Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Saturday, July 1, 2017 8:29 am

The best election money can steal


Dolt 45’s poll numbers continue to tank, and the Senate Republicans’ “health care” plan is polling down around the levels of cat poop: As of earlier this week, only 12% of Americans supported it. But Republicans don’t seem overly worried about the 2018 or 2020 elections. There are a couple of reasons for this: They’re pretty confident they can use Trump’s new election commission to steal the elections, and they may even be relying on voting-machine hacking.

When Trump signed an executive order in May to form an election commission, he said it was “to promote fair and honest elections.” It’s not. Trump himself continues to say (if not believe) that he lost the popular vote because 3 to 5 million people voted illegally. (That’s despite the fact that documented cases of voter fraud in the U.S. are vanishingly rare — law professor Justin Levitt found 135 cases of vote fraud nationally out of 1 billion ballots cast between 2000 and 2014, while the Washington Post found four cases out of 135 million ballots cast in 2016.) He clearly wants this commission to try to find evidence to back up his claim.

To do that, he named perhaps the country’s most notorious vote suppressor, Kansas Secretary of State (and gubernatorial candidate) Kris Kobach, vice chair of the commission. Kobach made headlines this week by demanding voter registration data from all 50 states; more on that below. Let’s be blunt: If you’re interested in fair and honest elections, you don’t hire Kris Kobach. If, on the other hand, you’re interested in suppressing the votes of people who might be disproportionately inclined to vote Democratic, Kobach’s your guy.

As this New York Times profile from a couple of weeks ago indicates, Kobach is basically a Klansman without the n-bombs. (Hey, in his spare time he provides legal counsel to a hate group, as one does.) He’s also a committed ideologue who has never allowed the facts to get in the way of a good delusion, on voting or anything else. (Read that profile. Kobach is the kind of scary true believer who could get us into a nuclear war if he ever got elected president.)

Since being elected Secretary of State, he has enacted four measures in Kansas to restrict voting, and the ACLU whipped his ass in court on all four. Not only that, a federal judge fined him $1,000 for lying to the court about the contents of some of his documents. (I’d’ve jailed him for contempt and referred the matter to the state bar for additional sanctions, as well.)

Moreover, Kobach was the driver of the GOP’s notorious “Crosscheck” program in the 2016 elections. Crosscheck, in place in swing states including Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina, ostensibly was intended to search voter-registration data for people who were registered to vote in multiple places and states, to ensure they voted only once. But in real life, its matching parameters were so loose — just a name and a date of birth — that the program generated roughly 200 false positives for every duplicate registration it detected.

Here’s how it worked in North Carolina:

Crosscheck has led to outrageous headlines that make double voting seem far more common than it is. In 2014, after North Carolina joined Crosscheck, the head of the state board of elections reported that in the 2012 general election, there were 35,750 voters in the state whose first and last names and dates of birth matched those of individuals who voted in the same election in a different state. Republican leaders of the North Carolina Legislature called it “alarming evidence of voter fraud,” and the conservative political strategist Dick Morris told Sean Hannity on Fox News, “It’s the most important data I’ve read in a year,” adding that it was “the first concrete evidence we’ve ever had of massive voter fraud.” But when North Carolina investigated the numbers using additional data like the last four digits of voters’ Social Security numbers, eight cases of potential double voting were referred to prosecutors and two people were convicted.

So, as we see, this is not a man who is disinterestedly pursuing free and fair elections. This is a man who is attempting to strike likely Democratic voters from the rolls, even when they are legally entitled to vote; indeed, as noted by former Justice official Sam Bagenstos, it appears Kobach intends for the commission to sue the states to force them to purge their voter rolls in the manner he favors. I note for the record that 18 USC 241 makes it a crime, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, to conspire to deny people their civil rights. And Kobach has been so wrong for so long on voting rights that it is difficult to understand his actions as anything other than intentional.

Also on the commission: Hans von Spakovsky, a former member Bush 43-era Justice Department official who also has a long history of vote suppression efforts under the guise of preventing vote fraud — indeed, Democrats successfully blocked his nomination to the Federal Election Commission in 2008 because of it. Like Kobach, von Spakovsky also has a certain morally casual attitude, as this 2006 Post article highlights:

When he was a senior lawyer in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, Hans von Spakovsky played a central role in approving a controversial Georgia voter identification program over the objections of staff lawyers.

But now, after leaving Justice for the Federal Election Commission, von Spakovsky has acknowledged writing a law review article that endorsed photo identification, which was Georgia’s approach, before the state’s proposal was even submitted to Justice for review. He also took the unusual step of using a pseudonym, “Publius,” in publishing the article, which appeared in the spring 2005 issue of the Texas Review of Law & Politics.

The article and its unusual authorship prompted a letter of complaint to the Justice Department last week from the Voting Rights Project, an arm of the American Civil Liberties Union that is opposed to Georgia’s voter identification plans. The group said the article shows von Spakovsky had already made up his mind on the issue and that his attempt to hide his views may have violated Justice Department guidelines.

In addition, a link to the Publius article suddenly disappeared this week from the FEC Web site, which had featured the article among a list of von Spakovsky’s writings.

“There appears to have been an intentional desire to prevent the public and, in particular, advocates with business before the Voting Section, from knowing the views of one of the senior officials involved,” Neil Bradley, the ACLU group’s associate director, wrote in his letter to Justice.

Whether or not von Spakovsky did anything to merit discipline, this is not the behavior of someone with a disinterested desire for free and fair elections.

Earlier this week, as noted above, Kobach asked all 50 secretaries of state, who oversee voter registration in most states, for voter registration data, including not only such things as names, addresses and dates of birth but also political party, last four digits of Social Security number, and voting history since 2006.

It is hard to avoid the inference that Kobach intends to apply Crosscheck nationwide — basically doing for the country what he did for North Carolina and possibly illegally disenfranchising millions of Americans.

(Even if Kobach’s motives were above suspicion, Kobach appears to know nothing about how to transmit, store, and analyze data safely and securely — you don’t transmit sensitive data files by email, just for starters. In short, this national database, even if it weren’t being used for partisan purposes, would be an identity-theft catastrophe just waiting to happen, particularly given the unseemly closeness of others in this administration to the Russian government.)

Fortunately, close to half of the secretaries of state are resisting, and not all of them are from blue states. Mississippi’s Republican Secretary of State, Delbert Hosemann, literally invited the commission to jump into the Gulf of Mexico. Even another member of the commission, Indiana Secretary of State Connie Lawson, a Republican, is refusing to provide anything more than what’s already public in Indiana: a voter’s name, address, and congressional district.

It remains to be seen what, if anything, the commission will accomplish, but one thing it manifestly will not do is probe fully the question of whether our elections are truly honest.

For one thing, neither the commission nor anyone else in the Trump administration appears interested in the question of whether Russians — or anyone else — hacked voting machines in 2016. The Department of Homeland Security says it hasn’t examined a single voting machine and does not intend to. And Trump, who could insist upon it, has been silent on the issue.

To be clear, there is as yet no proof that anyone ever has successfully hacked a voting machine to alter or delete a ballot in a U.S. election. That’s a topic I’ve followed ever since editing the 2004 book “Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century,” by Bev Harris and David Allen (more on that here). But I’ve always believed it possible — the evidence that it’s doable is just too overwhelming. And that’s why you need robust election auditing, including but not limited to examining machines.

For another, an election commission truly interested in election integrity would be examining a lot of topics this commission isn’t. Some of them, as suggested by Vermont’s Secretary of State, Jim Condos, include:

  • Foreign interference and attacks on our voting systems;
  • Funding for the Election Assistance Commission, which, among many other virtues, is the only U.S. government agency currently empowered to look into voting-machine hacking.
  • Partisan gerrymandering
  • Updating election equipment
  • Automatic voter registration
  • Requiring paper ballots instead of hackable machines
  • Requiring election audits
  • Expanding early voting opportunities
  • Expanding voting by mail
  • Increasing the convenience and accessibility of voting places
  • Reducing long lines and wait times at the polls.

 

Anyone seriously interested in helping authorized voters exercise their right to vote would be working on these issues. But that ain’t what Kobach’s commission is about. And that’s why it must be resisted. Otherwise, the Republicans will steal the upcoming elections and our 240 years as a democratic republic will be over.

Advertisements

25 Comments »

  1. […] SOURCE […]

    Pingback by The best election money can steal – Greensboro 101 — Saturday, July 1, 2017 9:06 am @ 9:06 am | Reply

  2. Trump’s Commission On Election Integrity Is Long Overdue

    “Like the response to any action by President Trump, we can expect manufactured public outcry from the left, likely centered on the fact that the commission will investigate problems of vote fraud as part of its mission. The activists on the left who deny the existence of vote fraud despite evidence to the contrary will decry the commission, even though vote fraud is a non-partisan issue.

    Why is it non-partisan? Because vote fraud takes many different forms and is a much broader problem than the voter impersonation fraud often discussed in the news—when someone shows up at the polls pretending to be a legitimate voter and votes in his or her name. When vote fraud occurs, it cancels out the vote of someone voting for a different candidate. It’s a broad problem that affects honest voters broadly. And no voter who has taken the time to research the candidates and issues and vote wants to know that a fraudulent vote has negated his or her vote.

    Commission member Democrat New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner understands this well. His party affiliation does not prevent him from caring deeply about the integrity of New Hampshire elections and working tirelessly to ensure that eligible votes from New Hampshire citizens are counted and not canceled by fraudulent votes.

    Gardner has publicized the problem of what he calls “drive-by voting,” when people who are in New Hampshire temporarily on election day register at the polls and vote despite not intending to stay in New Hampshire. He has supported reforms to protect the integrity of the vote in New Hampshire, such as voter identification requirements and amending New Hampshire’s laws to prevent “drive-by voting.” In his office’s investigation of voters who registered at the polls without showing proof of domicile or identity in the 2016 presidential election, 458 likely fraudulent votes have already been identified, and the investigation is ongoing.

    Commission vice chair Kris Kobach, Kansas Secretary of State, also has worked for years to improve the integrity of elections not just in Kansas but around the country. He founded, and his office administers, the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck (IVRC) program, which compares voter registration databases from member states to identify possible errors and duplicate registrations. When a voter moves to and registers to vote in a new state, the voter sometimes remains registered in the previous state as well, usually through a miscommunication among election officials and no fault of the voter. IVRC allows states to compare data and eliminate these duplicate registrations that could be exploited for fraud and at a minimum create messy voter registration rolls. IVRC and the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), the other interstate data sharing system, were explicitly endorsed and praised by President Obama’s bipartisan Presidential Commission on Election Administration (PCEA) in 2014. Secretary Kobach has been a leader in the field of voter registration list maintenance, which everyone—except the far left which calls such efforts voting purging—agrees is the foundation of election integrity.

    Rumored commission member Election Assistance Commission (EAC) Commissioner Christy McCormick has also long been a leader in fighting for election integrity on a bipartisan basis. The EAC is an independent, bipartisan federal agency charged with helping states administer their elections. Under Commissioner McCormick’s leadership, the EAC ruled, on a bipartisan basis, that states could use federal grant money intended to improve how elections are run to pay for criminal investigations of potential voter fraud.

    Election integrity is central to our system of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Many totalitarian regimes have “elections,” but true elections—where the people can freely express their political will in secret at the polls, trust that their vote counts, have confidence that fraudulent votes have not annulled their votes, and trust the outcome of the election—are the hallmark of a free people. President Trump’s commission is an important part of ensuring that America’s elections are open, fair, and honest, so that every eligible voter’s vote counts and that no fraudulent votes are counted.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Saturday, July 1, 2017 8:13 pm @ 8:13 pm | Reply

  3. So we have not a factual rebuttal to the facts presented in my post, but instead an opinion piece from a Republican lawyer. He asserts, inter alia:

    • That the president’s commission will investigate problems that affect the integrity of our elections. Right now, and I say this as someone who edited a goddamn book on the subject, the biggest threats to the integrity of our elections are vote suppression, Russian meddling, and hackable voting machines. There is no indication that the commission will investigate any of these threats.
    • That the commission will investigate vote fraud. That’s fine in a vacuum, but in context, 1) there’s almost no vote fraud, 2) what there is is largely a GOP phenomenon, and 3) as noted above, there are other, more pressing threats.
    • That only 30% of Americans express confidence in the fairness of our elections. While perhaps true, that claim does not delve into the reasons why people are not confident, and those reasons go at least as much to the real threats listed above, particularly vote suppression, as to the chimera of vote fraud.
    • That vote fraud “takes many different forms.” No, it does not. “Election fraud” takes many different forms.
    • That there is “evidence” for widespread vote fraud — evidence he doesn’t bother linking to or elaborating upon, probably because it doesn’t exist.

    There’s more crap in this piece, but there’s no pony to be found, and life’s too short, Fred. This isn’t an analysis, it’s propaganda, which should not be surprising because Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller doesn’t DO news or analysis. It brown-noses Trump, full stop.

    I realize it is an article of faith with you that 1) voter fraud exists and 2) that it is a bigger problem than the real-life election fraud being carried out by the Republican Party, with or without Russian help. But if you won’t open your eyes and look at the facts, I can’t help you. I will say this: I’m not going to approve any more comments like this unless they include evidence. I’m tired of your wasting my time with propaganda.

    Comment by Lex — Sunday, July 2, 2017 9:50 am @ 9:50 am | Reply

  4. The Election Integrity Commission is simply trying to find out how much illegal voting goes on. Do you care to know.? It is after all public information the the commission is seeking. The Democrats, and you, constantly tell us there is no, or virtually no, voter fraud. If that were the case, one would think that they would want to cooperate with the commission to prove their point. The fact that they don’t want the commission to be able to find out, for example, how many people are registered voters in multiple states, suggests that what they really want is for voter fraud to continue, because they know they benefit from it.

    Finis

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Sunday, July 2, 2017 6:39 pm @ 6:39 pm | Reply

  5. Fred, your faith in the integrity and good will of the commission is touching, but it is completely at odds with reality — indeed, so much as to call your own good faith on this issue into question.

    If the commission is “simply trying to find out how much illegal voting goes on,” it could start by conferring with, or even enlisting, the people who actually have done the research in this area. Instead, it has enlisted Kris Kobach and Hans von Spakovsky, two people who belong behind bars under 18 USC 241. That’s like making Ted Bundy a sorority-house house mother.

    Do *I* care to know? I already DO know, Fred, because I have read the work of disinterested researchers rather than the propaganda from the hacks at Fox News and National Review and the Daily Caller.

    The commission is NOT, in fact, seeking public information in all cases; just in North Carolina, for example, driver’s license numbers and Social Security numbers are not public. And keep in mind that the executive order creating the commission said that all data gathered by the commission would become public. Ask yourself, Fred: Who benefits from making the Social Security number of EVERY REGISTERED VOTER IN THE COUNTRY public? Identity thieves and Putin, but I repeat myself.

    You believe, or pretend to believe, that this commission was created in good faith. In point of fact, it was created to 1) try to find evidence, which does not exist, to bolster Trump’s claim that between 3 million and 5 million people voted illegally in 2016, and 2) suppress legitimate, and largely Democratic, voting nationwide by using Kobach’s criminally flawed Crosscheck program on the entire freakin’ country. It’s a scam. You know it. And the fact that you are defending it means you think felony denial of other people’s civil rights is just freakin’ fine, which makes you a would-be co-conspirator. I’d think about that if I were you; 10 years in prison at your age would be a bitch.

    Comment by Lex — Sunday, July 2, 2017 8:23 pm @ 8:23 pm | Reply

  6. Fred, may I please have the last four digits of your social security number? — since you say it’s public information.

    Comment by Roch — Monday, July 3, 2017 10:03 am @ 10:03 am | Reply

  7. One other thing, Fred: KOBACH HIMSELF “examined 84 million votes cast in 22 states to look for duplicate registrants. In the end 14 cases were referred for prosecution, representing 0.00000017 percent of the votes cast.” Now how much more evidence do you need to grasp that this whole voter-fraud issue is bullshit?

    Comment by Lex — Monday, July 3, 2017 4:59 pm @ 4:59 pm | Reply

  8. As some attacked the request nationally, Cox ( Lt. Gov, Utah ) issued a statement saying, “Similar to most states, Utah law requires voter registration records be public documents that can be obtained by any person or entity who submits an appropriate records request” — so he will provide them. He will not, however, turn over the last four digits of Social Security numbers, which are protected information.

    “I assure the voters of Utah that we will only provide information that is otherwise available to the public,” said Cox, a Republican. “The publicly available records do not include protected personal information like the voter’s Social Security and driver license number.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, July 3, 2017 5:57 pm @ 5:57 pm | Reply

  9. Roch,

    If I gave you the last 4 numbers of mt SS# out of order. How many permutaions could there be ?

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, July 3, 2017 7:01 pm @ 7:01 pm | Reply

    • 5,040 permutations but 10,000 combinations.

      Comment by Lex — Monday, July 3, 2017 8:38 pm @ 8:38 pm | Reply

  10. NC is handing over some voter information to Trump’s commission on voter fraud

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, July 4, 2017 6:34 pm @ 6:34 pm | Reply

    • Yeah, I know. As I noted on Facebook, NC is handing over data that is public under NC law and which it has no legal grounds to refuse. That does NOT include Social Security number, driver’s-license number, etc. And your point would be …?

      Comment by Lex — Tuesday, July 4, 2017 7:34 pm @ 7:34 pm | Reply

  11. My point ? That’s what the other 49 states should do using the same guidelines. This task when all comply will be fairly simple and not labor intensive besides yielding pretty clear cut results. Inquiring minds want to know so we can put a canard to rest or strengthen the electoral system to insure ballot integrity . Get’er done.

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Wednesday, July 5, 2017 5:16 pm @ 5:16 pm | Reply

    • As it happens, under Kansas law, Secretary of State Kobach has announced that he must deny Commission Vice-Chairman Kobach some of the same data that Commission Vice-Chairman demanded. A self-aware, reflective person with integrity would realize at this point that he has overreached.

      There are plenty of ways to ascertain whether duplicate registrations exist. Disinterested research to date suggests that those ways will find little or no vote fraud. More importantly, the evidence is clear that Kobach and Pence have no interest whatever in disinterested research, let alone in the many other aspects of assuring a fair, free, accurate vote count, and that, indeed, they’re guilty of violating 18 USC 241.

      You want to be certain of eliminating vote fraud? Turn it over to people who have nothing to gain, and who belong to no groups that have anything to gain, from the outcome of the research. More importantly, if you’re really concerned about honest elections, move on from allegations of “voter fraud” to the issues outlined in my post. If you’re unwilling to do that, you have no business in this discussion.

      Comment by Lex — Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:47 pm @ 11:47 pm | Reply

  12. From Byron York:

    In 2012 Pew Research published a study on the nation’s voter registration system, which it concluded was “inaccurate, costly, and inefficient.” Pew found that:

    Approximately 24 million — one of every eight — voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.
    More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters.
    Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.

    The problem with the Pew study, as von Spakovsky sees it, is that Pew did not study whether those registration problems actually resulted in voting problems. “We know for a fact that people who aren’t U.S. citizens are registering and voting in U.S. elections,” he said. “How extensive is that problem? I don’t know because no one has ever done the work to find that out.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Thursday, July 6, 2017 4:37 pm @ 4:37 pm | Reply

    • One again, von Spakovsky is lying. Plenty of people “have ever done the work to find that out,” including but not limited to those linked in this post. He just doesn’t like what they found because he just wants to screw more likely Democratic voters out of their constitutional rights, and Byron York gave him a platform because Byron York is a big ol’ whore.

      Comment by Lex — Thursday, July 6, 2017 7:39 pm @ 7:39 pm | Reply

  13. Voter records are public records

    “Withholding public records simply because you don’t like the president or because he is investigating election fraud sets a terrible precedent and is perhaps illegal.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, July 11, 2017 7:08 pm @ 7:08 pm | Reply

  14. UPDATE: Liberal hysteria over Trump’s voter fraud panel proves why it’s needed.

    “The sky is falling! President Trump’s Commission on Election Integrity is looking for ways to better protect the ballot box against voter fraud undermining the integrity of U.S. elections.

    One would figure that the Democrats would welcome such a move. After all, CNN uses 93 percent of its airtime to talk about the Russia narrative. An impartial look at the circumstances around each part of the election is something both sides normally would agree upon.

    However, the manic left threw that one out the window. Looking into registration forms and voter ID is the new “dog whistle” of racism……………

    Will Trump’s commission have a “chilling effect” on the number of votes cast? Likely not. If past history is any indication, there will be a combination of effects. First, the number of illegal immigrants casting ballots will fall substantially. Secondly, more voters will turn out for a system they feel isn’t rigged against them; remember, candidate Trump turned out so-called “low propensity” voters just waiting for a person on the ballot that spoke to them, not over them.

    As mentioned earlier, the information the administration wants is out there already. In fact, many campaigns and states regularly sell this same voter information to campaigns, candidates, and political strategists for a hefty profit. The information available to the highest bidder is almost word-for-word the same as that requested from the Commission Chair Kris Kobach. Personally-identifiable data was not requested and much of the information is held by local polling canvassers or county clerk’s offices.

    So what’s at stake here? 24 million, or about 13 percent of all voter registrations are incorrect nationwide. Nearly 3 million people are registered to vote in two states. Close to 2 million registered voters are deceased. A Virginia student recently registered 18 dead people — and that follows a report that 5,500 non-citizens were discovered on the state’s voter rolls.

    Using publicly-available voter roll information, the commission could cross-check voter registration rolls with a list of known illegal immigrants and other non-citizens. It’s a legal, transparent, and practical step — yet the Obama administration infamously declined to support this. For all of the talk on the left about how voter fraud isn’t real, perhaps it is because only one side actually enforces the law.

    Research showed that about 18,000 noncitizens in Kansas — Kobach’s home state — were either on voter rolls or attempted to register to vote and up to 2.6 percent of the state’s population is undocumented. Illegal immigrants make up nearly 6 percent of California’s population. Some back of the envelope math means that there could be more than a million illegal voters in the state alone. Meanwhile, California somehow recorded a 75.2 percent turnout last year, way above the 58 percent national average.

    State after state after state went well out of their way to deny their voter info to the feds. In the words of President Trump, “What do they think the commission will find?”

    Why would anyone be against such measures? Many of the same politicians seem to think little of the integrity of the democratic process. It is not a cudgel or bully pulpit. The vote is the people’s will and most sacred right. Citizenship is a federal issue, not a caveat for states to politically posture.

    But I guess it’s less fun that way.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Thursday, July 20, 2017 4:25 pm @ 4:25 pm | Reply

  15. Court allows Trump’s voter commission to proceed

    “A federal judge on Monday rejected complaints that President Trump’s voter integrity commission was breaking the law by requesting and storing states’ voter data, saying that as long as the panel is just advisory, it doesn’t need to meet strict standards that would apply to government agencies.
    The ruling was highly technical, but it clears the way for the commission to once again begin collecting data from willing states.
    Commission Vice Chairman Kris W. Kobach welcomed the ruling and told The Washington Times that they’ll soon reach out to states to renew their request for information, which he had put on hold while the judge was deciding.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:00 pm @ 4:00 pm | Reply

    • And NC is still going to tell him no, he can’t have driver’s license numbers, SS numbers, etc. And Kobach is still a criminal.

      Comment by Lex — Monday, July 31, 2017 5:52 pm @ 5:52 pm | Reply

  16. Why Democrats fear voter fraud investigations

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/13/voter-fraud-investigations-eschewed-by-democrats/

    For anyone who dismisses concerns about voter fraud, the unhinged reaction by the left at investigating it should, at the very least, make a logical person wonder what they’re so concerned about.
    After all, if you believe the issue is false, or at the most an irrelevant factor in end results, you should welcome confirmation of that fact. Unless, of course, one fears the actual outcome may prove how voter fraud impacts local and state races to the point of shifting the balance of power in Washington, D.C.
    Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state and vice chairman of the president’s commission, has already caused quite the stir. In a Breitbart article, Mr. Kobach revealed that out-of-state voters may have changed not only the outcome of the New Hampshire U.S. Senate race, but also could have impacted who won the state’s presidential contest.
    Mr. Kobach’s assertion is quite simple and demands an investigation, which is exactly what the commission will do. He noted that New Hampshire is a state with same-day voter registration, which eliminates the ability to determine the eligibility of those voters. He said that last year there were 6,540 same-day registrants with out-of-state driver’s licenses.

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Thursday, September 14, 2017 1:42 am @ 1:42 am | Reply

  17. NBC’s Jane Timm Sparks Outrage in Attacking Trump’s Election Commission

    Comic delight follows when you are attacked by NBC in a story written by a former fact checker for Rolling Stone.

    That’s what reporter Jane C. Timm did when she wrote a fact-optional attack on President Trump’s Election Integrity Commission, and me in particular. Timm’s piece is a case study in how rabid anti-Trump interests are undermining the priorities of the electorate that won President Trump the White House.

    Timm’s attack on the Election Integrity Commission also serves as a nifty example of the furtive assembly line that produces these anti-Trump attacks: Funding by extremist foundations, harvesting of raw materials by far-left special interest groups, packaging and pushing of talking points, and finally the publication by lapdog reporters who dislike President Trump and long for a Democrat in the White House.

    “Resisting” isn’t done in a day. It takes time and money and paid staff.

    The best resisting always starts with a headline designed to incite. In Timm’s case:

    “Sparking outrage” is a popular theme. Anyone who disagrees with media elites is liable to “spark outrage,” with a bit of elbow grease by reporters. Outrage is the currency of the resist movement. Best of all, it doesn’t take much sparking, or much outrage, to a headline make, and often the reporters themselves make the sparks. If the reporters don’t spark the outrage, they can rely on a variety of special interest groups to deliver the sparked outrage in heaps.

    Note the counterpart headline above, as Timm’s reporting has also sparked outrage, as we will see below.

    Timm’s beef is that my organization, the Public Interest Legal Foundation, discovered that Virginia had removed serious numbers of registered voters for citizenship defects and have brought federal lawsuits to force the cleanup of corrupted voter rolls. Timm offends all of the other hardworking lawyers at PILF, and other organizations, working on the same issues when she calls me a “one man wrecking ball.”

    SPONSORED

    Timm gets it wrong when she writes:

    Working with the nonprofit American Civil Rights Union, Adams filed his first voter roll maintenance lawsuits in the spring of 2013.
    The former fact checker needs a fact checker. My first voter roll maintenance cases were filed with Judicial Watch, not the ACRU, and against Ohio. They were filed in 2012, not 2013. I sought comments from Timm about her errors prior to the publication of this story. She did not reply.

    “The report that Timm wrote is one of the most unfair and dishonest news reports I have ever read,” Hans von Spakovsky (a fellow commission member) told me in a phone interview. Outrage sparked.

    RTWT

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Saturday, September 16, 2017 5:15 pm @ 5:15 pm | Reply

  18. Here is link to above piece: https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2017/08/28/nbcs-jane-timm-sparks-outrage-attacking-trumps-election-commission/

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Saturday, September 16, 2017 5:19 pm @ 5:19 pm | Reply

    • Again, you’ve not commented on the factual issues I raised, including von Spakovsky’s duplicity. He has one helluva nerve suggesting that someone else is “unfair and dishonest.”

      Comment by Lex — Saturday, September 16, 2017 6:06 pm @ 6:06 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: