Posted tagged ‘Vote fraud’

New Data: Illegal Voters May Have Decided New Hampshire in 2016

September 8, 2017

New Data: Illegal Voters May Have Decided New Hampshire in 2016, PJ MediaJ. Christian Adams, September 7, 2017

Newly available data is casting doubt on the integrity of the presidential election in New Hampshire in 2016, which Hillary Clinton won by just over 2,700 votes.

Over 6,000 voters in New Hampshire had used same-day voter registration procedures to register and vote simultaneously for president. The current New Hampshire Speaker of the House, Shawn Jasper, sought and obtained data about what happened to these 6,000 “new” New Hampshire voters who showed up on Election Day.

It seems the overwhelming majority of them can no longer be found in New Hampshire.

Of those 6,000, only 1,014 have ever obtained New Hampshire driver’s licenses. Of the 5,526 voters who never obtained a New Hampshire driver’s license, a mere three percent have registered a vehicle in New Hampshire.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation received information that 70 percent of the same-day registrants used out-of-state photo ID to vote in the 2016 presidential election in New Hampshire and to utilize same-day registration.

Gov. Maggie Hassan, a Democrat, also defeated incumbent U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte by only 1,017 votes.

These new data illustrate the problem with same-day registration laws: they prevent the ability to verify residency prior to the election — and in a close election, that can make a difference.

As John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky pointed out in their book Who’s Counting, same-day registration fraud won Al Franken his Senate seat, and that extra Democratic seat then gave the country Obamacare.

ACORN Sues California to Allow More Illegals to Vote

August 29, 2017

ACORN Sues California to Allow More Illegals to Vote, Front Page MagazineMatthew Vadum, August 29, 2017

An ACORN offshoot and other left-wing pressure groups are suing California in federal court because the state hasn’t made it easy enough for Democrats to flood voter rolls with illegal aliens and foreign nationals who aren’t legally eligible to vote.

Throughout the years Mickey Mouse, Mary Poppins, and celebrities living and dead were registered to vote because now-defunct ACORN and its allied groups were allowed to pollute the voter rolls.

The ACORN successor group known as ACCE Institute, League of Women Voters of California, California Common Cause, and the National Council of La Raza want to compel the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to incorporate voter registration material into the forms needed to apply for or renew a driver’s license or state identification card, or submit a change of address. They claim the DMV is violating the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), popularly called “Motor-Voter,” by asking the more than a million California residents who renew by mail every year to fill out a separate voter registration form.

Other election fraud-promoting state policies already exist in the Golden State, which is a haven for illegal aliens and illegal voting.

In 2015, Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed a law to register all eligible holders of driver’s licenses as voters unless they “opt out.” The Los Angeles Times reports that law “was on hold until state elections officials completed testing of a statewide voter database. That process ended last year, and the automated process for registering voters is expected to be used before next year’s elections.”

But that still doesn’t provide enough opportunities for non-citizens to vote in California to satisfy whiny so-called voting rights advocates in the already solidly Democrat state.

“Since we first alerted DMV to these problems, multiple local, state, and federal elections have passed, including the 2016 presidential election,” said ACCE Executive Director Christina Livingston. “Enough is enough. It’s time for California to make registration easier for every voter as the law requires and to get it done before another election passes us by.”

In court papers, ACCE Institute claims ACCE has 14,000 members, as well as offices in Los Angeles, Contra Costa, Oakland, San Francisco, Sacramento, and San Diego. The group claims in 2016 that ACCE ran five programs that registered almost 10,000 Californians to vote. ACCE Institute describes itself as “a non-profit community organization that helps California citizens organize and take action to promote change that benefits social, economic, and racial justice.”

Because the state supposedly hasn’t been following federal law, ACCE claims it “has been forced to and continues to expend resources to promote voter registration in California that ACCE would otherwise have used to further other organizational goals.”

What might those “other organizational goals” be? The California branch of ACORN was adept at dumping garbage in the lobbies of banks, surrounding the homes of corporate executives and frightening their families, and providing rent-a-mobs for wealthy benefactors such as banking tycoons Herb and Marion Sandler.

The plaintiff groups are being represented by the ACLU of Northern California, Demos, and the law firm of Morrison and Foerster. ACORN-affiliated Project Vote had also been providing legal representation but it recently closed its doors.

ACCE Institute is the 501(c)(3) nonprofit arm of ACCE, which stands for Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment. ACCE is the successor group to ACORN California, which, with 37,000 dues-paying members, was one of the largest state chapters in the ACORN network. ACCE was founded by ACORN officials in December 2009 before ACORN Inc., the parent nonprofit at the head of the network, filed for bankruptcy in November 2010. ACORN had been battered in 2008 by the revelation of a million-dollar embezzlement by the founder’s brother which management covered up, and by undercover videos shot in 2009 by James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles showing ACORN intake workers helping to facilitate tax fraud and prostitution. Soon after, Congress cut off funding to ACORN.

ACCE paid $9,000 to purchase ACORN California computers and office equipment. It also bought the rights to ACORN’s donor databases. The office address of ACCE and ACCE Institute is 3655 S. Grand Ave., Los Angeles. That address was the address of ACORN California’s headquarters, too.

ACORN is congenitally corrupt.

As I documented in Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts Are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers, at least 54 ACORN employees and individuals associated with ACORN have been convicted of voter fraud, a blanket term coined by lawyers referring to fraudulent voting, identify fraud, perjury, voter registration fraud, forgery, and other crimes related to the electoral process.

In August 2011, ACORN was fined the maximum of $5,000 in Las Vegas for its role in a massive voter fraud conspiracy. Judge Donald Mosley said he would have handed down a 10-year prison sentence if an individual rather than a corporation had been before him: “And I wouldn’t have thought twice about it.” Mosley criticized ACORN for making a “mockery” of America’s electoral process. “This isn’t a banana republic,” he said.

ACORN had pled guilty to felony-level unlawful compensation for registration of voters. With the full knowledge of upper management, ACORN illegally offered cash bonuses to its voter registration canvassers in a scheme called “Blackjack.” Canvassers received extra money if they registered 21 voters a day. Senior ACORN executives Amy Adele Busefink and Christopher Howell Edwards were also convicted for their roles in the scheme. ACORN cared so little about the conspiracy that Project Vote, its voter mobilization division, put Busefink in charge of the group’s national get-out-the-vote drive in 2010 while she was under indictment in Nevada. Project Vote announced it was shutting its doors on May 31 of this year.

The federal Motor-Voter statute so revered by the Left was the brainchild of Sixties radicals Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. It was enacted in 1993. President Clinton thanked the couple by name for their efforts and gave them prime seating at the bill-signing ceremony.

The idea behind the law was to make it ridiculously easy to register to vote in the hope that millions of people not legally eligible to vote would nevertheless find their way onto voter rolls. That law turned welfare offices and DMVs across the country into voter registration centers and encouraged nonprofit groups to conduct registration drives. It also opened the door to the massive voter fraud that is commonplace today.

Cloward and Piven explained their strategy in a 1983 article titled “Toward a Class-Based Realignment of American Politics: A Movement Strategy,” which ran in ACORN’s magazine, Social Policy.

[E]nlisting millions of new and politicized voters is the way to create an electoral environment hospitable to fundamental change in American society. An enlarged and politicized electorate will sustain and encourage the movements in American society that are already working for the rights of women and minorities, for the protection of the social programs, and for transformation of foreign policy. Equally important, an enlarged and politicized electorate will foster and protect future mass movements from the bottom that the ongoing economic crisis is likely to generate, thus opening American politics to solutions to the economic crisis that express the interests of the lower strata of the population … The objective is to accelerate the dealigning forces already at work in American politics, and to promote party realignment along class lines.

The goal behind Motor-Voter wasn’t to make America’s electoral processes function more smoothly. The goal was left-wing revolution.

The lawsuit filed by ACCE Institute and its allies is in keeping with that goal.

NAACP Lawsuit Against Trump Voter Commission Centers Around Alleged Racism

July 19, 2017

NAACP Lawsuit Against Trump Voter Commission Centers Around Alleged Racism, Washington Free Beacon, July 19, 2017

Generated by IJG JPEG Library

A lawsuit filed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Legal Defense Fund against President Donald Trump and his newly launched voter fraud commission in part centers around the argument that the commission is racist.

The lawsuit, which was filed Tuesday in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, argues that Trump has neither the constitutional nor statutory authority to create a new “executive organ for the purpose of launching an investigation that targets individuals or groups of people” and adds that it is an “unauthorized Presidential action.”

Trump, the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, the voter commission, Vice President Mike Pence, who chairs the commission, and Kris Kobach, the secretary of state of Kansas and the vice-chair of the commission, are listed as defendants on the suit.

“Both before and since his election, President Trump has made repeated statements alleging that there is widespread voter fraud throughout the United States, including the false claim that he lost the popular vote because of 3 to 5 million ‘illegal’ votes for former Secretary Hillary Clinton,” the suit states.

“The President and his surrogates have also repeatedly described voter fraud in language suggesting that voters of color are more likely to commit voter fraud than white voters, using racially-coded language linking voter fraud to predominantly-minority urban communities and to ‘illegals,'” according to the suit.

The suit claims that Trump’s choice of Kobach to serve as vice-chair shows that motivations for the commission in part from stem from “racial discrimination.”

They expand upon this by stating that the election integrity group headed by J. Christian Adams, another appointee to the commission, “supports restrictive voting laws” and that its literature is filled with “virulently racist rhetoric, equating non-citizens to nonhumans and trafficking heavily in the rhetoric of ‘invasion.”

The Legal Defense Fund is referring to a report titled “Alien Invasion” that was released by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF), the group led by Adams. The study found that thousands of illegal voters were on the rolls in Virginia. It has led to legislation in the state that was ultimately vetoed by Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe.

Adams has also fought back against attacks on voter identification laws that were backed by millions in funding from liberal billionaire George Soros. Marc Elias, an attorney at the D.C.-based law firm Perkins Coie, who was the top lawyer for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and is also a lawyer for Gov. McAuliffe, led the efforts against the voter ID laws in a number of states including Virginia.

In Ohio, Elias initially filed a lawsuit against the state’s voter ID laws on behalf of a liberal activist group called the Ohio Organizing Collaborative. The group was replaced on the suit and later investigated for fraudulent voter registrations. A canvasser for the group pleaded guilty and was sentenced to six months in prison for falsifying voter registrations that included registering dead people to vote.

PILF has additionally filed lawsuits against multiple cities whose voter rolls contain more registered than eligible voters. These efforts were countered by Demos, an organization that is also funded by Soros and chaired by the daughter of Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.).

“These groups are so threatened by this Commission it’s humorous. This is about more than covering up for fraud and exploitable weaknesses in our election systems,” Logan Churchwell, communications director for PILF, told the Washington Free Beacon. “The NAACP’s donors expect the organization to be in the room where it happens, regardless of who’s in elected office at the time. Their radical positions have foreclosed that opportunity–so now they’re reduced to these antics.”

“The NAACP has removed itself so far from the mainstream on civil rights that it has become utterly unrecognizable today,” Churchwell continued. “When a group finds common cause with bigots who attack voter ID laws because ‘less sophisticated’ black voters can’t follow them or considers the concept of voter registration to be ‘voter suppression’, you’re predictably going to be left in the cold.”

A federal judge recently denied an injunction against the panel to open its Wednesday meeting to the public and to require the group to disclose additional records about its work, Politico reported.

The NAACP Legal Defense Fund’s communications department was unavailable for comment on the lawsuit.

Judicial Watch Statement Regarding Supreme Court Decision to Hear Ohio’s Clean Voter Rolls Case

May 30, 2017

Judicial Watch Statement Regarding Supreme Court Decision to Hear Ohio’s Clean Voter Rolls Case, Judicial Watch, May 30, 2017

(Please see also, Alien Invasion: Thousands of Foreigners Registered To Vote (and Voting) in Virginia. — DM)

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement in response to today’s announcement from the Supreme Court of the United States that it granted certiorari and agreed to hear a case related to Ohio’s efforts to maintain accurate voting rolls:

“The citizens of Ohio may yet see their right to clean and fair elections upheld. Clearly, dirty election rolls can mean dirty elections.  We hope that the Supreme Court will reverse the Sixth Circuit decision and allow Ohio to more easily remove ineligible names from its voter registration lists.”

Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting Ohio’s efforts to ensure that its voter rolls are up to date.  The case was on appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which held Ohio’s process is in violation of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) (Jon Husted, Ohio Secretary of State v. Philip Randolph Institute, et al. (No. 16-980)).

Judicial Watch’s amicus brief argued that the Sixth Circuit ruling would adversely affect its settlement agreement with Ohio were it allowed to stand:

In January of 2014 the parties settled the lawsuit, agreeing to terms for Ohio to perform certain NVRA Section 8 list maintenance practices through November 2018.  A key provision of this Settlement Agreement was Ohio’s agreement to perform an annual list maintenance “Supplemental Mailing” to voters who had no contact with Ohio’s election offices in two years.  The Settlement Agreement required Ohio to send the Supplemental Mailing every year, whereas Ohio had previously been sending the mailing every two years.  The Supplemental Mailing portion of the Settlement Agreement was so important to the parties that they subsequently negotiated an amendment solely to give Ohio greater flexibility over which month of the year to initiate the Supplemental Mailing.

Judicial Watch never would have agreed to the Settlement Agreement with Ohio and dismissed its lawsuit if it believed that the Supplemental Mailing was legally impermissible.  If the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in this case is allowed to stand, this key provision of Judicial Watch’s Settlement Agreement could be voided.

Judicial Watch Attorney Robert Popper, the director of the organization’s Election Integrity Project, joined with five other former attorneys of the Civil Rights Division Attorneys of the Justice Department to file an amici curiae brief in the Husted case.

Alien Invasion: Thousands of Foreigners Registered To Vote (and Voting) in Virginia

May 30, 2017

Alien Invasion: Thousands of Foreigners Registered To Vote (and Voting) in Virginia, PJ Media, J. Christian Adams, May 30, 2017

In the age of Obama, politics prevented voter fraud prosecutions. Obama’s Justice Department didn’t prosecute alien registration and voting because their governing philosophy opposed it. The Justice Department ignored the information gift-wrapped by local election officials.


Some inside the Beltway are in a froth about foreign influence in our elections.

Yet I’ll wager they won’t say a word about real foreign influence in elections — even when actual evidence exists.

A new report released today documents that in Virginia alone, 5,556 voter registrations were cancelled because of citizenship defects. Many of those cancelled had gotten on the voter rolls despite saying on their voter registration form that they were an alien and not eligible to vote.

Voter history records also show that many thousands of ballots were cast by registrants removed for citizenship defects.

Only Americans should be electing American leaders, but that isn’t happening.

Even worse, the report documents the extensive efforts by state and local election officials to conceal the extent of noncitizen registration and voting.

These efforts include internal emails which revealed an intent to alter public records to hide the full extent of noncitizen cancellations.

The report, entitled Alien Invasion II: The Sequel to the Discovery and Cover Up of Non-Citizen Registration and Voting in Virginia, notes that the 5,556 removed for citizenship defects in Virginia are only the tip of the iceberg. These 5,556 were only caught by accident after each told a state agency of his or her alien status after previously registering to vote. Had they never provided an inconsistent answer to citizenship status, they never would have been detected.

The report released by the Public Interest Legal Foundation, of which I am president, can be accessed here.

PILF originally asked in 2016 for election records demonstrating registrants removed from the voter rolls for citizenship defects. Under federal law, all list maintenance records are subject to public inspection. You would have thought election officials would be transparent and keen to comply with federal disclosure laws.

You would be wrong: it took three separate federal lawsuits — against Alexandria City, Manassas City, and Chesterfield County — filed by PILF to finally obtain the information.

Along the way, other election officials in internal email discussions obtained by PILF contemplated altering list maintenance records to conceal the extent of cancellations for citizenship status.

For example, Arlington County General Registrar Linda Lindberg, in an email obtained by PILF, contemplated providing an altered and shorter list of registrants removed for citizenship problems. Her email stated:

This group [PILF] has and will interpret the fact that there may be voting credit on the cancelled record as “illegal aliens” registering and voting, despite the voter having subsequently affirmed his citizenship. …  I am going to delete or otherwise notate these names from my report, either by deleting the rows from the Excel version or marking them on the report.

Lindberg specifically contemplated hiding the full report of non-citizen cancellations from PILF and then producing an abbreviated list that excluded anyone on the list who subsequently cast a ballot regardless of the timing of any naturalization process.

Arlington registrar Linda Lindberg

Federal law requires list maintenance records to be public, and does not entertain alteration of those records prior to release or the production of derivative records that conceal original removal data.

Some officials claim that the list of those cancelled for non-citizenship eventually affirmed citizenship or may have been citizens in the first place. Even that excuse — that the government was cancelling valid voters for citizenship defects — illustrates the mess that American voter rolls are in regarding aliens.

Without robust citizenship verification procedures at the front end, downstream failures occur in election administration. States like Virginia, which utilize no means to verify citizenship at registration, find themselves cancelling valid registrations occasionally if Lindberg’s story is to be believed.

Neither cancelling valid citizens nor registering aliens is good government.

Yet the PILF report demonstrates that hundreds of foreigners ended up on Virginia voter rolls even after telling Virginia election officials they were aliens on their voter registration form.

Consider Jiling Xiao. Xiao registered to vote during Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign for president. Indeed, the report notes that 2008 was the year with the highest rate of alien voting in Virginia. Xiao plainly marked “NO” to the question “Are you a citizen of the United States of America?”, yet was registered to vote. Such is the flimsy check used to prevent alien voting:

Jiling Xiao registration form obtained by PILF

Or take Yun Ok Bae. Bae plainly answered “NO” to the citizenship checkbox question on the federal form, but was still registered to vote — and remained on the rolls for four years:

Yun Bae registration form obtained by PILF

Juan Mones Cazon was registered to vote in Charlottesville despite marking “NO” to the citizenship question. Cazon also marked his form that he wished to serve as an election official.

Juan Mones Cazon registration form obtained by PILF

PILF obtained 700 pages of similar examples.

All can be accessed by law enforcement personnel at this link. 

As day follows night, the people most obsessed with Russian influence in American elections will excuse away the behavior uncovered in the PILF report. Here are some voter fraud axioms:

— The more in a froth you are about Russia and Trump, the less you care about alien registration and voting.

— The more you believe foreigners in Russia handed Trump the White House, the less you worry about foreigners like Xio, Bae, Cazon, and thousands of others participating in our election system.

Yet the law takes a different approach. (Remember that quaint institution — the law?) The PILF report documents election felonies piled on top of felonies.

Federal law 52 U.S.C. Section 20511 makes it a felony to submit a false voter registration form. Federal law 18 U.S.C. Section 1015 makes it a crime to make a false statement to register to vote. Federal law 18 U.S.C. Section 611 makes it illegal for foreigners to cast a ballot. Virginia law also criminalizes the casting of an illegal ballot.

So you may think there should have been hundreds, or even thousands, of voter fraud prosecutions in Virginia in the last few years. Again, you’d be wrong.

And it’s not for a lack of information. Federal and state prosecutors were made aware of the problem of alien registration and voting by the Fairfax County electoral board years ago. Hans von Spakovsky, who served on that board, told me the information “disappeared into the equivalent of a cosmic black hole.” Not a single alien voter fraudster was prosecuted — even those who cast ballots.

Voter fraud deniers use this absence of prosecutions to argue that voter fraud doesn’t exist. The referrals by Fairfax election officials provide an excellent example of how the lack of prosecution is meaningless data for determining the extend of voter fraud.

The PILF report documents over 7,000 ballots were cast by those cancelled for citizenship defects.

In the age of Obama, politics prevented voter fraud prosecutions. Obama’s Justice Department didn’t prosecute alien registration and voting because their governing philosophy opposed it. The Justice Department ignored the information gift-wrapped by local election officials.

For good measure, Democrats in Virginia launched a successful campaign against von Spakovsky to get him removed from the Fairfax County electoral board. There was no question that the data the board provided was valid. The real issue is that the question was even raised.

If you ask questions and collect empirical data about voter fraud, you must be extinguished.

It explains why Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe vetoed multiple bills that would have addressed the problems found in the PILF report, including using jury recusal forms filled out by aliens to see if the same recused juror is also registered to vote.

The PILF report catalogs the bills vetoed by McAuliffe.

Ignorance and denial is the preferred approach of voter fraud deniers, with ridicule toward those who ask the questions tossed in for good measure.

In another American age, when government records revealed that crimes were committed by the hundreds or thousands, that foreigners were registering to vote, that thousands of citizenship defects were caught on the voter rolls, everyone would have cared. Democrats would have joined Republicans in seeking solutions. But these days, our political discourse is corrupted by the same lack of intellectual honesty and factual curiosity that Solzhenitsyn described to his bunkmate: they don’t care what you have to say, they don’t care about the truth. They only care about destroying you.

Let’s see what happens. Will there be any intellectual curiosity, any effort to expound on what we now know about defects in at least one state’s election administration?

Or will we hear, yet again, the tired propaganda about “voter suppression” and the “myth of voter fraud?”

Maybe, just maybe, those tasked with enforcing the law at the United States Department of Justice and county prosecutors will ignore the nonsense and click the links — where hundreds of pages of real evidence can be found.

As Trump creates commission to study voter fraud and suppression, liberals cry foul

May 12, 2017

As Trump creates commission to study voter fraud and suppression, liberals cry foul, Washington TimesStephen Dinan and Dave Boyer, May 11, 2017

(On May 7th, Judicial Watch announced its own project on election integrity, opining that Election Integrity is Under Assault. While claiming that President Trump stole the election due to his connivance with Russia to defeat Hillary, those by whom the election process is actually under assault contend that it’s just fine and that no empirical evidence, one way or the other, is needed. All the more reason to study voter fraud and suppression. — DM)

President Trump appointed Kansas Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach to join Vice President Mike Pence in leading a commission to study voter fraud and suppression. (Associated Press/File)

President Trump established a commission Thursday to study voter fraud and suppression, tapping Vice President Mike Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris W. Kobach to lead an effort that is drawing fire even before its first meeting.

On an issue where anecdotes, conjecture and accusations from both sides have dominated the debate, the commission hopes to break new ground by producing a comprehensive national look at the extent of voter fraud.

The commission, for the first time, will delve into Homeland Security databases in an effort to determine the scope of noncitizens who end up illegally registered to vote — and sometimes even cast ballots.

“People have their different opinions about whether this is big enough to be considered a problem, how big a problem is it. But oftentimes they don’t have a whole lot of data to work with. This commission will provide that data,” Mr. Kobach told The Washington Times just after Mr. Trump signed an executive order creating the commission.

The idea for the commission stems from Mr. Trump’s insistence that Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton’s popular victory last year was padded by illegal votes. Liberal voting rights groups dismissed that, saying there isn’t enough evidence of fraud to give the matter attention.

The commission’s charge is broad and the wording is tempered, but Mr. Trump’s signature ignited ferocious pushback from Democrats and activist groups, who said he was setting the stage to strip voting rights from some Americans.

The ink was barely dry on the executive order before the American Civil Liberties Union said it had filed an open records request demanding that the White House release the evidence Mr. Trump is referencing when he makes claims of fraud.

Dale Ho, ACLU voting rights project director, called on sources to boycott the commission to try to prevent it from completing its work. He called Mr. Kobachthe king of voter suppression” and said his participation makes the commission “a sham.”

Rep. Luis V. Gutierrez, Illinois Democrat, called Mr. Kobach an “enemy of American democracy,” and Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice, said Mr. Kobach displays bigotry in his efforts to tighten voting and immigration laws.

The Brennan Center for Justice, another of the advocacy groups, released a report last week surveying election officials in 42 cities and counties and saying that 40 of them reported “no known incidents of noncitizen voting” last year.

Mr. Kobach, though, said there are types of fraud that no local official could identify. A legal immigrant who hasn’t obtained citizenship could have registered, perhaps while at the motor vehicles bureau, and it’s unlikely local elections officials would become aware.

“To make broad statements like ‘It’s not a problem, it doesn’t exist’ — that is factually impossible to do. So what the commission is going to do is provide facts,” he said.

“Their reaction is, ‘Oh no, we don’t want to see facts, we don’t want to see data.’ Well, all we’re going to do is provide data to the public, and people can draw their own conclusions about the numbers,” Mr. Kobach said.

He said it will be tougher to gauge voter suppression, which Democrats say is a bigger problem in elections than fraud.

Mr. Kobach said nonvoting is often the result of several factors and pinning down the one that discourages a person from casting a ballot is tough.

“We’ll see what the commission is able to do, and other people on the commission and people that bring evidence before the commission may bring things that I haven’t anticipated,” he said. “That’s one that’s a really tough nut to crack because it’s hard to say 100 percent that you voted in that election because of these reasons, or you didn’t vote because of that reason.”

He said Kansas has not seen evidence that its photo ID requirement is dissuading voters but other states might have evidence.

Although academics and voting officials have studied voter fraud for years, Mr. Kobach said, they have never been able to take a comprehensive look because they have not had access to important data.

He said the commission will be able to use Homeland Security data that lists every legal immigrant and visa holder in the country — and will run a sample of state voter files against that data to try to spot noncitizens who are registered to vote.

Mr. Kobach said the commission also may tap Social Security’s Death Master File to see how often dead people show up on local voting rolls.

Conservative groups said there are hints of how bad the fraud problem is.

North Carolina’s Board of Elections has identified 41 noncitizens who voted in its election last year, and Nevada has an active investigation. The Washington Times has asked for documents on that probe, but Nevada has delayed its answers.

“Perennial questions surrounding the actual scope of ineligible voters and their rates of participation can only be answered when federal offices share information,” said Logan Churchwell, spokesman for the Public Interest Legal Foundation.

In addition to Mr. Pence and Mr. Kobach, four current or former secretaries of state have been appointed: Democrats from New Hampshire and Maine, and Republicans from Indiana and Ohio.

The commission also will have one of the members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. A half-dozen other members are still to be named, though Mr. Kobach said the endeavor will be bipartisan.

“I’m keeping an open mind, and I think all members of the commission will have an open mind. The charge of the commission is to go out and collect the facts and go where the facts lead us,” he said.

Hundreds Vote Illegally in North Carolina after Court Bans Election Integrity Law

April 26, 2017

Hundreds Vote Illegally in North Carolina after Court Bans Election Integrity Law, Judicial Watch, April 26, 2017

Even in the North Carolina probe, we’ll never know if that’s the whole number. “These kinds of stories are a feature of every election and that’s despite the fact that most states often don’t even track these crimes in a systematic way,” said Robert Popper, a former Deputy Chief of Justice Department Voting Section who heads Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project. “Some states admit they don’t track them at all,” Popper added.


Less than a year after a federal appellate court sided with the Obama administration to strike down North Carolina’s election integrity reforms, a state audit reveals that hundreds of votes were illegally cast by felons and non-citizens in just one election. Voter impersonation, double voting and irregularities in absentee ballots sent via mail also tainted the election, according to the investigation conducted by the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE). The probe analyzed records from the 2016 general election.

State auditors found that about 500 ineligible people voted in 2016, more than 440 of them felons. Dozens of non-citizens from 28 different countries also cast ballots, the probe found. “A number of non-citizens said they were not aware that they were prohibited from voting,” the report states. “Interviews and evidence show that some non-citizens were misinformed about the law by individuals conducting voter registration drives or, in at least one document case, by a local precinct official.” North Carolina authorities are also investigating 24 substantiated cases of double voting in 2016. “Some violators appear to be ‘testers’ trying to find holes in the system,” according to the report. “Others claim property ownership in multiple jurisdictions should allow them to vote in each, and others brush past the law to support their candidate by any means necessary. Additionally, a case that initially appears to be a double voter—an individual who votes twice—may actually be a case of voter impersonation—an individual who casts a ballot using the identity of another person.”

The NCSBE concedes that there are probably many more cases of double voting but identifying them is difficult and there’s no reliable method to consistently find them and other types of election fraud. “While no audit exists to catch all possible cases of voter impersonation, double voter or deceased voter audits may detect such cases,” the report says. This brings up another alarming point; if duplicate registrations are voted, there’s no way to tell if that’s fraudulent voting by a single individual—which everyone assumes—or impersonation fraud. Even in the North Carolina probe, we’ll never know if that’s the whole number. “These kinds of stories are a feature of every election and that’s despite the fact that most states often don’t even track these crimes in a systematic way,” said Robert Popper, a former Deputy Chief of Justice Department Voting Section who heads Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project. “Some states admit they don’t track them at all,” Popper added.

Judicial Watch has been heavily involved in the North Carolina case and in 2015 filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in opposition to a lower court ruling preventing the state from implementing its election integrity reform law. Passed by the legislature in 2013 the measure requires voters to present a photo identification, eliminates same-day registration, shortens the early voting period from 17 to 10 days and requires voters to cast ballots in their own precinct. The Obama administration joined a group of leftist organizations to challenge the law in federal court, alleging that it disparately and adversely affects minority voting rights. A federal judge, Thomas D. Schroeder, rejected the claims and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled against North Carolina just prior to the November 2014 elections. State officials asked the Supreme Court for a temporary stay of the Fourth Circuit’s ruling and the high court granted it, allowing North Carolina’s election integrity rules to be used in 2014.

In its unanimous decision, the three-judge panel from the Fourth Circuit wrote that North Carolina’s voter integrity law harmed blacks, who overwhelmingly cast ballots for Democrats. “The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision” and “impose cures for problems that did not exist,” the appellate ruling states. “Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the State’s true motivation.” Under the racial “disparate impact” theory, which is at the heart of the controversial Fourth Circuit opinion, a defendant can be held liable for discrimination for a policy hat statistically disadvantages a minority group, even if that negative impact was neither foreseen nor intended. The more broadly accepted view by courts under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) says that a violation occurs only when voting practices are motivated by a discriminatory intent and that any incidental racially disparate impact of a voting law is not sufficient on its own to prove a violation of Section 2.

Trump’s Got a Big Job Reining In Voter Fraud

February 6, 2017

Trump’s Got a Big Job Reining In Voter Fraud, American Thinker, Michael Kimmitt, February 6, 2017

President Trump’s assertion that millions of illegal votes were cast in the November election has elicited howls of protest from offended national reporters and pundits who demanded proof. Instead of recoiling, the President doubled down with an executive order to find out just how much voter fraud exists.

It is hard to fathom how anyone, especially those inquiring minds of the Washington press corps, legitimately would be so uninterested in finding the truth.  Despite insisting that the President provide evidence of voter fraud, he is being assailed even more vehemently by the Democrat pols, late-night talk show hosts and reporters when he offers to do just that. 

A 2014 report based on an investigation conducted by a consortium of 28 universities found that 6.4 percent of the 20 million adult non-citizens in the U.S. had voted in our elections.  The study also concluded that, “Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.”  That would translate into 1,280,000 illegal votes being recorded, of which an estimated 81 percent, or more than a million, would have gone to Hillary Clinton. But instead of being shocked and dismayed that this level of criminality may be underway, most in the press gloated that Mr. Trump had overstated the voter abuse.

Questionnaires used by the consortium however, revealed a significant number of non-citizens who admitted to voting in our Presidential elections – leading the researchers to conclude this group alone could have cast between a low of 38,000 to a high of 2.8 million illegal votes.  We don’t know the extent of the abuse because there has been no attempt to find out, and the liberal press will go to great lengths to keep it that way.

To bolster its case that election fraud is statistically insignificant, the press points to the very few criminal convictions that have been secured by state or federal authorities.  But do any of us believe that only those who are ticketed had sped down our highways on a holiday weekend?  And state troopers actually make some effort to curtail traffic violations.   The Justice Department, however, has been blithely indifferent to preventing possible election fraud.

Obvious but unreported is the fact the Democratic Party pushes an open borders agenda specifically to increase its voter base and rails against “vote suppression” whenever anyone points out that these same illegal immigrants might be participating in and distorting our elections.  Fraud long has been an ugly element of American politics, and it has been almost exclusively the dominion of Democrats.

From the reckless corruption of the Boss Tweed and the Tammany Hall thugs in New York during the mid-1800s through the heavy-handed precinct politics favored by Mayor Richard J. Daley and his successors in Chicago during much of the 20th century, to the wide-spread graft of today, the Democratic Party has virtually sole claim to the mechanisms of election corruption.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), of which former President Barack Obama has had a close working association and heavy funding for his campaign coffers, has a 40-year rap sheet of widespread voter registration fraud.  Untold thousands who went to their just rewards years ago are resurrected on each election day to cast one more ballot for their favorite Democrat pol, while an estimated 2.8 million are registered to vote in more than one state and often do.

In a recent interview, former Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agent Claude Arnold described the ease with which illegal immigrants can obtain falsified government documents in California.  “In every neighborhood where there is a significant illegal alien population, there are at least several document vendors that provide this service,” Arnold explained.  “Typically people buy what we refer to as a three-pack – either a counterfeit resident alien or work authorization card, a counterfeit California drivers license and a counterfeit Social Security card.”

Securing an illicit voter registration card at this point is no problem because the veracity of the documents is seldom confirmed by election officials in the state.  “I have worked in six locations across the United States,” Arnold said.   “I’ve probably arrested more than 1,000 illegal aliens in my career, and I routinely encounter people in possession of voter registration cards and many admit to having voted.”

It is no coincidence the 18 states plus the District of Columbia that demand no form of identification are those that normally support Democratic Party candidates.  California, Illinois, New York, and New Mexico have disproportionately large numbers of immigrants and little effort is made to ensure which are legally entitled to vote.  State officials in these jurisdictions actively avoid finding out what is going on.

Officials in these states advance the predictably patronizing notion that members of minority groups are somehow less capable than Caucasians of securing any of the many legitimate forms of identification, and therefore are disproportionately turned away from the polls.  Despite the fact that study after study prove this to be untrue and minority voter turnout essentially is unaffected by ID requirements, the left plods on with these foolish assertions.

Mississippi, a state with strict photo ID requirements, now has the nation’s best ratio of black-voter turnout to white-voter turnout, and is one of several Southern states in which voter-registration is higher among blacks than whites.  So which state has the greatest racial disparity?  It happens to be none other than Massachusetts, which requires not one shred of identification to cast a ballot.

Many nations (Germany, Sweden, Italy, Switzerland, Canada, France, Belgium, South Africa, etc.) require identification to vote.  Americans want the same.  A 2012 Pew Research Center poll found 77% of all respondents favored photo IDs.  Fox News and Washington Post polls produced similar results.  About 65% of African-American and Hispanics citizens also support voter IDs.

Democrat bosses cling desperately to the threadbare canard that any request for photo identification is demeaning and racist.  And yet to board a commercial airliner, acquire a business license, purchase a six-pack of beer, open a bank account or cash a check, secure a library card, apply for welfare or other social services, purchase a gun, rent a car and so much more require photo IDs.

Our people have a right to expect that only U.S. citizens of voting age are allow to vote – and just once in each election cycle.  Each state should be required to put in place measures to protect the integrity of our elections.

More than half a century after the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed to strip away Jim Crow laws that corrupted the election process in many states.  It is time for the federal government to take similarly decisive steps to require states to certify federal voting standards are uniformly and strictly applied.

John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky: Why Trump’s probe of voter fraud is long overdue

January 26, 2017

John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky: Why Trump’s probe of voter fraud is long overdue, Fox News, January 25, 2017

The real problem in our election system is that we don’t really know to what extent President Trump’s claim is true because we have an election system that is based on the honor system. 

What we do know, despite assertions to the contrary, is that voter fraud is a problem, and both sides of the political aisle should welcome a real investigation into it — especially since the Obama administration tried so hard for eight years to obfuscate the issue and prevent a real assessment. 

The Obama administration did everything it could to avoid complying with requests from states to verify voter registration records against federal records of legal noncitizens and illegal immigrants who have been detained by law enforcement to find noncitizens who have illegally registered and voted.   

The Justice Department has also opposed every effort by states—such as Kansas, Arizona, Alabama and Georgia—to implement laws that require individuals registering to vote to provide proof of citizenship. This despite evidence that noncitizens are indeed registering and casting ballots.


President Trump has announced that his administration will be launching a major investigation of voter fraud, including those who are registered in more than one state, “those who are illegal” and those voters who are dead but still registered. This followed a media firestorm in which the New York Times and others called Trump’s assertion a “lie.”  

But just last week, President Obama told a whopper at his last news conference that went almost completely unnoticed, much less criticized.

He promised he would continue to fight voter-ID laws and other measures designed to improve voting integrity. The U.S. is “the only country among advanced democracies that makes it harder to vote,” he claimed.

This is demonstrably false. All industrialized democracies — and most that are not — require voters to prove their identity before voting.

Britain was a holdout, but last month it announced that persistent examples of voter fraud will require officials to see passports or other documentation from voters in areas prone to corruption.

The real problem in our election system is that we don’t really know to what extent President Trump’s claim is true because we have an election system that is based on the honor system.

What we do know, despite assertions to the contrary, is that voter fraud is a problem, and both sides of the political aisle should welcome a real investigation into it — especially since the Obama administration tried so hard for eight years to obfuscate the issue and prevent a real assessment.

Former Justice Department attorney Christian Adams testified under oath that he attended a November 2009 meeting at which then-deputy assistant attorney general Julie Fernandes told DOJ prosecutors that the administration would not be enforcing the federal law that requires local officials to purge illegitimate names from their voter rolls.

This refusal to enforce the law came despite a 2012 study from the Pew Center on the States estimating that one out of every eight voter registrations is inaccurate, out-of-date or a duplicate. About 2.8 million people are registered in more than one state, according to the study, and 1.8 million registered voters are dead. In most places it’s easy to vote under the names of such people with little risk of detection.

The Obama administration did everything it could to avoid complying with requests from states to verify voter registration records against federal records of legal noncitizens and illegal immigrants who have been detained by law enforcement to find noncitizens who have illegally registered and voted.

The Justice Department has also opposed every effort by states—such as Kansas, Arizona, Alabama and Georgia—to implement laws that require individuals registering to vote to provide proof of citizenship. This despite evidence that noncitizens are indeed registering and casting ballots.

In 2015 one Kansas county began offering voter registration at naturalization ceremonies. Election officials soon discovered about a dozen new Americans who were already registered—and who had voted as noncitizens in multiple elections.

These blatant attempts to prevent states from learning if they have a real problem with illegal votes makes it impossible to learn if significant numbers of noncitizens and others are indeed voting illegally, perhaps enough to make up the margin in some close elections.

There is no question that there are dishonorable people who willing to exploit the loopholes in our honor system.

An undercover video released in October by the citizen-journalist group Project Veritas shows a Democratic election commissioner in New York City saying, “I think there is a lot of voter fraud.”

A 2013 sting operation by official New York City investigators found they could vote in someone else’s name 97 percent of the time without detection.

A second O’Keefe video showed two Democratic operatives mulling how it would be possible to get away with voter fraud.

They were both fired.

How common is this? If only we knew. Political correctness has squelched probes of noncitizen voting, so most cases are discovered accidentally instead of through a systematic review of election records.

The danger looms large in states such as California, which provides driver’s licenses to noncitizens, including those here illegally, and which also does nothing to verify citizenship during voter registration.

In a 1996 House race, then-challenger Loretta Sanchez defeated incumbent Rep. Bob Dornan by under 1,000 votes. An investigation by a House committee found 624 invalid votes by noncitizens, nearly enough to overturn the result.

How big is this problem nationally? One district-court administrator estimated that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 people called for jury duty from voter-registration rolls over a two-year period were not U.S. citizens.

A September report  from the Public Interest Legal Foundation found more than 1,000 non-citizens who had been removed from the voter rolls in eight Virginia counties. Many of them had cast ballots in previous elections, but none was referred for possible prosecution.

There are many other examples of Justice’s dereliction of duty. In 2011, the Electoral Board in Fairfax County, Va., sent the Justice Department, under then-Attorney General Eric Holder, information about 278 noncitizens registered to vote in Fairfax County, about half of whom had cast ballots in previous elections. There’s no record of anything being done.

A 2011 study by three professors at Old Dominion University and George Mason University used extensive survey data to estimate that 6.4 percent of the nation’s noncitizens voted in 2008 and that 2.2 percent voted in 2010.

This study has been criticized by many academics who claim that voter fraud is vanishingly rare. Yet the Heritage Foundation maintains a list of more than 700 recent convictions for voter fraud.

A postelection survey conducted by Americas Majority Foundation found that 2.1 percent of noncitizens voted in the Nov. 8 election. In the battleground states of Michigan and Ohio, 2.5 percent and 2.1 percent, respectively, of noncitizens reported voting.

The best argument for a real investigation into just how big voter fraud is stems from the refusal of the general public to believe the media’s claims it is insignificant.

The Washington Post conducted a poll last October using the Pollfish firm that found 84 percent of Republicans believe that a “meaningful amount” of voter fraud occurs in U.S. elections, along with 75 percent of independents. A majority of Democrats — 52 percent — also believed there was meaningful voter fraud.  When it came to types of fraud, nearly 60 percent of Republicans told Pollfish they believed illegal immigrants were voting, but so too did a third of independents and a quarter of Democrats.

One Democrat who has personal experience with voter fraud is Bruce Franks Jr., a 31-year-old Black Lives Matter activist in St. Louis, who ran for state legislature last year. Last September, he got a local judge to call a new primary election after irregularities in hundreds of absentee ballots were found. He went on to win the new election with 71 percent.

Conducting an investigation that will help resolve the size of the voter fraud problem is straightforward. The Department of Homeland Security should cooperate with states wanting to check the citizenship status of voters on their rolls.

The Justice Department should put pressure on, or sue, counties and states that refuse to clean up their rolls.

The IRS has issued 11 million Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, most of them to illegal immigrants so they can file taxes. Privacy rules allow the IRS to share information for some law enforcement purposes, but not in a way that results in deportations. Those rules could be tweaked to allow states to compare the names of illegal immigrants the IRS has with their voter records.

Our honor system for voting doesn’t work. We don’t know how big of a problem voter fraud really is because no systematic effort has ever been made to investigate it.  But the public doesn’t think it’s as insignificant as the media insists.

It’s time to learn more about just how many people are exploiting weaknesses that damage election integrity.

Trump Is Right — Millions Of Illegals Probably Did Vote In 2016

November 29, 2016

Trump Is Right — Millions Of Illegals Probably Did Vote In 2016, Investors Business Daily, November 28, 2016

edit_trump_112816_newscom(Jose More / VWPics/Newscom)

Media Bias: Not surprisingly, the media take seriously and support Jill Stein’s and Hillary Clinton’s excellent vote-recount adventure, despite there being no indication a recount is needed. Heck, even President Obama agrees — Donald Trump won, period. But when Trump dares to suggest in a Sunday tweet that illegal aliens voted in the election, the media respond with massive denial.

“In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” Trump tweeted to the barely concealed contempt of many in the media.

Typical was the utterly dismissive headline in The Nation, the flagship publication of the progressive movement: “The President-Elect Is An Internet Troll.”

The Washington Post’s “The Fix” blog site did a little better: “Donald Trump’s new explanation for losing the popular vote? A Twitter-born conspiracy theory.”

There are many more, too many to put here. Most follow the same theme: Trump foolishly followed the faulty analysis of Gregg Phillips of True The Vote, an online anti-voter-fraud site and app. Phillips estimates that illegals cast three million votes in the 2016 election. He’s wrong, say the media. Heck, even the liberal fact-checking site says so.

But, in fact, it’s almost certain that illegals did vote — and in significant numbers. Whether it was three million or not is another question.

While states control the voter registration process, some states are so notoriously slipshod in their controls (California, Virginia and New York — all of which have political movements to legalize voting by noncitizens — come to mind) that it would be shocking if many illegals didn’tvote. Remember, a low-ball estimate says there are at least 11 million to 12 million illegals in the U.S., but that’s based on faulty Census data. More likely estimates put the number at 20 million to 30 million.

What’s disappointing is that instead of at least seriously considering Trump’s charge, many media reports merely parrot leftist talking points and anti-Trump rhetoric by pushing the idea that Republicans and others not of the progressive left who seek to limit voting to citizens only are racist, xenophobic nuts.

But there is evidence to back Trump’s claims. A 2014 study in the online Electoral Studies Journal shows that in the 2008 and 2010 elections, illegal immigrant votes were in fact quite high.

“We find that some noncitizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and congressional elections,” wrote Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, both of Old Dominion University, and David C. Earnest of George Mason University.

More specifically, they write, “Noncitizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.”

Specifically, the authors say that illegals may have cast as many as 2.8 million votes in 2008 and 2010. That’s a lot of votes. And when you consider the population of illegal inhabitants has only grown since then, it’s not unreasonable to suppose that their vote has, too.

Critics note that a Harvard team in 2015 had responded to the study, calling it “biased.” But that report included this gem: “Further, the likely percent of noncitizen voters in recent U.S. elections is 0.”

Really? That’s simply preposterous, frankly, as anyone who has lived in California can attest. Leftist get-out-the-vote groups openly urge noncitizens to vote during election time, and the registration process is notoriously loose. To suggest there is no illegal voting at all is absurd.

What’s appalling, as we said, is not the media’s skepticism, but its denial. But why? Illegal votes shouldn’t be allowed to sway U.S. elections. So why tolerate them?

When the far left began insinuating that the Russians had hacked the election, the media treated the nonsupported claims with the utmost of respect. They still do. But not Trump’s suggestion that illegals voted, and in large numbers, mainly for Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton.

And, yes, Trump is right: Illegal votes may in part explain why Hillary now has a nearly two-million-vote lead in the popular vote, even though she lost convincingly in the Electoral College. A Pew Research Poll earlier this year found that 53% of the Democratic Party supports letting illegals vote, even though it’s against the law. It’s pretty clear why.

Yes, there is room for skepticism of any claim that’s made. But every vote cast by someone who isn’t by law permitted to vote disenfranchises American citizens. The charge should at least be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, we will expect the media to continue to give its fawning attention to the spurious challenges of nonexistent vote tampering leveled by Hillary Clinton and Jill Stein, on behalf of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

While the media savage Trump and his motives, please recall what Hillary said in the debates: that the idea a defeated candidate wouldn’t recognize the results of the election was “horrifying.” And she has also agreed there is no “actionable evidence” of either hacking or outside interference, despite joining with Stein to seek recounts.

So what about Clinton’s motives?

As for Stein, who barely registered a blip on the 2016 electoral screen, the $5 million or so she has raised to pay for recounts really seems more like a ploy to bail out her failed campaign than a serious attempt at a recount. But the media continue to treat her like a serious political operator — not the far-left kook she is.