Tag: election rigging

New Jersey Democrats INDICTED AGAIN in Expanding Voter Fraud Case — Accused of Stealing and Forging Ballots and Voter Registrations to Rig 2020 Election

Paterson City Council President Alex Mendez faces new charges in a superseding indictment related to the May 2020 municipal election.

Alongside his wife, Yohanny Mendez, and campaign workers Omar Ledesma and Iris Rigo, Mendez is accused of orchestrating a scheme involving the theft and forgery of ballots and voter registrations to secure his council seat.

The indictment alleges that the group unlawfully collected and tampered with vote-by-mail ballots, including destroying ballots not cast for Mendez and submitting fraudulent ones in their place.

According to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office,

“The 10-count superseding indictment alleges that Mendez, who represents the Third Ward on the Paterson City Council, his wife Yohanny Mendez and campaign workers Omar Ledesma and Iris Rigo tried to deprive Paterson residents of a fair election. Alex Mendez was first indicted in 2021 for election-related offenses. Further investigation by OPIA resulted in additional charges filed by complaint in October 2023 against the co-defendants, as well as additional charges for Alex Mendez, all stemming from the May 2020 election.

[…]

Based on publicly filed documents and statements in court in this case, the OPIA investigation began after hundreds of mail-in ballots for the May 2020 Paterson election were found in a postal box in the neighboring municipality of Haledon, when all voting was being conducted via vote-by-mail because of COVID-19.

Members of the alleged conspiracy face several charges including Tampering with Public Records or Information (third degree), Falsifying or Tampering with Records (fourth degree), Forgery (third degree), and Election Fraud (second degree). Among the allegations, they are accused of submitting fictitious or fraudulent vote-by-mail registrations and ballots.

The superseding indictment contains a new charge of Theft (third degree) against the four defendants for allegedly taking other peoples’ ballots with the intent to deprive them of their vote. It also includes a new count of Receiving Stolen Property (third degree) for those four defendants, alleging they received ballots that they knew had been stolen.

It is further alleged that the defendants tried to cause one or more witnesses previously contacted by investigators to make additional, contradictory, and false statements – leading to the superseding indictment’s new charge of Witness Tampering (third degree).

The superseding indictment also charges an additional defendant, Ninoska Adames, a Paterson resident, with Hindering Apprehension or Prosecution (third degree) and Tampering with Public Records or Information (third degree). She allegedly falsified a voter certificate on a vote-by-mail ballot and gave false information to detectives with the intent to hinder the State’s investigation into the May 2020 election.

The charges are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Second-degree charges carry a sentence of five to 10 years in state prison and a fine of up to $150,000. Third-degree charges carry a sentence of three to five years in prison and a fine of up to $15,000. Fourth-degree offenses could lead to up to 18 months in state prison and a fine of up to $10,000.”

“As alleged, this case is not simply about a city council seat. The people’s right to vote and to have their voices heard was subverted by what we allege to be an unlawful conspiracy,” said Attorney General Platkin. “This was unfair to the voters of Paterson. It was, as the grand jury charged, fraud and theft.”

“The tenacious, hard work of the investigators and prosecutors on this case uncovered new information about the lengths the defendants allegedly went to in an attempt to rig Paterson’s municipal election and cover up their conduct,” said Drew Skinner, Executive Director of OPIA.

Mendez was initially indicted on election fraud charges in 2021.

In 2023, new charges have been brought against him, his wife Yohanny Mendez, and two other Paterson residents, Omar Ledesma and Iris Rigo.

Keep reading

Dem Rep. Eric Swalwell Vows Use of ‘Subpoena Power’ to Investigate Whether Elon Musk’s Starlink Rigged Election For Trump

Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell has stoked a conspiracy theory Elon Musk used his Starlink satellite network to rig the 2024 presidential election for Trump.

During an appearance with a left-wing podcaster, Swalwell was asked about the integrity of the previous election and the role that Starlink may have played.

The host remarked:

The enemies allegedly stole U.S. data. The leak came through Elon Musk’s Starlink. I mean, I’m sure you’ve heard people, based on all of this information that’s happened since then, wonder if 2024 was secure. But more importantly, Representative, about 2026 and 2028, can you talk about that a little bit? Do you have concerns?

Swalwell, who is best known for being honey-trapped by a Chinese spy named Fang Fang, responded:

Elon Musk has done nothing in the last five months to make me think that we shouldn’t ask questions about what the hell he was doing in 2024.

Maybe we gave him too much of the benefit of the doubt, you know, after the election, but the way that he’s conducted himself with DOGE, and the way that, you know, he’s exposed us to so many hackers outside.

The way that he’s taken data, you know, from Americans, from our records — whether it’s Social Security or health care records, the only way that we can understand, you know, what the hell Elon Musk has been doing is to be in the majority.

Swalwell added that being in the majority would give Democrats “subpoena power,” which he would use to investigate the spurious allegations.

Keep reading

How to…Rig Your Rigged Elections

Are you an aspiring oligarch, dictator or autocrat? Do you want to wield power whilst maintaining a façade of popular support and democratic mandate? Do you want to make your proles believe they have a choice?

Well then, welcome to the first of our “How to…” series. A selection of articles dedicated to teaching aspiring authoritarians how to hide tyranny behind a reassuring mask of  freedom.

Here we’ll go into the finer points of how it’s possible to have “elections” that mean almost nothing.

What we talk about when we talk about rigging an election

First things first, we need to establish what we mean when we talk about “election rigging”.

Controlling the outcome of an election is a comparatively simple, even vulgar, process. All you need to do is manipulate the count and/or simply lie about the result.

However doing this efficiently  – rigging an election with as little effort as possible and disguising that fact is more difficult.

In short, if your rigged election is entirely reliant on simply forging ballots you have done something wrong. If you want to reliably and consistently control the results of your “elections” you need to be more creative than that.

The vast majority of your work pre-election will be dedicated to laying the groundwork, building infrastructure, and lubricating the public.

The vote itself is the final destination in a long journey that starts with…

Keep reading

A Newly Discovered Algorithm in Wisconsin Voter File is Indisputable Evidence of Criminal Election Fraud

Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., has discovered a never-before-seen algorithm in the Wisconsin Election Commission’s (WEC) voter registration database, leaving no doubt someone has penetrated the WEC’s computer system to impose a criminal reordering on the voter files. This finding alone should draw the attention of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and FBI Director Kash Patel. Yet, to date, we see no action whatsoever from the DOJ or the FBI investigating criminal election fraud.

Paquette first observed that the WEC voter role had an unusually high number of voter records that ended in zero. Assuming that the WEC voter roll assigned voter ID numbers sequentially, without breaks or outside manipulation, records ending in 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 should appear with equal distribution. As seen in Table 1, voter records ending in zero occurred in 30.6 percent of the voter records, while those ending in numbers 1 through 9 ended with each number appearing equally at 7.7 percent of the time.

Paquette was at a loss to explain this irregularity until he realized that every voter ID record ending in zero had two different Wisconsin voters assigned the same voter ID number. In searching the database, Paquette confirmed that in every case where the same voter ID number was assigned to two different voters, the voter record ended in zero.

We have labeled the two voter IDs tied to WEC voter records ending in zero as “doubles,” a term devised to distinguish this phenomenon from the “modified duplicates” that Paquette previously found in the WEC voter database. “Modified duplicates” involve making multiple voter records for the same voter, which can be done, for instance, by assigning a different birthdate or address to each duplicated record. Because duplicated voters each have different dates of birth or other addresses, the “modified duplicates” appear to be different people.

The point of the “modified duplicate” scheme is to create false voters, all of whom nevertheless get legitimate state voter ID numbers. The non-existent “multiple duplicate” voters can then be hidden back in the voter role, identifiable to the criminals by “algorithm locator numbers,” so they are available for use in fraudulent mail-in ballot schemes.

Why the “doubles” scheme assigns the same voter ID number to two different voters is more difficult to figure out. What is also not clear is whether one or both of the “doubles” are real voters or if both of the “doubles” voters could be fictitious.

A scheme this complicated must operate through a computer algorithm that creates “doubles” for every voter ID record ending in zero in a WEC database of over 7 million voters. That is, whatever rule is applied to pick the two voters who constitute the “doubles” in a database with over 7 million voters needs an algorithm if the scheme is to be applied, monitored, and updated on an ongoing basis.

Keep reading

Daniel Noboa’s electoral theft will cement cartel and corporate control over Ecuador

President Daniel Noboa appears to have stolen Ecuador’s election. He’s now poised to consolidate control of a system that has benefitted cartels and multinational corporations – including his family business – at the expense of average Ecuadorians. And Washington likes what it sees.

Watch The Grayzone’s special video report on Noboa’s well-documented ties to transnational drug cartels here.

On April 13, 2025, Ecuador’s National Electoral Council proclaimed incumbent President Daniel Noboa the winner of the presidential runoff—a result that his challenger, the left-wing Luisa González, denounced as “massive fraud.”

If Noboa secures what appears to be an ill-gotten victory, he will be able to consolidate complete control over a state weakened by austerity and corrupted by deep infiltration by transnational drug cartels – a criminal network that is deeply enmeshed with his family’s business.

González, who led several polls by up to 6 points as of Friday, has demanded a vote-by-vote recount.

Keep reading

Former top CISA official leaving SentinelOne to challenge Trump administration probe

Chris Krebs, a former top Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) official, is leaving the private sector to challenge a Trump administration probe.

Krebs said in a Wednesday email that he was “stepping away from” the cybersecurity company SentinelOne “effective immediately.”

“For those who know me, you know I don’t shy away from tough fights. But I also know this is one I need to take on fully – outside of SentinelOne. This will require my complete focus and energy. It’s a fight for democracy, for freedom of speech, and for the rule of law. I’m prepared to give it everything I’ve got,” the former CISA director added later.

Krebs, who was insistent that the U.S.’s elections were not compromised, pushed back in 2020 against allegations from now-President Trump that the election had been fraudulent.

In a memo from last week, Trump ordered a probe into “Krebs’ activities as a Government employee, including his leadership of CISA” by Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. 

The president said in his memo that the probe needed to find “any instances” in which the former CISA director’s behavior “appears to have been contrary to suitability standards for Federal employees” or in which he was “involved the unauthorized dissemination of classified information.”

Keep reading

Senators, Don’t Fall For Hillary Clinton’s Desperate Lies About The SAVE Act

Last week, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 22, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which I proudly co-authored with my friend, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah. The SAVE Act passed the House on a bipartisan basis, an inconvenient fact for Democrat leaders’ chosen narrative attacking it. 

Perhaps the most absurd narrative peddled from the left, including twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, is that the SAVE Act will somehow disenfranchise married women, or anyone else who has changed his or her name, from voting in federal elections. 

Nothing could be further from the truth. The SAVE Act secures all Americans’ votes by ensuring noncitizens do not vote in federal elections, effectively canceling out the votes of citizens, including married women.

The SAVE Act, a common-sense proposal widely supported by the American people, simply amends the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) to require documentary proof of citizenship to register individuals to vote in federal elections.

Those opposed to the SAVE Act have hurled wild accusations against the bill, comparing it to a “poll tax” or “Jim Crow 2.0.” This is nothing new; virtually every state that has passed election integrity laws has faced backlash from left-wing Democrats decrying the measures as racist. This ignores the fact that, for example, in Georgia, voting increased after the state implemented voter integrity measures. 

The left loves nothing more than invoking tiresome rhetorical tactics involving race or sex to stir up controversy against common-sense proposals. But Clinton’s argument that the SAVE Act will disenfranchise married women is not grounded in reality, and here’s why.

First, married women who have changed their name and already registered to vote — millions, mind you — are utterly unaffected by the SAVE Act. The so-called “69 million married women” figure is a statistical sleight of hand meant to purposefully ignite fear and conveniently glosses over this critical fact. As my friend Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., rightly pointed out during the House floor debate, this is a non-issue for those women, rendering the panic-peddling not just misleading but outright false. 

Second, for individuals who have changed their name and already updated their documentary proof of citizenship to reflect this, no action is needed, and they can register to vote.

For the small fraction of individuals who have not updated their documentation to reflect a name change — though most do so quickly for general life purposes such as an I-9 form for employment, passport to travel, and Social Security card for taxes — the SAVE Act explicitly directs states to establish a process allowing them to register to vote despite a name discrepancy. The SAVE Act specifically left this to the states because name-change procedures are governed by state law, and the specific requirements, forms, fees, and processes can vary from state to state. 

No one will be unable to vote because of a name change.

Keep reading

North Carolina Supreme Court Allows 60K Votes Lacking ID To Count In High Court Race

The North Carolina Supreme Court decided to allow about 60,000 ballots to count in a race for a seat on its own bench, despite those voters never having provided proper identification upon registering.

A unanimous court Friday decided that over 60,000 votes challenged by Republican candidate and appellate judge Jefferson Griffin should remain in the count for the vote total. In a 4-2 split, the court also decided that another roughly 5,500 overseas voters who did not provide identification would be allowed 30 days to fix their ballots, while another 267 voters who have never resided in North Carolina would have their votes removed.

“This Court is aware of the valid competing interests in this case the need for an expeditious resolution of an election that occurred more than five months ago and the importance of ensuring that only lawful votes are counted,” the majority wrote.

Griffin’s race against incumbent Democrat Justice Allison Riggs, who is recused, is the last in the country to be decided from the Nov. 5, 2024, general election. On election night, Griffin was winning by about 10,000 votes, but over the following nine days, overseas and provisional ballots started trickling in to give Riggs a 734-vote lead.

Griffin challenged over 65,000 ballots because they were cast either by voters who had not provided a driver’s license or last four digits of a Social Security Number upon registering, in accordance with state law, or had not provided a photo ID upon casting their ballot as required in the state as well.

The discrepancy with incomplete registrations occurred because the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE), currently run by Democrats, failed their duty to ensure that citizens in the state were properly registered because it did not adequately inform them the identification was required.

“To the extent that the registrations of voters in the first category are incomplete, the Board is primarily, if not totally, responsible,” the decision states. And while the NCSBE learned of the issue in 2023, well before the 2024 election, the court noted it “did nothing, however, to ensure that any past violations were remedied.”

“The board’s inattention and failure to dutifully conform its conduct to the law’s requirements is deeply troubling,” the opinion continued. “Nevertheless, our precedent on this issue is clear. Because the responsibility for the technical defects in the voters’ registration rests with the Board and not the voters, the wholesale voiding of ballots cast by individuals who subsequently proved their identity to the Board by complying with the voter identification law would undermine the principle that ‘this is a government of the people, in which the will of the people — the majority — legally expressed, must govern.’”

The court distinguished between providing an approved form of identification upon registering, which is required by state and federal law, and another law requiring voter ID upon casting a ballot, which it says the challenged voters have done. North Carolina’s voter ID laws are notoriously weak.

Keep reading

After 4 Years Of Claiming US Elections Are ‘Most Secure Ever,’ Leftists Again Accuse Trump Of Stealing Them

In just their latest bizarre twist of logic, leftists are again accusing President Donald Trump of planning to steal an election — even though for the last four years, they insisted this was impossible.

On Friday, Paul Rosenzweig asserted in an article for The Atlantic that “Trump Is Already Undermining The Next Election.” He claimed Trump’s executive order requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote was “nothing less than an attempt to disenfranchise his opponents and forestall electoral defeat.” In reality, the measure would simply prevent noncitizens from voting and reinforce other vulnerable areas of elections, for example, by requiring paper ballots. Still, he apparently thinks Trump will rig the next election.

Rosenzweig is not alone. Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told The New Yorker last month that he thinks Trump is turning America “from a democracy to an autocracy,” and that “the chances are growing that we will not have a free and fair election in 2026.” These concerns come as Democrats’ favorability is plummeting.

Even before Trump’s landslide victory in November, legacy media were planting seeds that he might “steal” the race. MSNBC said in October that then-Vice President Kamala Harris was “prepared if Trump tries to steal the election,” while NBC said Trump could “declare a premature election win.” Vox even speculated that Trump would use the Supreme Court to “steal the election.” And just days before the election, The Rolling Stone published an article on “How Republicans Could Help Steal The Election From Harris.” 

After Trump won, many Democrats began wondering how their immensely popular candidate could have lost. After all, she spent millions on celebrity endorsements, and rapper Lizzo promised that if Harris won, the “whole country will be like Detroit.” What could have gone wrong? 

Keep reading

Tulsi Gabbard Drops TWO Huge Bombshells

National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard made a startling revelation during an open cabinet meeting Wednesday, announcing that she has evidence that electronic voting machines have been tampered with to manipulate the results of past US elections.

“I’ve got a long list of things that we’re investigating. We have the best going after this, election integrity being one of them,” Gabbard stated.

“We have evidence of how these electronic voting systems have been vulnerable to hackers for a very long time,” she continued.

Gabbard emphasised that the evidence shows that machines are “vulnerable to exploitation to manipulate the results of the votes being cast.”

She told President Trump that the finding “further drives forward your mandate to bring about paper ballots across the country so that voters can have faith in the integrity of our elections.”

It seems the ‘conspiracy theorists’ were right again.

Keep reading