Thread by @TheMattBeebe

The Pennsylvania absentee & mail-in ballot canvassing process is a mess – you've heard about the elimination of signature verification requirements, but it’s actually even worse than just that. Time for a quick primer since we’ll undoubtedly be hearing more in the days ahead:
1/

Back in October Kathy Boockvar, the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania sought declarative relief from the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania regarding...
2/

...whether "county election boards are authorized or required under the Pennsylvania Election Code to reject absentee or mail-in ballots with alleged or perceived signature variances."
3/

Her argument isn’t particularly hard to understand – basically the General Assembly didn’t provide procedures for signature verification & while she acknowledged there were certain technical reasons a ballot could be set aside, she argued a signature defect wasn’t one of them.
4/

Ultimately the court sided with her, and allowed the Pennsylvania election boards to proceed with the election canvassing process that would not include signature verification. pacourts.us/assets/opinion…
5/

But here’s where it gets really interesting – and Boockvar’s behavior becomes unconscionable:
6/

In its analysis, the court acknowledged the inherent risk of submitting a mail-in or absentee ballot: “unlike in-person voters, mail-in or absentee voters are not provided any opportunity to cure perceived defects in a timely manner.”
7/

We all know that there is a risk when submitting an absentee ballot that if you’ve not done so in the proper way, your ballot could be deemed invalid and you’d have no way of knowing it. That’s unfortunate, but it’s how the law works. There are no do-overs. Or are there?
8/

We’ve all heard of “ballot harvesting” where political operatives manage the absentee voting process from start to finish on behalf of their candidate or party, and potentially do so in a way that exerts undue influence, or even invites outright fraud.
9/

Well, Boockvar took that concept to the next level and implemented a highly suspect and potentially illegal “ballot perfecting” operation late the night before the election:
10/

Her department told county election directors that they should provide information to *party and candidate representatives* during the “pre-canvass” period regarding rejections of absentee ballots...
11/

SPECIFICALLY so those “party and candidate representatives” could facilitate the curing of those ballots by finding the voters and assisting them in completing provisional ballots.
12/

Note: the “pre-canvass” period starts no earlier than 7am on election morning and is essentially a time for them to sort out the ballots and prepare them for counting.

Not a time for "fixing" them.
13/

Section 3146.8 of the Pennsylvania Election law is quite clear that “No person observing, attending, or participating in an pre-canvass meeting may disclose the results of any portion of any pre-canvass meting prior to the close of the polls.”

READ THAT AGAIN
14/

In Philly & Montgomery County there are reports (and lawsuits) alleging that democratic election workers were working to identify deficient ballots so provisional ballots could be cast to cure the deficiencies:
inquirer.com/politics/elect…
15/

Conveniently, these democrat election workers were also allegedly keeping GOP observers "too far away from the actual canvassing to provide any meaningful oversight".

16/

What are the odds that this late night policy push encouraging Election Day malarkey clearly against Pennsylvania Election Code benefited one party disproportionately?

YOU KNOW THE ANSWER.
17/

And yes, Republicans are suing over this: forbes.com/sites/alisondu…
Let's hope it makes a difference.
18/

@realDonaldTrump seems on point here:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/256063573669855232?s=20

19/19