Tag: voting

Michigan’s Dirty SOS Jocelyn Benson Gives Green Light To ONLINE VOTING With NO Legislative Approval

On September 22, 2024, we warned of a shocking plan by Democrats to steal the upcoming general election.

In the 2000 presidential election, a mere 629 votes separated the race between George W. Bush and Al Gore in Florida. When the absentee overseas votes finally arrived, George W. Bush was able to take the 537-vote lead from Al Gore and win the presidency.

On August 12, 2024, the DNC released a memo announcing that it would spend six figures to collect up to 9 million Democratic votes from overseas.

The DNC’s stated goal of winning the votes of approximately 9 million Americans through its Democrats Abroad website seems impossible, given that, according to a recent report by the federal government, only 4.4 million US citizens reside overseas, and only 2.8 million of those are of voting age.

Watch this stunning montage of Democrats working with their allies in the media to push for millions of NON-EXISTENT overseas “voters” to miraculously cast millions of votes in the 2024 election.

Despite the fact that military members only make up a small fraction of all UOCAVA voters, Democrats and the media continue to identify all UOCAVA voters as “military voters” as a way to gaslight the general public into believing that Republicans who want to secure the UOCAVA voting system are trying to disenfranchise military voters.

Keep reading

Trump to sign executive order mandating voter ID: ‘NO EXCEPTIONS’

President Donald Trump announced that he will sign an executive order requiring voters to present identification in all U.S. elections, while also largely eliminating mail-in voting.

President Trump issued the announcement in a Saturday Truth Social post, stating: “Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS! I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!!”

The president added that he will also remove the mail-in voting option, “Except For Those That Are Very Ill, And The Far Away Military. USE PAPER BALLOTS ONLY!!!”

Keep reading

Newsom Holds Californians Hostage, Refuses to Fully Fund Prop 36 – A Measure that Passed in a Landslide to Increase Penalties for Theft and Drug Trafficking

California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) is holding Californians hostage by refusing to fully fund Proposition 36 – a measure that passed in a landslide in November 2024 that increases penalties for theft.

Proposition 36 passed in California in a landslide 71% to 21%.

California voters overwhelmingly voted to increase penalties for theft and drug trafficking after a record number of brick-and-mortar retailers closed down due to smash-and-grab robberies.

Governor Gavin Newsom (D) opposed Prop 36 because he said it’s “too harsh.”

Per LA Public Press, Prop 47 “scaled back punishments for certain nonviolent offenses for drugs and theft, which were reclassified from felonies to misdemeanors.”

Under Prop. 36, penalties will be increased, and sentences will be lengthened for drug possession and for the theft of items valued at less than $950.

Prop. 36 rolls back some of the soft-on-crime policies that California voters passed in 2014 with Prop. 47.

Newsom has only approved $100 million for prop 36 – far below the $400 million needed to fully pay for the new law.

Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman blasted Newsom for not funding prop 36.

“We will call [Newsom],” Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman said. “We will send him social media. We will DM him. I’ll say it right to the camera, Governor Newsom if you’re watching, get us this funding. If you want to save lives, get us this funding.”

Keep reading

Newsom Slips — Admits ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS are VOTING in U.S. Elections

In defending his state’s sanctuary laws, California Governor Gavin Newsom warned that Immigration and Customs Enforcement might show up at polling places to “chill participation.” 

That statement was an admission: Democrats know non-citizens are voting—and they are relying on it.

For years, Democrats and allied media have insisted that non-citizen voting is a “myth.”

Yet extensive research contradicts them. A 2014 Electoral Studies paper found that about one-quarter of non-citizens were likely registered, and over six percent voted in 2008.

The study concluded those votes “likely” changed key elections for Democrats, including Electoral College outcomes and a Senate race that enabled passage of Obamacare.

It also reported that 81.8% of non-citizens who admitted voting in 2008 supported Barack Obama.

Those findings were reinforced by Just Facts, which updated the estimates using 2022 Census data.

They determined that between 10% and 27% of non-citizens nationwide are illegally registered to vote.

With 19.7 million non-citizen adults counted in 2022, that means two to five million names appear illegally on voter rolls.

Given turnout rates, between one million and nearly three million non-citizens could cast ballots in 2024.

That is enough to swing battleground states and determine control of Congress.

The argument that those numbers are “too small” collapses when compared to recent election margins.

In 2020, Biden carried Arizona by just over 10,000 votes. Georgia’s margin was fewer than 12,000.

If even a fraction of the non-citizen votes identified occurred in those states, outcomes could have flipped.

Keep reading

Access is NOT an Election Security Metric…But It’s All They Have

I saw this article yesterday about mail-in voting, and it’s worth sharing an excerpt from My Journal Courier:

“Trump has remained consistent; even before the 2020 election, he warned: ‘“’There is a lot of dishonesty going on with mail-in voting.’ Trump doesn’t need to hedge about voting rules abroad. Poland was the one other country that considered conducting its 2020 presidential election by mail during the pandemic, but even it abandoned the attempt. Countries don’t use the kind of mass mail-in voting now used in eight states – where states automatically send ballots to all registered voters, who then mail them back. That system differs from absentee ballots, which require a request and traditionally demanded a reason, such as being out of town on Election Day.”

I read this after receiving a CEIR email about mail-in voting, with the usual suspects and their usual disinformation.

“As CEIR Executive Director David Becker told CBS News, getting rid of mail-in voting ‘would make our elections much less secure.’ Spreading voting over several days with options like mail-in voting allows additional time to recover from hiccups beyond election officials’ control, like power outages or disinformation. Flexible voting options limit inconvenience and help prevent the disenfranchisement of voters on Election Day.”

They claim that early and mail-in voting is required for secure elections…so that officials can recover from “disinformation” during the election period.

Wait, what?

Unexpected admission…

The single security control for vote by mail is signature verification — and that single control was how they sold it to the people: Don’t worry, we’ll know the ballot actually comes from the eligible voter because we’ll match the signature.

But the same people that push mail-in voting as a sacred right are now arguing in courts that signature verification is a poll tax, suppressive, and must be eliminated. If they accomplish that particular goal, then mail-in ballots would have ZERO security controls.

Keep reading

Appeals Court: Pa. mail-in ballots with misdated envelopes cannot be thrown out

A federal appeals court has ruled that Pennsylvania cannot reject mail-in ballots solely because the voter failed to write an accurate date on the ballot’s return envelope.

In a unanimous decision Tuesday, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Pennsylvania cannot disqualify mail-in ballots solely because the return envelopes are missing or have incorrect dates.

The court ruled that enforcing this requirement imposes an unreasonable burden on voters’ Constitutional rights with little to no benefit in preventing fraud.

The three-judge panel, in a 55-page opinion, weighed Pennsylvania’s interest in enforcing the rule against the Constitutional right to vote. The judges concluded they “could not justify” throwing out ballots over date issues, a policy that has led to the rejection of thousands of ballots that were otherwise valid.

State law requires voters to add a date on the return envelope of their mail ballot. But many voters misunderstand the rule, either omitting the date or mistakenly writing something like their birthday instead.

GOP leaders insist the date mandate protects election integrity, and they have advocated for a strict reading of the law to disqualify ballots without proper dates. Yet, election officials have argued that the date serves no real purpose in verifying timeliness or eligibility.

The appeals court noted in its opinion that accepting ballots with missing or incorrect dates “will not interfere with fraud detection.”

Keep reading

California Supreme Court Backs Newsom, Allows Legislators to Seize Power from Voters

The California Supreme Court rejected an emergency petition Wednesday filed by Republicans to stop Gov. Gavin Newsom’s (D) $200 million special election to gerrymander the state’s congressional districts.

It was the second time in as many weeks that the state’s highest court, which has a 6-1 Democrat-appointed majority, had given Newsom and his party the green light to go ahead with their redistricintg scheme.

As Breitbart News had reported earlier in the week, Republicans said that the redistricting law and the special election Newsom is holding to enact it are both unlawful and unconstitutional.

Sacramento-area NBC affiliate KNBC reported that the court’s decision did not seem to be accompanied by any opinion on the issues at hand.

Effectively, California’s highest judges allowed the legislature to seize the power to draw congressional districts away from voters, even after the voters amended the constitution to prevent them from doing so.

Keep reading

Leftist Lawfare Shark Marc Elias Sues To Help Noncitizens Vote

Russia collusion hoax peddler Marc Elias and his leftist lawfare group are pushing another federal lawsuit aimed at stripping election integrity protections that prevent noncitizens from voting. 

The Elias Law Group’s complaint, filed on behalf of liberal “voter rights” organizations, claims the state’s new law requiring documented proof of U.S. citizenship before individuals may register to vote at the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles “threatens to disenfranchise thousands of eligible citizens.” The law does no such thing, and the lawsuit — filled with the Elias Law Group’s usual hyperbolic spin — may well suffer the same fate as a similar election law complaint the law firm filed in Wyoming. 

Red Wine & Blue and the Ohio Alliance for Retired Americans argue that the law, included in the legislature’s transportation funding bill, violates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the U.S. Constitution.

“HB 54’s new proof-of-citizenship requirement imposes unnecessary obligations to register to vote in violation of the NVRA,” the lawsuit asserts. “HB 54 violates the U.S. Constitution because it is impermissibly vague, giving no guidance as to what constitutes sufficient proof of United States citizenship.”

It’s more of the same from Elias and “dark money” leftist groups attacking election-integrity measures in the name of “voter rights.”

“Both federal law and the Ohio Constitution prohibit noncitizens from voting. But now dark money groups represented by D.C. operatives are challenging a law that prevents noncitizens from registering to vote at the BMV,” Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose said in a statement in response to the lawsuit.

“We will win this case – just like we’ve fought off the other baseless actions that such groups have brought against us,” LaRose added. 

The secretary of state is right to feel confident. 

Keep reading

Left-Wing Media Spreads Falsehoods About Trump’s New Election Integrity Watchdog

Election systems expert Heather Honey has been sworn in at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as a deputy assistant secretary, leading elections integrity for the Trump Administration, and the left is losing its mind.

Honey, a long-time open-source investigator, has spent years analyzing every aspect of how elections are administered, looking for vulnerabilities that leave election systems open to exploitation. Her investigations have led to lawsuits aimed at changing or clarifying election laws in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Michigan, Georgia, Maine, and Tennessee, where she helped rewrite election legislation.

Honey was the lead investigator on President Trump’s criminal defense team supporting his Jan. 6 trial preparation.

Democrat operative Marc Elias, possibly the king of election lawfare, is so threatened by Honey’s new position that he has launched into hyperdrive attacking her on his far-left page, Democracy Docket, where one of his writers, Matt Cohen, has published an inaccurate hit piece smearing Honey.

The piece claims Honey “played a key role in the right-wing effort, much of it driven by conspiracy theories, to pressure states to withdraw from the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) — a nonpartisan organization that helps to coordinate accurate voter registration data between states across the country.”  Wow. So many errors in just one sentence.

ERIC is a hard left organization that is wildly ineffective at cleaning the voter rolls, (which should be done by state or local election administrators anyway) and that assessment is based on real data, not conspiracy theories.

Cohen also originally claimed Honey used a “right-wing app” called “IV3” to clean voter rolls, and he connected the app to the Election Integrity Network. But IV3 is a True the Vote product and neither Honey nor the Election Integrity Network is affiliated with that group or app, confirmed Cleta Mitchell, an attorney and the founder of the Election Integrity Network. A day after the hit piece was published, at Mitchell’s request, Democracy Docket added a correction for this portion of the still error-riddled piece.

Elias went to social media this week to cast a shadow on Honey’s reputation, calling her an “election conspiracy theorist.” And the word in election circles is that a few more hit pieces are planned from other leftist groups who don’t want anyone to tinker with the election rules that have been quietly established by leftist bureaucrats in Washington over the years. For example, seemingly small decisions about what information belongs on the Federal Post Card Application could have profound effects on elections.

Keep reading

Mail-In Voting Is A Recipe For Election Disasters

President Trump announced on Truth Social last week his intention to sign an executive order banning mail-in voting ahead of the 2026 election. For those who care about ensuring our elections are safe, secure, and transparent, this is welcome news.

The reality is that mail-in voting is the least secure method of casting a ballot in the United States. Unlike in-person voting, where safeguards such as voter ID verification are standard and supported by a majority of the people, mail-in ballots are susceptible to fraud, misdelivery, and errors. Ballots can be intercepted and fraudulently cast, lost in transit, or even altered without the voter’s knowledge. In addition, signature verification — a key safeguard — is far from foolproof.

States that have widely implemented mail-in voting, such as California, Nevada, and Colorado, have experienced chronic delays in counting ballots, sometimes taking days or even weeks to finalize results. These delays create uncertainty, undermine public confidence, and provide fertile ground for disputes and legal challenges.

For instance, in California, it took 38 days after the November election to certify the results, with about 81 percent of the votes being by mail. In Nevada, mail ballots sent by Election Day can still be counted if they arrive up to four days afterward, a rule that extended the timeline for final results in 2020. Colorado has also faced hurdles with mail-in voting, prompting U.S. senators to urge the U.S. Postal Service to ensure the timely delivery of mail-in ballots.

Battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin have also encountered significant challenges with mail-in voting. In Pennsylvania, last-minute changes and a surge in mail-in voting during the 2020 election caused extended deadlines and legal challenges regarding ballot receipt and counting procedures that lasted years.

Similarly, Michigan experienced delays in counting mail-in ballots, and Wisconsin had issues with absentee ballot verification and processing, leading to concerns about the accuracy and integrity of the vote count.

Democrats, however, have increasingly weaponized mail-in voting as a tool to influence election outcomes. By pushing expansive mail-in voting programs without sufficient safeguards, they have created opportunities for procedural confusion, ballot mishandling, and, in some instances, outright fraud. These actions do not promote access; rather, they erode trust in our electoral system and disproportionately affect competitive races where even a small number of disputed ballots can change outcomes.

Keep reading