Republican National Committee has pledged to “spend whatever it takes to make sure the election is conducted orderly and that we push back on the Democrats’ litigation.” Already more than 300 lawsuits have been filed, most of them related to pandemic voting rules and mail-in ballots.

This has left America for the first time in a long time confronting an awful question: what happens if days, weeks, months elapse after Election Day without a clear winner? What happens if both candidates go to court and refuse to concede?

Tune in to American politics these days and you’ll inevitably hear the election described as “the most important of our lives.” Children running for middle-school student council claim as much; the phrase has become almost ludicrously devalued. And while American elections are indeed significant, they have yet to prove existential: Democrats survived eight years under George W. Bush; Republicans endured eight years under Barack Obama. Yet this year the partisans are even more distressed than usual. Bernie Sanders, speaking at the Democratic National Convention, pronounced the 2020 election to be “the most important in the modern history of this country.” Activist Charlie Kirk at the Republican convention said it was “the most critical since 1860,” the year before our civil war.

For both sides, much is at stake. Democrats view the contest as a referendum on Donald Trump, with a second term seen as a green light to bigotry, racism, sexism, homophobia, heteronormativity, cisgendered fundamentalism and all the rest of it. They also worry about what they see as an attack on American institutions and Trump’s dispatch of the norms of federal governance. Republicans, meanwhile, watch riots tearing through city streets, statues and monuments being defaced, cancel culture weaponized against those who disagree, and accuse Democrats of complicity. They worry their very heritage is under threat. That is why Trump made a point this summer of speaking at Mount Rushmore and recently created a “1776 Commission” to promote patriotic curriculum in education.

This is not, in other words, the kind of climate in which you want to start hearing about voting irregularities. Many Americans already believe the worst of their political opponents, and from there it isn’t such a long jump to wondering whether they might try to steal the election. Such worries are being compounded by conspiracy theories that have made their way around the internet and the airwaves. Dark and menacing, they posit stories of pedophile groups, networks of Russian infiltrators — the sorts of dark forces which would have no problem skewing a few ballots.

Into these troubled waters has now crashed another cultural cannonball: a Supreme Court nomination by Donald Trump and the Senate confirmation battle over Amy Coney Barrett. The death in September of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court’s most left-wing justice, allowed Trump to appoint her replacement in what may be the twilight months of his presidency. Barrett, a Catholic who has expressed skepticism over Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that effectively legalized abortion across America faces strong Democrat opposition. Pro-life conservatives are thrilled. Their aim has long been to get as many right-leaning justices on the bench as possible so as to eventually overturn Roe.

Supreme Court nominations were once benign affairs (Ginsburg was confirmed by a Senate vote of 96-3); today gifting nuclear weapons to Isis is generally more peaceable. The reason is that A-word, “abortion,” which remains much more controversial in America than in most other first-world countries. Yet there’s something else at stake this time too.

The last time a presidential election turned seriously to the courts was in 2000, when a paper-thin margin between George W. Bush and Al Gore in Florida led to weeks of recounts. Images of 80-year-olds in Palm Beach staring at ballots through trifocals did not inspire confidence. The lawsuits flew, and the issue made its way to — of course — the Supreme Court.

The resulting decision, Bush vs Gore, is still one of the most controversial in the high court’s history. It ordered a stop to the recounts, effectively pronouncing Bush the winner. It was decided by a 5-4 margin, along the so-called partisan lines within the Court. And it’s here that we come full circle.

Right now, thanks to Ginsburg’s vacancy, the Supreme Court has only eight justices. If Trump is prevented from appointing Barrett, and if the election results are challenged all the way up, the justices could split evenly on who the effective president-elect is. That would kick the decision back down to the lower courts, but multiple lawsuits could result in multiple rulings, a debacle that might create enough confusion for both candidates to claim victory. Suddenly the republic itself would be over a barrel. The only hope would be some kind of grand compromise between the two parties, and given our gargantuan partisan climate, that would be no guarantee.

This is a worst-case scenario, but the fact that we’re considering it at all is reason enough to start chasing stuff to stifle headaches! And given how often nightmares have come true this year, the apprehension is very real. Lately we’ve seemed to suffer just about every nightmare imaginable: horrendous wildfires, a bad hurricane season, the New York Yankees’ return to form. Back in the summer, it was reported that murder hornets had been spotted in the United States: “Murder  hornets.” Insects from Japan so named because they slaughter entire hives of lesser bees by decapitating them with their mandibles. They’ve been known to kill the occasional human too.

What’s next? Meteor storms? The Mississippi River turning to blood? Maybe the current disasters will start running together, with murder-hornet hurricanes attacking the East Coast and coronavirus-infected wildfires torching mail-in ballots out west. Amid all this catastrophe, the election seems doomed.

On a positive ending-note: there are dark clouds over this election but nowhere near as many as in 1860. Our politics is unsettled, but not as much as, say, during the 1910s. The United States has descended into madness before, only to bounce back, and there’s no reason to think we won’t do so again. Let’s just make it out of this wretched year first. Let’s pray that every registered citizen will vote legally, AND let’s pray that NO legal vote will be thrown-out.

Would that be a request for the “Election Fairy?”

We WILL Have Chaos Nationwide on November 3rd

It’s becoming increasingly clear that we should conduct the November election in as normal a manner as possible. We should have as many of our regular polling places open as we can—and we should resist the ongoing push to have an all-mail election or a massive increase in absentee balloting with an elimination of the protective protocols in place for such ballots.

A couple of personal experiences illustrate why. Have you been to the grocery store or drug store lately? These retail establishments have all of the safety protocols in place that health experts have recommended, from line spacing to a mask-wearing requirement to sanitation stations. If we can go shopping in person, why can’t we vote in person?

The answer, of course, is that we can, despite the push by some to scare voters away from the polls. We know we can because multiple states and countries have held elections with in-person voting in this and prior pandemics—and have done so successfully, using all the health safety protocols recommended by experts.

Liberia did it in 2014 in the midst of the Ebola pandemic sweeping West Africa. South Korea did it on April 15 of this year when 29 million South Koreans voted in their national elections; reports indicate there was no COVID-19 spike after that election. Wisconsin did it on April 7 when several hundred thousand state residents voted in person in their regular polling places. The Wisconsin Election Commission implemented very strict safety procedures, stricter than what we experience when we go shopping. That includes social distancing in voter lines; hand washing/sanitizing stations for all voters when entering and leaving polling places, as well as regular sanitizing of all tables, door handles, voting booths, voting equipment, and everything else being touched or handled in the polling place. Some polling locations even had curbside voting for those who didn’t want to come into the polling place.

A report released by analysts from the World Health Organization and Stanford University after the Wisconsin election found “no detectable surge” in COVID-19 “transmissions due to the April 7” election. Similarly, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a report on July 31 looking at the experience of Milwaukee, the largest city in Wisconsin. It concluded that there was no “increase in cases, hospitalizations, or deaths” from COVID-19 due to the election. In fact, there were fewer cases reported during the “incubation period” after the election—April 9-21—than in the 13 days preceding the election.

The CDC has issued guidelines for conducting in-person voting safety, which include everything from social distancing in voter lines to cleaning and disinfecting of equipment and voting materials used in a polling location. Rather than telling voters to vote by mail as so many jurisdictions are mistakenly doing and decreasing the number of polling locations, the CDC recommends “increasing the number of polling locations” in order to “improve the ability to social distance.”

Will this impose extra costs over what state legislatures already appropriated for the administration of the 2020 elections? Yes, but that is why Congress approved over $400 million in the CARE Act that has already been distributed to the states by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to pay for those extra costs.

Another all-too common experience underscores the superiority of in-person voting: Have you ever received mail at your home addressed to the folks who lived there before you? Has your neighbor down the street ever knocked on your front door to give you a letter that had been mistakenly delivered to his house? That is not an isolated problem. The EAC reported that well over two million absentee or mail ballots sent to voters by election officials were returned as “undeliverable” by the U.S. Postal Service in the last four federal elections. The fate of more than 28 million ballots is labeled as “unknown,” defined by the EAC as those that “were not returned by a voter, spoiled, returned as undeliverable, or otherwise unable to be tracked.”

Remember the Wisconsin primary where many residents voted in person? Unfortunately, many others tried to vote with absentee ballots. The Inspector-General of the USPS recently reported that thousands of those ballots were never delivered to Wisconsin voters, while others were never postmarked. This led to them being rejected by election officials since they had no way of knowing if the ballots were completed and mailed prior to Election Day.

This has been a recurring problem in almost all of the primaries held since March where election officials made the mistake of encouraging voters to use absentee ballots to vote. The District of Columbia had a similar problem when it held its primary, leading to very long lines on Election Day at the greatly reduced number of open polling places. Why? Because voters who had not gotten the absentee ballots they had requested showed up in person to vote.

The rejection rate for mailed ballots is much higher than ballots cast in person. There is no election official in voters’ homes to answer questions or remedy any potential problems, unlike at a polling place. During the recent primary elections in New York, which also had a huge increase in absentee ballots, large numbers of ballots were rejected for a whole host of reasons, something that happens every election:

  • voters forgetting to sign the ballots;
  • signatures on the absentee ballots not matching voters’ registration signatures;
  • voters not properly supplying all of the registration information required;
  • USPS forgetting to postmark the returning ballot envelopes from voters; and
  • ballots not being delivered in time to be counted.

More than half a million absentee ballots were ultimately rejected in recent primaries, including over 80,000 — one out of every five ballot — in New York City alone — an enormous and unacceptable disenfranchisement rate.

In 2012, before the current progressive love affair with absentee ballots and all-mail elections, The New York Times actually did a highly critical report on absentee ballots. They concluded that “votes cast by mail are less likely to be counted, more likely to be compromised and more likely to be contested than those cast in a voting booth.” In fact, the Times said, the rejection rate for absentee ballots by election officials is “double the rate for in-person voting.” As the then-election supervisor of Tallahassee, Florida said, “the more people you force to vote by mail, the more invalid ballots you generate.”

There has been a very loud and contentious debate recently about the USPS and whether it needs more funding. But the postal service has had problems for years, problems that won’t be solved by using the standard Washington solution of throwing more money at them. The USPS is badly managed, badly organized, and has numerous employee unions that have resisted any and all reforms intended to try to bring it into the 21st Century and turn it into the type of efficient, effective organization like other delivery services such as FedEx and UPS.

The USPS’s own standards are simply inadequate for a mail-in election. In November, the USPS Inspector General released a report on its delivery of “election mail” in the 2018 congressional elections. Its goal was the timely delivery of absentee ballots 96% of the time—not 100%. That means that even if the USPS met its goal, 4% of voters would potentially not have their absentee ballots delivered in time to be counted. The Inspector General (IG) said that USPS achieved its goal nationwide, on average, 95.6% of the time.

But the IG report also listed the worst mail processing facilities in the country, located in California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, and Wisconsin, which only managed to deliver this very important mail on-time 84.2% of the time. Whether it is 4% or 16%, that translates to literally millions of absentee and mail-in ballots that may not be delivered in time.

This problem has not been resolved over the two intervening years. To test this issue, the CBS Morning News recently set up a P.O. box at a Philadelphia post office to represent a local election office. They then mailed 100 envelopes from various locations in the city to the box that were the same size and class of mail as absentee ballot envelopes. A week later, most of the envelopes had apparently not arrived, although after explaining what was going on to a manager, the “votes were found.” There were two pieces of mail meant for someone else in the box, including a birthday card. But three of the 100 envelopes were missing, so effectively 3% of mock voters were disenfranchised. Out of a second batch of 100 envelopes mailed, 21% had not arrived after a week.

Compare that to walking into your polling booth, filling out your ballot, and depositing it in a ballot box — in other words, not being dependent on the issues of the postal service to hopefully deliver you ballot in time and to the correct address both ways.

Of course, another big problem with absentee ballots is that they are completed outside the supervision of election officials and outside the observation of poll watchers, destroying the transparency that is the hallmark of our election process. They are the easiest ballots to steal, forge and alter. Moreover, because state laws that ban electioneering in polling places don’t apply to voters’ homes, voters become vulnerable to pressure, intimidation, and coercion from individuals who have a stake in the outcome of the election.

There are numerous cases involving absentee ballot fraud from around the nation.  Judicial Watch has a database that contains details of 300+ such cases that have been investigated and proven. Such problems were encountered in Paterson, New Jersey after it made the mistake of switching to an all-mail process for its recent municipal election, which also had a very high rejection rate. Four locals have already been criminally charged in an absentee-ballot fraud scheme, and a new election has been ordered.

Paterson is not unique. The New York Post recently published a disturbing story about a longtime Democratic political operative who admits that he has committed fraud through phony, forged, and altered absentee ballots for decades in New Jersey in legislative, mayoral and congressional races. He describes how simple it is and says he has “led teams of fraudsters and mentored at least 20 operatives in New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.” Changing the outcome of an election is particularly easy to do in close elections—and we have close elections all the time in this country.

Unfortunately, the targets of such schemes are often those most vulnerable. As a court outlined in a 2003 mayoral primary election in East Chicago that involved, according to the court, “pervasive” and “voluminous, widespread” absentee ballot fraud, those targeted “were first-time voters or otherwise less informed or lacking in knowledge of the voting process, the infirm, the poor and those with limited skills in the English language.”

Despite these vulnerabilities, lawsuits have been filed all over the country by liberal advocacy groups and the Democratic Party to make it even easier to commit absentee ballot fraud. This includes getting rid of voter ID and witness signature or notarization requirements; overriding state deadlines for absentee ballots to be either returned or postmarked by Election Day; voiding state laws banning vote harvesting by third parties; and requiring that voters be sent postage — prepaid envelopes for the return of completed absentee ballots. This last requirement means the USPS may not postmark the envelopes again, making it impossible for election officials to know whether a ballot was completed and mailed before or after the election.

Election officials also are not equipped to handle large numbers of absentee ballots. New York took six weeks to count the votes cast in its June 23 primary after there was an enormous increase in the number of ballots cast by mail. The outcome is still being contested through litigation over the high rejection rate of those ballots. If similar delays occur after the November general election in New York and numerous other states, it could be weeks before we know who won the presidential election if the race is close. It could be even longer if litigation contesting the outcome is filed in not just one state, as happened in 2000 in Florida, but in numerous states.

We have all the makings for a potential nightmare in November. Here’s hoping that doesn’t come to pass. The best way to do that is to have as normal an election as possible without making all of these major, last-minute changes in the voting and election process.

NOW Let’s Get the Truth About Fraud in Mail-In Voting: It’s Real!

The factual conclusion is in: there IS mail-in voter fraud throughout our nation. And there’s NO good reason to allow mail-in voting to occur, other than for absentee balloting that is already in place.

Mail-in ballots have become the latest flashpoint in the 2020 elections. While President Trump and the GOP warn of widespread manipulation of the absentee vote that will swell with COVID polling restrictions, many Democrats and their media allies have dismissed such concerns as unfounded.

But the political insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he fears prosecution, said fraud is more the rule than the exception. His dirty work has taken him through the weeds of municipal and federal elections in Paterson, Atlantic City, Camden, Newark, Hoboken, and Hudson County in New Jersey, and his fingerprints can be found in local legislative, mayoral, and congressional races across the Garden State. Some of the biggest names and highest officeholders in New Jersey have benefited from his tricks, according to campaign records.

“An election that is swayed by 500 votes, 1,000 votes — it can make a difference,” the tipster said. “It could be enough to flip states.”

The whistleblower — whose identity, rap sheet, and long history working as a consultant to various campaigns were confirmed — says he not only changed ballots himself over the years but led teams of fraudsters and mentored at least 20 operatives in New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania — a critical 2020 swing state.

“There is no race in New Jersey — from City Council to United States Senate — that we haven’t worked on,” the tipster said. “I worked on a fire commissioner’s race in Burlington County. The smaller the race, the easier it is to do.”

A Bernie Sanders die-hard with no horse in the presidential race, he said he felt compelled to come forward in the hope that states would act now to fix the glaring security problems present in mail-in ballots. “This is a real thing,” he said. “And there is going to be a f–king war coming November 3rd over this stuff.  If they knew how the sausage was made, they could fix it.”

Mail-in voting can be complicated — tough enough that 84,000 New Yorkers had their mailed votes thrown out in the June 23 Democratic presidential primary for incorrectly filling them out. But for political pros, they’re a piece of cake. In New Jersey, for example, it begins with a blank mail-in ballot delivered to a registered voter in a large envelope. Inside the packet are a return envelope, a “certificate of a mail-in voter,” which the voter must sign, and the ballot itself.

That’s when the election-rigger springs into action.

Just Make Your Own “fake” Ballots 

The ballot has no specific security features — like a stamp or a watermark — so the insider said he would just make his ballots. “I just put [the ballot] through the copy machine, and it comes out the same way,” the insider said. But the return envelopes are “more secure than the ballot. You could never recreate the envelope,” he said. So they had to be collected from real voters.

He would have his operatives fan out, going house-to-house, convincing voters to let them mail completed ballots on their behalf as a public service. The fraudster and his minions would then take the sealed envelopes home and hold them over boiling water. “You have to steam it to loosen the glue,” said the insider.

He then would remove the real ballot, place the counterfeit ballot inside the signed certificate, and reseal the envelope. “Five minutes per ballot tops,” said the insider.

The insider said he took care not to stuff the fake ballots into just a few public mailboxes but sprinkle them around town. That way, he avoided the attention that foiled a sloppy voter-fraud operation in a Paterson, NJ city council race this year, where 900 ballots were found in just three mailboxes. “If they had spread them in all different mailboxes, nothing would have happened,” the insider said.

USPS Employees Compliticit in Voter Fraud?

The tipster said sometimes postal employees are in on the scam.

“You have a postman who is a rabid anti-Trump guy, and he’s working in Bedminster or some Republican stronghold. He can take those filled-out ballots, and knowing 95% are going to a Republican; he can just throw those in the garbage.”

In some cases, mail carriers were members of his “work crew” and would sift ballots from the mail and hand them over to the operative.

In 2017, more than 500 mail-in ballots in New York City never arrived at the Board of Elections for races that November — leaving hundreds disenfranchised. They eventually were discovered in April 2018. “For some undetermined reason, some baskets of mail that were bound to the New York City Board of Elections were put off to the side at the Brooklyn processing facility,” city elections boss Michael Ryan said at the time of discovery.

Elder Care Facilities

Hitting up assisted-living facilities and “helping” the elderly fill out their absentee ballots was a gold mine of votes, the insider said. “There are nursing homes where the nurse is actually a paid operative. And they go room by room by room to these old people who still want to feel like they’re relevant,” said the whistleblower. “They literally fill it out for them.”

The insider pointed to former Jersey City Mayor Gerald McCann, who was sued in 2007 after a razor-thin victory for a local school board seat for allegedly tricking “incompetent and ill” residents of nursing homes into casting ballots for him. McCann denied it, though they did admit to assisting some nursing home residents with absentee ballot applications.

“That’s Not You!”

When all else failed, the insider would send operatives to vote live in polling stations, particularly in states like New Jersey and New York, which do not require voter ID. Pennsylvania, also, for the most part, does not. The best targets were registered voters who routinely skip presidential or municipal elections — information that is publicly available.

“You fill out these index cards with that person’s name and district, and you go around the city and say, ‘You’re going to be him, you’re going to be him,’” the insider said of how he dispatched his teams of dirty-tricksters.

At the polling place, the fake voter would sign in, “get online and vote,” the insider said. The imposters would simply recreate the signature that already appears in the voter roll as best they could. In the rare instance that a real voter had already signed in and cast a ballot, the impersonator would just chalk it up to an innocent mistake and bolt.

“Wanna Make a Few Bucks?”

The tipster said New Jersey homeless shelters offered a nearly inexhaustible pool of reliable — buyable — voters.

“They get to register where they live in, and they go to the polls and vote,” he said, laughing at the roughly $174 per vote Mike Bloomberg spent to win his third mayoral term. He said he could have delivered the same result at a 70-percent discount — like when Frank “Pupie” Raia, a real estate developer and Hoboken big cheese, was convicted last year on federal charges for paying low-income residents 50 bucks a pop to vote how he wanted during a 2013 municipal election.

Organizationally, the tipster said his voter-fraud schemes in the Garden State and elsewhere resembled Mafia organizations, with a boss (usually the campaign manager) handing off the day-to-day managing of the mob soldiers to the underboss (him). The actual candidate was usually kept in the dark deliberately so they could maintain “plausible deniability.” With mail-in ballots, partisans from both parties hash out and count ballots at the local board of elections — debating which ballots make the cut and which need to be thrown out because of irregularities.

The insider said any ballots offered up by him or his operation would come with a bent corner along the edge of the voter certificate — which contains the voter signature — so Democratic Board of Election counters would know the fix was in and not to object. “It doesn’t stay bent, but you can tell it’s been bent,” the tipster said. “Until the certificate is approved, the ballot doesn’t matter. They don’t get to see the ballot unless they approve the certificate.”

“I invented bending corners,” the insider boasted, saying once the fixed ballots were mixed in with the normal ones, the bed was made. “Once a ballot is opened, it’s an anonymous ballot.”

While federal law warns of prison sentences of up to five years, busted voter frauds have seen far less punishment. While in 2018, a Texas woman was sentenced to five years, an Arizona man busted for voting twice in the mail was given just three years probation. A study by the conservative Heritage Foundation found more than 1,000 instances of documented voter fraud in the United States, almost off of which occurred over the last 20 years.

“There is nothing new about these techniques,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at Heritage who manages their election law reform initiative. “Everything he’s talking about is perfectly possible.“


Are you nauseated at the plethora of lies being told by leaders in the Democrat Party, Democrats in Congress, and the Mainstream Media: “Those who say mail-in voting is full of corruption are nothing more than conspiracy theorists! They are all lying?”

What you just read proved our already-existing voting system has problems that have not been corrected for several reasons. As stated above, the Heritage Foundation proved more than 1,000 cases of voter fraud in the U.S. We at TruthNewsNetwork have reported on almost 300 of those voter fraud cases.

So how widespread will be the probability of voter fraud November 3rd? Predictions at this point are just guesses. But it should be understood and accepted by every American that there will certainly be voter fraud underway in November. And those who indicate otherwise — I don’t how vehemently they denigrate Republicans or how nasty they are — are telling Americans lies!

Forgetting about absentee voting, for the “new” version of mail-in voting that several states have instituted for the upcoming election, 44 million voters in nine states and the District of Columbia are already set to vote by mail! 44 million! Just one percent of those votes intercepted and altered and replaced by the schemes detailed above that have been in place for years can turn an election!

Do Democrats really care?

That answer is simple: NO! “If” they did care, Democrat Party Leadership in Congress would NOT suggest mail-in voting without a massive planning and preparation process put in place over at least two election cycles. And those two elections would be placed under a microscope to guarantee Americans that NO illegality, vote-changing, or vote-buying was taking place.

Not only does the Nancy Pelosi proposal offer NO plan, NO intentions of creating a plan, NO methods to assure the safety of such a system, Speaker Pelosi demanded that the federal government assume total power over the operation of our entire election system. Why would she do such a thing? To strip MORE power from the states to give the federal government (which she plans on turning 100% of government control to members of her party) to facilitate voting results to the favor of the Democrat Party and to guarantee that NO state will ever have the opportunity to change their election process in the future.

“You’re just a conspiracy theorist, Dan!

If you feel this way, do us all a favor: write your explanation for the Democrat Party insistence on a national mail-in voting system to be implemented with NO plan, NO preparation, NO funding, and to do it so quickly. Send your 600-word explanation to Dan@TruthNewsNet.org. We will print each response we get in their entirety between now and election day. We will NOT edit any for content (other than profanity) but will correct misspelled words and punctuation when necessary.

Each weekday through November 3rd, we will open a live segment on TNN Live from 9:30 – 10:00 AM Central Time to allow any callers to share their votes about this sham proposed mail-in voting system.

Send us your rebuttal for our conclusion. Starting tomorrow, we will print them, and give us a call between 9:30 – 10:00 AM Central tomorrow and any day through November 3rd to discuss your thoughts live on TNN Live.

I can’t wait to read and hear the explanation for why Nancy Pelosi so brazenly demanded such a system. She and her fellow-Democrat co-harts are lusting for Power!

The End of the Beginning: The Beginning of the End

That’s something that makes everyone utter one unison, “Hmmm……”

What the heck does that mean?

Yesterday we began a series for this week of revealing “The Plan” of the Democrat Party for this presidential election and beyond. Yesterday we opened the door of understanding by introducing to all just how political is Sen. Kamala Harris. Today, we are getting a closer look at the exact role Harris plays in this Democrat Party epic and historical moment in U.S. history.

I watched a movie over the weekend — one I’ve watched several times previously: “The Manchurian Candidate.” I’m pretty sure most people have either watched it or, at least, know what it’s about. (The one I watched was the 21st-century version. Frank Sinatra starred in the original movie) But for those who haven’t or for others who have forgotten, here’s the short synopsis of the movie “The Manchurian Candidate:”

  • It stars Liev Schrieber as Raymond Prentiss Shaw. Shaw is the son of an extremely powerful mother played by Meryl Streep who pretty much controls her son’s entire life. His father was a U.S. Senator who died and was replaced by Raymond’s mother.
  • Denzel Washington plays the role of Major Ben Marco. Marco and young Shaw served together in the Middle East in a combat situation. They were both severely injured in combat for which they each were decorated.
  • Shaw went into politics while Marco remained in the military. Both dealt with medical, emotional, and mental problems as the results of their military combat.

The summary of the movie is that Shaw’s mother has him pointed to becoming the next Vice President. She uses her considerable political might to position him at the last moment to replace the existing VP candidate during the campaign for President/Vice President. Polls show Shaw’s ticket is going to win.

There’s a parallel storyline that involves strange dreams on the part of Marco AND Shaw and another GI who served with those two and was severely injured in the same war incident. He too has the same dreams. The dreams are vivid visions of each doing horrible things while under control of a drug or some mind-altering medical process.

Marco seeks-out Shaw on the campaign trail to compare notes on their dreams. Shaw keeps Marco away for a while. But it wasn’t long until Shaw’s dreams became more and more serious: serious enough to personally result in his murdering another powerful Senator who was trying to block Shaw’s VP chances. In that murder scene, Shaw also murdered the Senator’s daughter, who Shaw had dated seriously years earlier.

The “End of the Beginning”

As is appropriate in such a movie, all of these heretofore random coincidences concluded. The conclusion came shortly after the revelation that Shaw, Marco, and the other former soldier who shared those horrid dreams were each desperate to get some relief. Marco was fearful that Shaw was being used for sinister political objectives by his mother. And at a campaign appearance, Major Marco determined to assassinate Shaw. Shaw, somehow knew it was coming and inwardly welcomed it.

While on stage at a nationally televised event the night of the election in which Shaw and his now President buddy were accepting their victory, Marco hid in a balcony with a rifle. Shaw saw where Marco was hiding. At the exact moment Shaw expected the rifle shot, he pulled his mother close while they were in a victory dance. Both were killed instantly with one shot.

The “Beginning of the End”

“That’s 500 words of meaningless drivel,” you might say. It simply sets the stage in a very elementary way to demonstrate what is happening in the Biden/Harris/Democrat Party faux election scheme. Let’s get to the explanation.

First, let’s start with Joe Biden. Significantly more than half of Americans say they do NOT feel that Joe Biden — after a win against Donald Trump in November — will last physically and mentally through four years. In fact, many think it’s questionable that he would make it through one year. Why would the Democrat Party then put Joe on the top of the Democrat ticket?

“That’s why they chose Kamala Harris as his running mate. She’s young and vibrant. She could easily step in and take the reins from Joe.”

Many Americans believe that. But probably just as many think Joe will actually be capable of carrying the load that any U.S. President must carry.

I’m here today to tell you that neither of these thoughts truly represents the reason why Joe is running to be President nor the reason Kamala is running to be Vice President.

They each are running as “space holders:” two people who were chosen to serve a specific cause for a specific period of time.

“Uh Oh! Dan’s gone over the Conspiracy Theory Hill!” No, nothing could be further from the Truth. Let’s break this down:

  • The Democrat Party has some of the smartest leaders their party has ever had. I know: Nancy Pelosi is evil and devious, but one thing she is NOT is stupid. Everything she says or does in politics fits a particular purpose in a particular plan. She is brilliant at analyzing the hand in front of her. But she’s MORE adept at analyzing the hand she is certain her OPPONENT has. She is certainly working this election using those skills.
  • As I said yesterday, Democrats NEVER play the “short game.” They are in every battle to not just win “it.” They use every battle victory as a notch on their march to their ultimate goal: “To Win the War!” This Biden/Harris combination is the Democrat Party team Pelosi and Co. will use to win their first battle: the elimination of Donald Trump.
  • Biden is necessary because Democrat leaders understand America is not ready to digest a full-blown Socialist society. To be successful, that must happen in stages. Going straight to Kamala Harris for President would destroy their plan. They must take baby steps. Joe certainly has, in his lengthy history, a record of supporting conservative Democrat Party issues through decades. And he’s a much easier sell to Americans than any other candidate that was in this race — including Harris herself.
  • Biden is the tip of the battle sword; Harris is the sword handle. She is a prolific one-on-one politician, speaks well, can be forceful when needed but tender and affable also. She’s tough, she’s determined, and she’s a true Progressive in the truly “Liberal” sense of the word. In other words, she has the eyes and ears of Millenials who spurn this administration comprised of old white guys. If given a chance, they will in locked-step march over a cliff to embrace all those issues that AOC has been touting for the last two years. Harris can work in both Moderate and Progressive worlds.
  • Democrat Party leadership prefers a Biden win with a really strong campaign out-front presence of Harris for her communication skills and the fact she is an American woman of color who relates well to younger voters. In other words, Biden opens the election door, and Harris brings in the tiebreakers in the Progressive wing of the Democrat Party.

What Next?

Biden will NOT last through a first term — if he wins at all. Kamala Harris is the right “interim” plan for the Democrat Party.

For all the reasons listed above, she is a much more formidable Democrat for moving the party to the next level. And that level will no longer be propped up the likes of Joe, Nancy, Chuck, or even Barack Obama! All those folks are simply too old and “so yesterday” to the 35-year-old and younger Americans. She will make the transition to the “Next” Democrat Party objective.

What’s that objective?

Tomorrow in our final segment of this story, you will see and hear a 25-minute documented and vetted presentation that will explain what the “long-game” is for Democrats. When complete, you will no doubt know for certain exactly why all this stuff is happening. “All this stuff” is comprised of every one of these: the Mueller Investigation, the Ukraine investigation, President Trump’s impeachment, the COVID-19 pandemic, the racial unrest that resulted in continuing protests, demonstrations, rioting and looting all across America, and the insistence by Democrat leaders for a 100% mail-in voting system operated totally by the Federal Government, taking control of elections away from our 50 states.

All of these have happened at specific times for specific “interim” reasons — “interim” because they all are little more than planks in the foundation of the Master Plan of today’s Democrat Party.

One final note today: as we conclude this tomorrow, all the pieces will fit together—most if not all of your why questions will be answered. You’ll be elated but at the same time afraid. But for sure, we will all know what has been happening in D.C. for so long that we simply could not understand. Additionally, we will know the purpose for all, not just for today but for years to come, long after most of us will be gone.

What About the Manchurian Candidate?

In case you didn’t put today’s characters names on the roles of the actors in that movie, the actual candidate played by Liev Schrieber is Joe Biden. His powerful mother who is a Senator is the Democrat Party. The politician who replaces Biden is, of course, Kamala Harris.

So who is the shooter, the one who takes out with one shot both Biden and the Democrat Party? Tune in for that answer tomorrow!

Don’t miss TNN Live at 9:00 AM Central today and every weekday. It two-hours of conservative streaming talk radio complete with call-ins so that you can share in the program yourself. I’m going to cheat and make joining the show every day simple. Just copy the following link. Why not paste it somewhere so that you can keep it handy permanently. It is the direct link to our radio streaming broadcast. At a few minutes before 9:00 Central, click on this link, and you will go straight to our show media player. Just click on the arrow to immediately join our show.  Here’s that TNN Live link: https://www.elasticplayer.xyz/truthnews/

Don’t forget our conclusion to this series will be published worldwide at 1:45 AM Central Wednesday morning. Don’t you dare miss it!


The Democrat Party Master Plan: You Will Be SHOCKED!

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) was a surprise pick to be Joe Biden’s running mate. Why so? Biden has, for decades, been the “poster boy” for the Moderate wing of the Democrat Party. Going into his presidential bid this year, he has painted himself as a consummate Moderate. But Americans have watched as the former Moderate has allowed the far-left of his party to pull him away from the neighborhood of Mr. Rogers to the neighborhood of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Waren. He had to get their support.

There’s a problem: Democrat Party leadership is uncertain any far-left Democrat can win the White House right now. So what do they do? They prop-up the picture of Uncle Joe as the “forever-Moderate” to sell to the American people. And they think they can.

But this Democrat Party is anything BUT Moderate.

“If Democrats are no longer Moderate, what are they?” The Democrat Party is running quietly yet as fast as possible to the Far Left in American politics.

The Truth?

“Americans are not ready for the Truth.” That’s where this Democrat Party is in their thinking. Their conundrum in looking at this election cycle caused them to make some hard choices: how to retake full government party control by making voters think Democrats are all Moderates without letting voters know they aren’t.

Democrat Party leadership is not playing a “short game:” they are playing the long game.” The game is called “Who will control the World politically.” It’s not just the United States.

What does that mean?

In the next few days, TruthNewsNetwork will unfold a bit at a time the plan of the Democrat Party in tandem with others to control World Politics.

We’re NOT going to give you any conspiracy theories. We’re not going to play a blame game. We’re going to present to you facts through documents, audio files, video files, the words of particular people that support every bit of information we give to you. And it starts right now.

Yes, it Begins with Kamala Harris

I dropped my glass when I heard ABC’s George Stephanopolous portray Kamala Harris as a “Moderate.” Any American who pays any attention at all knows she’s is certainly not that.

We’re not drawing broad and unsupported conclusions. We are basing those statements on facts: facts of her legislation and political history. Let’s take a look at just a few of her legislative “offerings.”

Democratic running mate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) is one of the busier senators when it comes to introducing congressional legislation. Her 54 bills introduced in 2019 tied for 19th-most among all 100 senators, while her 52 bills introduced in 2017–18 put her in the top third among senators.

COUNT Victims Act

Disaster Victims Passport and ID Relief Act

Image for post
  Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA)

Justice for Victims of Lynching Act


Rent Relief Act


Shirley Chisholm statue

Census Equality Act

Family Friendly Schools Act

Access to Counsel Act

Aretha Franklin Congressional Gold Medal Act


I know: you probably skimmed this entire list of Harris legislation or simply quit. But to understand the importance of what Americans each are facing in this election, one must have a good understanding of who are the players, where did they originate, and where each is headed.

These bills introduced by Sen. Harris may appear to be little more than a freshman Senator spreading her “legislative” wings, but they are far more than just that. She, in being so aggressive as a young Senator, showed all the political heavyweights looking-in that she is ready to become a “player” in important politics — the type of politics that are now in full swing in our country. She wants to be on stage and not sitting in the back.

That’s important to understand. It will help explain what shows up tomorrow about the California Senator, her role in the “Big Game,” and how today’s Democrat Party have surreptitiously been initiating their plan for us all while we were busy watching Russia-Gate, Ukraine-Gate, Impeachment, COVID-19 Pandemic, and Racial Anarchy during the last four years.

You don’t want to miss a day of this! Day by day, chapter, by chapter, the future of our nation as Democrats hope to see it play out is unfolding before your eyes.

Buckle-up: it’s going to be a hard ride.

Voting by Mail: Let the Fight Begin!

Here we go! All those for making voting so much easier for Americans now have another arrow in their quiver for what they term is “justification” for voting by mail. Their new arrow has a name: “Coronavirus.”

We saw it play out in the Wisconsin Democrat primary election just a few weeks ago. Back and forth from court to court filing lawsuits, filing appeals, the Wisconsin governor weighing in with his decision and another court overturning. Wisconsin voters voted: period. Sure, there were some fears of Coronavirus. But it’s reasonably sure that everyone that voted had their one vote count. I said “one vote” because that has not always been the case. In many lessons throughout American history, people have cheated and have voted multiple times and often have lied and voted as someone else. That’s part of this story we’ll get to in a bit. But we DO know this one thing: Coronavirus IS and WILL be changing everything for at least a good while in the nation. And that probably will include the November election. Buckle up! The fight has already begun.

In recent history, voters in national elections know almost immediately after polls close who is going to be the next president. Electronics in voting have made it easy. But it’s not going to be very easy in November, and it probably will be no easier in any day going forward. Because of a massive increase in mail-in voting in states that are not used to it, the presidential election could take a week or more to be decided. Public officials are just now beginning to grapple with how to prepare themselves and the country for this unprecedented situation.

“It’s a culture shift that’s going to be required,” said Vanita Gupta, president, and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, in an interview. “We should be prepared to wait at least a week before the results can be certified.”

Gupta, who oversaw the Justice Department’s civil rights division from 2014 to 2017, said her organization — one of the oldest civil rights groups in the country — would work with other groups over the next several months to raise awareness and create an expectation among both voters and journalists that results should not be expected on election night.

“People are going to have to be able to be patient to wait for the results,” Gupta said. “That’s an uncomfortable position for a lot of people. The media’s not used to it. The public’s not used to it.” But, she said, “election officials need to be able to do their job to make sure they are counting every ballot. The danger would be if there is false pressure that gets built-in, and people are disenfranchised because of this false pressure.”

Tom Perez, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said that “if we have a vote-by-mail state that is close, I would rather be in a position where everybody’s vote got counted. I think that should be our gold standard, is that everyone who wanted to participate was able to participate.”

“I’d rather get it right than get it at 10 o’clock on Election Day night.”

In my opinion, “Get it right” means “everybody gets one vote to cast — just ONE vote. And we must verify whoever casts that vote has been confirmed to be the person registered and casts that vote legally.”

Vote By Mail Already Exists

Five states currently conduct all elections entirely by mail: Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington, and Utah. At least 21 other states have laws that allow certain smaller elections (such as school board contests) to be conducted by mail. For these elections, all registered voters receive a ballot in the mail. The voter marks the ballot, puts it in a secrecy envelope or sleeve and then into a separate mailing envelope, signs an affidavit on the exterior of the mailing envelope, and returns the package via mail or by dropping it off.

Ballots are mailed out well ahead of Election Day, and thus voters have an “election period,” not just a single day, to vote. All-mail elections can be thought of as absentee voting for everyone. This system is also referred to as “vote by mail.”

While “all-mail elections” means that every registered voter receives a ballot by mail, this does not cancel in-person voting opportunities on and before Election Day. For example, even though all registered voters in Colorado are mailed a ballot, voters can choose to cast a ballot at an in-person vote center during the early voting period or on Election Day (or drop-off, or mail, their ballot back).

Generally, states begin with providing all-mail elections only in certain circumstances, and then add additional opportunities as citizens become familiar with procedures. Oregon’s vote-by-mail timeline includes four times that the legislature acted before the 1998 citizens’ vote that made Oregon the first all-mail election state.

All states will already mail an absentee ballot to individual voters who request one. In two-thirds of the states, any qualified voter may vote absentee without offering an excuse, and in one-third of the states, an apology is required. Some states offer a permanent absentee ballot list. Once a voter asks to be added to the list, she or he will automatically receive an absentee ballot for all future elections.

Voter Fraud

Mention those words at a Democrat Party function, and you’ll be immediately tossed! That’s like the proverbial “something ugly got slipped into the punch bowl.” That forces one to ask and try to answer this question: “Why are so many Democrats adamantly for mail-in voting while being just as adamantly against voter ID requirements? But there’s no absolute answer to that. Let’s start with words from leaders in one of those five states who conduct elections totally through the mail: Oregon.

That all sounds so simple, doesn’t it? And voting SHOULD be simple. And, as you just heard, those who so vehemently support mail-in voting, to a person, disavow any claim or claims of voter fraud. If we’ve heard once that, “there is no proof in any federal election on record of there being ‘massive’ voter fraud like Republicans and President Trump claim,” we’ve heard it a hundred times.

Notice that word “massive?” That’s the caveat that allows them to make that argument. But there is plenty of evidence of massive voter fraud. The problem is that states — not the federal government — run all elections. Normally states conduct their own elections in tandem with federal elections. And whether or not Democrats, or any other persons for that matter, want to dispute the existence of systemic voter fraud, they must live in “La-La Land.”

Tom Fitton, the President of Judicial Watch, has on behalf of his company filed numerous lawsuits against states, individuals, corporations and other municipalities for voter fraud. Sometimes the alleged voter fraud can be written-off as accidental — but not very often. Fitton in his research and subsequent lawsuits have found millions of voters and votes that were fraudulent and therefore ineligible to vote or be counted in every kind of election! Why would those on the left simply shrug those claims away and say, “Voter fraud just doesn’t happen?”

Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch have been busy finding places where voter fraud is rampant. You just heard his comments about one million bogus votes discovered in North Carolina. It’s not just in North Carolina, believe me.

Los Angeles County has started the process of removing from its registration rolls an estimated 1.5 million inactive voters who have moved, died or become ineligible to cast a ballot, an effort to comply with federal election law and a court settlement with Judicial Watch. The county, the most populous in the United States, recently mailed notices to the inactive voters in an effort to verify their residency status and whether they are still alive. It’s the first time in 20 years that Los Angeles County has cleaned its voter rolls, having previously interpreted the federal law requiring it as not mandatory.

And then there’s this: we KNOW for certain there’s voter fraud in mail-in voting. We know someone personally who did it!

In 2011, a lady decided to test the system, and so she asked for three voter registration applications from the county voter registration office in her county in Florida. She filled them out, listing three different names — two that she pulled out of her head Rebecca Bugle and Hannah Arendt — and her own name, Margaret Menge. Margaret listed her real date of birth, and made up dates of birth for the other two. On the lines where the application asked for a driver’s license number or last four of Social Security number, she wrote “none” as the instructions said to do if a person has neither of these.

A few weeks later, she got two notices back, saying applications for Rebecca Bugle and Margaret Menge could not be processed because a driver’s license number or Social Security number was not provided. But Margaret also received in her mailbox a new voter information card for Hannah Arendt. On the outside of the card, her mailman had circled the name and address and written a question mark in pencil. But he still put it in the mailbox.

A few days later, Margaret checked the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections website, and, sure enough, there was Hannah Arendt, listed as an eligible voter — a person who existed in history, the celebrated author of “Eichmann in Jerusalem” — but not a person who was in existence in 2011 in Palm Beach County, Florida.

Not long after, with an election approaching, she called the Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections, said she was Hannah Arendt, and asked for an absentee ballot. The employee on the phone asked for a date of birth, and when given that information from “Hannah’s”  initial application — July 20, 1991 — she said she’d send one. The absentee ballot for Hannah Arendt appeared via mail a week or two later.

Margaret called a former Florida secretary of state in 2012 and asked him how was it possible that she was able to do this.

“Well,” he said, “the fact is that they check names of people applying to register to vote against several different databases, but they have no way to check to see whether someone exists.”

That’s just one way people can cheat with absentee ballots. There are many more.

Last year, a political operative working for North Carolina Republican congressional candidate Mark Harris was charged with fraud for directing a group of people to fill out as many as 1,000 absentee ballot requests on behalf of voters — most of whom were unaware the ballots were being requested. These people then collected the ballots and filled them out themselves. Harris defeated Democrat Dan McCready by just 905 votes and, though it was never shown that the number of tainted ballots was enough to account for Harris’s win, the election results were thrown out, and a new election was held. (Republican Dan Bishop beat McCready in a special election by 2,400 votes.)

Also in 2019, a Democratic city clerk in Southfield, Michigan, was arrested and charged with six felonies for falsifying absentee ballot records to say that 193 of the ballots in one election were missing signatures or a return date, when in fact they had both. The correct records were found in the trash can in her office.


Voting in person or mail-in ballots: both seem simple and each in certain circumstances appropriate. But the single absolute in these two voting methods is that when a person in person shows up at a voting precinct, gives their name and presents an ID to confirm they are the same person as registered in the registrar’s voters database, those running that election know a legal voter just cast a ballot.

In a similar case but one using mail-in voting, there is absolutely no way possible for anyone to guarantee the person whose name is on the ballot above their signature is the person who actually “showed up” to vote.

Mail-in voting is a really big deal right now. It’s not so much because of Coronavirus — which is the narrative Democrats are cramming down the throats of Americans. It’s looking as if our pandemic may be mostly if not totally resolved before September 1! That if it happens means the November election should proceed in normal fashion.

But there’s one big glitch in all this: the glitch’s name is “COVID-19.” “If” our pandemic has not disappeared or is not in a status in which voting in person is safe, absentee-balloting is a certainty. And NO state, with the exception of the five states who already have mail-in voting, can possibly be prepared by November. And voting ballots would necessarily need to be mailed a month before.

I just hate to think about how easy it will be for those who wish to cheat in voting find it to be really easy to do so. And, by the way, mail-in voting MUST be done for the 2020 election according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She stated weeks ago that any new stimulus bill that the House considers MUST contain a provision for permanent mail-in voting for every state, or she will not give American businesses or the American people one more dime.

I can’t wait for November!