Tag: elections

CA Pot Tax Heist: $370 Million Stolen from Kids’ Drug Prevention to Fund Dem Voter Registration Scam

Steve Hilton announced the first findings from the newly formed California Department of Government Efficiency, led by Jenny Ray LaRue, alleging large-scale fraud involving state funds.

Speaking outside the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, Hilton said the new department had begun examining financial activity within state agencies and tracking alleged misuse of taxpayer money.

“Welcome everyone. We are here outside the California Department of tax defeat administration. This is where your money goes. This building is where your money goes into the Democrats bottomless money pit,” Hilton said.

Hilton referenced a prior estimate released weeks earlier, which he said projected at least $250 billion in fraud statewide.

“Our estimate, as you may remember, that we put out a few weeks ago, at least $250 billion of fraud in California,” Hilton said.

“And today, we’re announcing our first findings since we got to work in Cal DOGE just a few weeks ago, just a couple of weeks ago, and here it is. It’s a classic.”

Keep reading

Fifth Circuit Upholds Texas Ban on Paid Ballot Harvesting in Major Election Integrity Win

The Fifth Circuit just handed Texas a major win on ballot harvesting, reversing a lower court and allowing the state’s ban on paid in-person ballot harvesting to take effect.

The ruling clears the way for enforcement of a key provision in S.B. 1, the 2021 election integrity law signed by Gov. Greg Abbott (R). The statute targets compensated political operatives who interact with voters while they are physically handling ballots.

The law defines “vote harvesting services” as:

“in-person interaction with one or more voters, in the physical presence of an official ballot or a ballot voted by mail, intended to deliver votes for a specific candidate or measure.”

That definition is neither abstract nor open-ended. It zeroes in on in-person conduct that occurs in the presence of a ballot and is intended to influence how that ballot is cast. The statute does not sweep in general political advocacy. It addresses direct interaction with a voter while the ballot itself is being handled.

The enforcement provision leaves little ambiguity. Under the statute, a person commits an offense if he:

“knowingly provides or offers to provide vote harvesting services in exchange for compensation or other benefit.”

Put more plainly, Texas can prohibit someone from being paid to hover over a voter while a ballot is being completed and steer the voter toward a preferred candidate or measure.

Keep reading

28% of US Voter Verifications Have NO MATCH at Social Security Administration

Since 2004, the Social Security Administration has provided a simple process to help States with verifying voter applications. It’s called the HAVV System. States send in the name, DOB, and last four digits of the voter’s SSN. The SSA then notifies the State if that person is deceased, alive, matches SSA records, or No Match Found!

A whopping 13% of all HAVV verifications processed in 2025 came back as NO MATCH. That’s 318,217 of the 2.37 million submitted. Since 2011, an astounding 28.8% of all HAVV submissions have come back as NO MATCH. For the past 15 years, the federal government (SSA) has been unable to match 28.1 million voter submissions from States, to the information in its comprehensive computer systems. The Feds have every right to know what garbage is being processed at the State level for our Federal elections.

These alarming percentages most certainly are justification for the DOJ to have access to any State’s voter rolls, including the voter’s full SSN. Yet, activist Judges in MI, OR, and CA tossed out the DOJ cases for voter rolls. The HAVV program was created to process new voters who can’t provide a valid Driver’s License during registration.

This amount of “Non Matches” is why passing the SAVE Act, which requires voter ID, is simply imperative.

When a blue State receives a “NO MATCH” report from their own Federal Government, do you think they reject, or approve that voter application?

Keep reading

213 Democrats Vote Against Requiring Voter ID And Proof Of Citizenship To Vote

Nearly every single Democrat voted against legislation that would require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID for voting in federal elections.

The House passed the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act 218-213. Just Democrat Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas voted to pass the legislation alongside his Republican colleagues. A similar version, known as the SAVE Act, passed the House last year with the support of four Democrats.

The legislation now heads to the Senate, though it would need 60 votes to reach cloture. Self-described “Republican” Lisa Murkowski has already stated she would oppose the election integrity legislation, while Democrat Chuck Schumer has suggested the legislation is “dead on arrival.”

But as The Federalist’s Matt Kittle reported, Republicans — who control the Senate — could invoke the “talking filibuster,” which would force Democrats to keep talking to stall a vote on the legislation. Legislators would have no opportunity for a break and, as Kittle points out, would have to “explain to the 80 percent of Americans (including a significant number of Democrats) who support citizenship and ID requirements, why they so vehemently oppose basic election integrity.”

Some Republicans, however, don’t want to force a vote on the popular legislation, as Kittle reported — but they should.

Keep reading

It’s Not Just Pakistan – Foreigners from Around the World Who Are Not US Citizens Can Register to Vote in US Elections

As The Gateway Pundit reported on Friday, the San Joaquin County Sheriff’s office in California help a news conference 2023 on illegal voting in their California community.

The San Joaquin Sheriff’s Office found 41 sealed, completed, mail-in ballots in the home of Lodi City Council member Shakir Khan. There were a total of 71 voter registrations tied to his address, phone, or email.

Khan targeted members of the local Pakistani immigrant community (including elderly individuals unfamiliar with U.S. voting processes), pressuring them, forging signatures, filling out ballots, and submitting fraudulent registrations.

The San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Captain told reporters at the time that voting records revealed people outside of the country, in Pakistan, were allowed to vote in the California elections.

The Sheriff’s  Captain revealed this during a press conference in September 2025.

Sheriff’s Captain: “The way the voting system is structured, we see quite a few flaws. You’re able to register and cast a vote if you don’t live in the country as evidence of his brother in Pakistan.

I think we have some evidence of two or three other people out of the country that are voted? Is that correct? Yeah, approximately two or three other people out of the country, as well as people residing outside of the district.

The online voter registration system, it seems to be an honor system. Anybody can put information in there to register to vote. All you have to do is click a box and say that you’re not lying, and then you’ll get an email from the Secretary of State or something in the mail saying, Thank you for registering to vote. And there you are. Once you’re on the voter rolls, anytime an election comes around, guess what? You get mailed a ballot, right? You get mailed something to vote. So we found that a little bit problematic.

Keep reading

Senator John Fetterman Weighs in on the SAVE Act – “I Do Not Believe That it’s Unreasonable to Show ID Just to Vote”

Senator John Fetterman was on “Sunday Morning Futures” with host Maria Bartiromo to discuss the SAVE Act, which, if passed, would require voters to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.

“Are you gonna vote to fund DHS?” Bartiromo asked.

“I’ve always been, you know, just secure our border, deport all the criminals,” Fetterman said.

“I hope it doesn’t shut down cause we could all agree to focus on those things, and that’s where I’m gonna be and where my vote is gonna be,” Fetterman said.

“That’s going to impact TSA, people’s travel, certainly under the Department of Homeland Security. It’s gonna impact FEMA,” Bartiromo commented.

“What I don’t understand, Senator, is why it is so difficult to get the SAVE Act into the portfolio and onto the floor. What’s wrong with having an ID to vote?” Bartiromo said.

“Chuck Schumer last week said if the SAVE Act even attempts to get to the Senate, it is dead on arrival. Why?” Bartiromo asked.

“I’m going to see a lot of TSA people, and they are not gonna get paid. Now I can’t have an answer for them other than it’s just basic politics right now. I think every American deserves to be paid for the work that they have done,” Fetterman said.

“I’ve been a Democrat that refused to shut our government down last year. I mean, that’s real lives, and they are not wealthy if they are TSA folks. They are allowing us to fly safe here in America,” Fetterman continued.

Senator Fetterman stated that showing ID is a reasonable standard to be able to vote in federal elections.

“As a Democrat, I do not believe that it’s unreasonable to show ID just to vote,” Fetterman continued.

“Less than a year ago in Wisconsin, you know, they added that to the Constitution by a 63 percent, you know, passing,” Fetterman said of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

“It’s not a radical idea for regular Americans to show your ID to vote, and it’s absolutely those things are not Jim Crow or anything,” Fetterman continued.

“I don’t ever want to vote to shut our government down again,” Fetterman said.

“You are very much where the people are,” Bartiromo commented.

Keep reading

AIPAC Coordinates Donors in Illinois House Primaries

With Israel’s reputation reaching record lows among Democrats, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is resorting to ever more sophisticated methods to support its preferred candidates while cloaking its own involvement.

The amount of money that the premier pro-Israel organization is able to spend in elections is extraordinarily valuable to candidates who would otherwise have little chance of winning. But it now comes with a catch: If voters know the money comes from an organization advocating on behalf of Israel, it can do more harm than good.

AIPAC road-tested its stealth approach in a 2024 House primary in Oregon that pitted Susheela Jayapal, the sister of Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), against physician Maxine Dexter. Dexter raised relatively little money throughout much of her campaign, then saw a last-minute deluge organized by AIPAC coupled with outside spending through super PACs, which themselves turned out to be funded by AIPAC. The timing of the donations meant that there was no meaningful transparency before voters went to the polls, and Dexter expressed a mixture of ignorance and umbrage when her opponents suggested the money actually came from AIPAC.

The main super PAC in question (named 314 Action) explicitly denied that any funding came from AIPAC—a claim revealed as a flagrant lie once disclosure records finally became public. But by then, Dexter had triumphed and was on her way to Congress.

Campaign staffers expect AIPAC to continue using the tactic in this year’s primaries. “In these districts where we have a progressive primary fight, you’re going to see AIPAC put out a network of shell PACs, putting money into races without putting their name on it,” said Usamah Andrabi of the progressive campaign group Justice Democrats.

And indeed, the same pattern is emerging in three competitive House primaries in Illinois. The pieces of the puzzle can be found in the campaign disclosures of House candidates Laura Fine, a state legislator running in Illinois’s Ninth Congressional District for the open seat vacated by Rep. Jan Schakowsky on the North Side of Chicago and its northern suburbs; Donna Miller, a Cook County commissioner running in Illinois’s Second District to replace Rep. Robin Kelly on Chicago’s South Side and southern suburbs; and Melissa Bean, a banker and former member of Congress making a comeback in Illinois’s Eighth District in the western suburbs of Chicago. Bean is also running for an open seat to replace Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who like Kelly is running for Senate.

Putting the pieces together, it is clear that AIPAC is again funding super PACs in order to secretly funnel money to its preferred candidates, while also coordinating donors to give to those candidates directly.

Miller is running in a race that features an attempted political comeback by Jesse Jackson Jr., and Fine is squaring off against progressive Daniel Biss and Kat Abughazaleh, who became a national figure after she was indicted by the Trump Justice Department for her role in anti-ICE protests. Bean is facing Junaid Ahmed, who supports ending all military aid to Israel.

A look at Miller, Fine, and Bean’s filings betrays an impressively coordinated operation at work. Sixty-five donors who previously gave to AIPAC or its affiliated super PAC United Democracy Project (UDP) have given to both Miller and Fine. These donors delivered $88,066.66 to the Fine campaign. They also contributed $119,746.33 to Miller. A whopping 237 former AIPAC/UDP donors have given to both Miller and Bean, contributing $396,288.01 to Bean and $429,083.00 to Miller. Forty-four of these donors have given to all three candidates, sending a total of $208,753.33 to them.

Keep reading

Raskin: Voter ID Law Violates The 19th Amendment In Denying The Vote To Women

With polling showing over 80 percent of Americans in favor of voter ID laws, it is hard to come up with reasons why you need an ID to board a plane but not vote in a federal election. That was particularly glaring this week when Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) required people to show an ID to attend his campaign events after opposing an ID requirement to vote. So if you want to hear Ossoff speak against voter ID, you will have to show your ID. Now Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) has a rather bizarre argument: the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, if passed, would likely violate the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.

CNN Host Kasie Hunt told Raskin that “Voter ID is supported by the majority of Americans. But there are Democrats on the Hill and you voted against this? Why not support voter ID?”

Raskin then had this curious response:

“… what’s wrong with the Save act? What’s wrong with it is that it might violate the 19th Amendment, which gives women the right to vote, because you’ve got to show that all of your different IDs match.

So if you’re a woman who’s gotten married and you’ve changed your name to your husband’s name, but you’re so now your current name is different from your name at birth.

Now you’ve got to go ahead and document that you need an affidavit explaining why. And why would we go to all of these, troubles in order to keep people from voting when none of the states that are actually running the elections are telling us that there’s any problem.”

In fact, under various voter ID laws, states can create systems to address issues such as different maiden names or name changes following a divorce, including requiring a standard attestation provided by the state.

Nothing in the SAVE Act requires birth certificates be brought to polling places. 

It allows for the use of a signed attestation supplied by the state.

As for identification, various forms are allowed:

The legislation would require documentation that shows an individual was born in the U.S., including either:

  • An ID that complies with the REAL ID Act and indicates the holder is a citizen;
  • A passport;
  • A military ID card and military record of service that shows a person was born in the U.S.;
  • A government-issued photo ID that shows the person’s place of birth was in the U.S.;
  • Other forms of government-issued photo ID, if they’re accompanied by a birth certificate, comparable document or naturalization certificate.

Now, on the 19th Amendment, Raskin’s argument is simply ridiculous. Indeed, if this were credible, why has it not been used successfully against prior state voting ID laws? Rather than making this claim on CNN, it would be interesting for Raskin to try it in court once the SAVE Act passes.

Keep reading

LAUGHABLE: Jasmine Crockett Tells MSNOW That Republicans Will ‘Absolutely’ Vote for Her in a General Election

Far left Rep. Jasmine Crockett recently appeared on MSNOW and told host Michael Steele that Republican voters in Texas will ‘absolutely’ vote for her because she’s genuine or something.

Crockett has raised her national profile over the last year through her willingness to go on TV and say incredibly stupid things, but it’s unlikely that she would win over Republican voters in a general election.

It’s also funny how no one at MSNOW even challenges her on any of this.

Breitbart News has details:

Co-host Michael Steele said, “Do you think Republicans, when you get to a general election, can be convinced that you are the representative they need in Washington?”

Crockett said, “Oh, absolutely. Now, Michael, you can maybe talk about this a little bit more because I think the Democrats have a perception of what Republicans want. And I think that, you know, what the real is. I think that Republicans aren’t looking for somebody that is Republican lite. They can just go and get the real thing. What they want is somebody that they know who they are. So I have text messages from Republicans that have made it clear that if there is a certain person that ends up making it through, they are absolutely voting for me because they know who I am.”

She added, “And so that’s why we can understand. When Republicans went out and voted for a less than perfect candidate in Donald Trump, they don’t seek perfection, whereas Democrats typically do.

Keep reading

Michigan, Alabama Republicans Advance Bills To Cut Off Foreign Money In Elections

Michigan and Alabama Republicans took major steps this week to secure their states’ elections from foreign dark money.

The GOP-controlled Michigan House passed legislation (HB 5197) on Thursday that seeks to prohibit foreign nationals from contributing money to ballot initiative campaigns. The measure passed 97-6, with seven members not voting.

HB 5197 stipulates that Michigan ballot question committees “shall not knowingly or willfully receive, solicit, or accept contributions from a foreign national, whether directly or indirectly.” These committees are further required to obtain “affirmation” from any person who donates to the campaign that he or she “is not a foreign national and has not knowingly or willfully received, solicited, or accepted more than $100,000.00 in aggregate from foreign nationals in the 4 years immediately preceding the date of the contribution.”

Ballot question committees who discover that a donor meets the bill’s criteria are ordered to “return” such contributions “not later than 30 business days” after receiving it. Those who violate the provision will be “subject to a civil fine of not more than double the amount of the undisclosed contribution.”

The measure includes additional language explicitly prohibiting foreign nationals from making “a contribution, independent expenditure, or expenditure to promote or defeat a ballot question or to qualify a question for placement on the ballot.”

HB 5197 now heads to Michigan’s Democrat-run Senate for consideration.

Keep reading