“How ‘widespread’ does election fraud have to be before it should be taken seriously?
I doubt the voters of the 9th Congressional District share that attitude, or voters of Paterson, NJ, where a new municipal election recently was ordered due to absentee ballot fraud that tainted the results.
To say that “widespread” is the only criteria worth considering is absurd.
Instead, media attacks try to diminish the culpability of those found guilty of fraud despite the fact that every single case represents an instance in which a public official, usually a prosecutor, thought the offense serious enough to act upon it.
A 2005 report by the Commission on Federal Election Reform, a bipartisan commission led by former President Jimmy Carter, was clear that election fraud does exist, that it must be deterred to preserve election integrity, that it could make the difference in a close election.
The report also makes clear that that absentee ballots “remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” We have an obligation to secure our elections against these vulnerabilities.
In fact, one has to consider: Why has a legion of election fraud deniers so suddenly and so rapidly materialized at this moment in history?
And why are they against common-sense reforms that the vast majority of Americans support, such as voter ID and maintaining the accuracy of voter registration rolls?
Tragically, election fraud has become a politicized topic.
Americans—especially those in vulnerable communities who are the most susceptible to fraud—will suffer if we let partisanship come before what should be our shared goal of ensuring our elections are secure, accurate, and transparent.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Shutting down law enforcement’s ability to communicate leaves the public more vulnerable to ‘threat actors’
On the eve of U.S. elections, where candidates have significant differences on U.S. immigration policy, Twitter censorship shut down the account of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner Mark Morgan.
While a Democratic victory in Tuesday’s presidential election could give stocks a temporary boost, market strategists say Wall Street will likely be happier with more of what Republicans have delivered.
A Joe Biden win could boost share prices in the short term given that he’s likely to champion a big stimulus package to address the raging coronavirus pandemic.
“Michael Trujillo, a veteran Democratic operative, blamed his party’s choice to knock on doors only in October due to the pandemic, saying ‘I think the data and the evidence was there that they needed more engagement at the door.’
Other activists have brought up the fact that Democrats pushed to vote by mail throughout the campaign, due to the pandemic, and only revised their message to voters in the past few days by forcing them to instead vote in person or hand-deliver their ballots.
On Oct. 16, the same day a teenage jihadist decapitated French school teacher Samuel Paty in a Paris suburb, The New York Times published an article about the attack under the headline: “French Police Shoot and Kill Man After a Fatal Knife Attack on the Street.”
Headlines don’t have the same weight as calculated editorial statements but they reflect a publication’s instincts.
A federal judge named Joe Biden as a possible “witness” along with his son Hunter in a criminal fraud case last year that ended in the convictions of two of Hunter’s business partners, according to little-noticed court documents.
The Democratic presidential candidate’s appearance on a witness list casts new doubt on his claims he knew nothing about his son’s shady business dealings.