Showing posts with label mail-in ballots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mail-in ballots. Show all posts

Thursday, May 12, 2022

Chain-of-Custody Issues

There was voter fraud—enough to overturn the 2020 election, and maybe the Georgia runoff, and maybe a few since then. But mainly we’re concerned about that 2020 presidential election—and consequently also the upcoming midterm election.

Mail-in Ballot Problem

Dinesh D-Souza’s movie 2000 Mules lays out one particular type of voter fraud—related to mail-in ballots. The numbers are pretty staggering. True the Vote, the organization that did the investigations, set very high criteria: a “mule” had to visit at least five nonprofits related to getting out the vote in addition to at least ten mail-in ballot drop boxes. They were trying to eliminate anyone who coincidentally went by such locations. And with that criteria, five of the six states they looked at had more such illegal mail-in ballots that the vote margin, so they would be flipped. That finding alone is enough to overturn the 2020 election outcome.

illustration of someone mailing multiple ballots,
found in this August 29, 2020, New York Post article

But, seriously, who goes multiple times to that type of nonprofit and also happens to go to multiple mail-in ballot drop boxes—when it’s illegal to handle anyone’s ballot but your own? You could set the bar much lower, say maybe only five drop boxes. So they looked at that level of data too. And of course the numbers are staggering.

They looked at only 3% of the country—not to mention other types of voter fraud. What about the rest of the country where this could have been going on but was not looked at?

There’s a story from the New York Post, from August 29, 2020—before that election. This was brought back up via Mike Huckabee, in light of the 2000 Mules information coming out. The story is about a Democrat operative, who confesses (anonymously to reporter Jon Levine) that he has performed voter fraud for years, and describes the methods. He says it’s more the rule than the exception.


illustration of the parts included in a mail-in ballot,
image found in New York Post article from August 29, 2020



The article is full of details and verifications, as well as quite a few photos. Worth the read. But, anyway, here’s the summary of the article from the Huckabee post

“An election that is swayed by 500 votes, 1,000 votes—it can make a difference,” this tipster said. “It could be enough to flip states.”

It’s a big operation. He said he had not only altered ballots himself but had led teams, mentoring at least 20 operatives who were active in New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania, which, of course, would turn out to be one of the battleground states at issue on Election Day 2020.

This operative, who said he'd been a Bernie Sanders supporter and no longer had a stake, said he’d come forward in the hope that states would fix their glaring security problems with mail-in ballots, because November 3 was going to be “a (bleeping) war.” I wonder if he had any idea then how bad it was going to get.

The Post includes his descriptions of how election-riggers do their stuff. For example, they can just make copies of the ballot itself, but they have to collect actual envelopes, because it's not possible to recreate those. That’s where vote harvesters come in, going from house to house, “helping” people by mailing their ballots for them, but steaming them open and using the real envelopes to mail the phony ballots. These they would “sprinkle” around numerous mailboxes in town.

He said sometimes postal employees are in on it. If they don’t like Trump, for example, and they work in an area that’s predominantly GOP, they can just “lose” those ballots. They can either dump all the mail in the trash or, if they have time, sift through their mail for ballots, and throw the ballots in the trash. (Or I would think they could take them to be steamed open if more envelopes are needed.)

Then, of course, there are the nursing homes. We’ve discussed how that works, but the Post article provides details.

Sometimes, if they’re in a state that doesn’t require ID, operatives will even go to polling places and vote in person. They go through publicly available information to find the names of registered voters who routinely skip elections, and vote using those names.

They also buy the votes of homeless people. This tipster went on to say that Michael Bloomberg's campaign spent roughly $174 per vote to win his third term as New York mayor. He likened this effort to a mafia organization, with the candidate himself typically kept in the dark about the details, to maintain “plausible deniability.”

This particular political insider even took credit for a helpful little idea that he says was put into practice: bending one corner of the ballot, where the signature appeared, to signal to Democrat Board of Election counters that this was one of “their” ballots and to let it go through.

Huckabee also passed along an additional story from just a couple of days ago, reported by Newsmax. A woman, Christina Repaci, was walking her dog and came upon an entire box of ballots, sitting on the sidewalk, apparently abandoned by the US Postal Service, since it was in one of their boxes.


Box of ballots found by woman in East Hollywood
screenshot from here

These 104 unopened mail-in ballots were in a U.S. Postal Service box, just abandoned there on the sidewalk. Sacredness of the vote, indeed.

Ms. Repaci didn’t know what to do about this; it was only thanks to her persistence that an official picked up these ballots from her. Of course, the chain of custody had long since been shot. The registrar’s office said not to worry, they’ve reissued ballots to all the people affected. But what if someone not quite as conscientious as Ms. Repaci had found the ballots and used them for, I don’t know, bird cage liners?

“Early signs indicate that this was an incident of mail theft and not a directed attempt at disrupting the election,” the registrar’s office said in a statement. To that I say, “How do you know?” I also say, “So what?” because either way, a box of votes that doesn't get counted can affect the outcome of a close election. Doesn't say much for mail-in voting. 

Whether intentional or accidental, if a ballot loses chain of custody, it is an illegal ballot; it cannot be legally counted. Mail-in ballots lose chain of custody between the time they leave the voter’s hands until they are received by an election official. Ostensibly the US Postal Service qualifies as handling that. But I don’t think they’re that reliable. We had other stories around the 2020 election of dumped ballots, and ballots transported across state lines. A truck driver for a contractor of the US Postal Service reported a trailer filled with 288,000 ballots disappeared.[i] But, as with so much election-related material, it wasn’t reported, and it didn’t get heard by a judge.

Our Own Chain-of-Custody Issues

In Texas, mail-in ballots are intended only for those who physically can’t make it to a polling place—at all, during early voting or on election day. This is likely to be someone out of town for an extended period of time or an invalid. It isn’t someone who is “scared of COVID” or too inconvenienced to vote somewhere in person. But in 2020 the replacement Harris County Clerk (after the elected one stepped down because of legal issues against her, and before we had an Election Administrator imposed on us by the County Judge and Commissioners Court) tried to send mail-in ballot applications to every voter on the non-cleaned-up voter rolls. He was stopped, but not before spending big bucks on printing, nor before he actually mailed quite a few.

So his next move was to make more drop-off locations. In theory, the mailbox is sufficient. But voters are also allowed to turn them in at the County Clerk’s office. He tried expanding it to dozens of locations, but I think he was limited to 12 or so. There should be a person from each party wherever and whenever votes are received, so his attempts to open them up, at short notice, to prevent Republican workers from being there was an obvious ploy. But, why would a person be fully capable of driving downtown to one of these various locations—during early voting—but not be able to go to one of the dozens of voting places? There shouldn’t have been such drop-off locations.

Anyway, back to chain-of-custody issues. We had a special election last Saturday, May 7, statewide for ballot propositions, plus in some places also for local jurisdictions, like school boards or water districts. (We also had one for our Emergency Services District, but they handled their own election in separate locations, which was inconvenient for voters, but was run smoothly and provided a vote count promptly.) The Harris County Election Administrator had to turn in her resignation after the March 1 Primary Election failure—so many things wrong that were simply incompetence.  However, she promised to stay on through June, which means she’s there to fail for both this special election last Saturday and the Primary Runoff Election on May 24. 

Chain-of-custody was the failure of choice last Saturday.

Dropping off ballots has been a problem every election since she got appointed. In November, which was a pretty limited election, mostly school boards and a few local races, they had everyone turn in their materials at one location, outdoors. This was at Reliant Stadium parking lot. They thought they had a neat system. You hand off your stuff from your car to the workers who receive it. But they set up lines such that, if someone ahead of you had an issue, no one could move until it was handled. We arrived fairly early, waited 45 minutes in line, and that was uncomfortable but not intolerable. People who got there later waited up to three hours. There were no restrooms; you’re stuck in your car. Some people got fed up and abandoned their election materials (including ballot boxes) on the sidewalk outside the building; those lost chain of custody.

In March, they thought, “Well, that didn’t work. Let’s go back to having multiple drop-off locations.” But they didn’t go back to multiple lines inside the various buildings; they did the outdoor thing again. With similar problems. We waited 45 minutes in line. Then we were told we were missing equipment; we were not. They were wrong. Months later they admitted that. But it was, again, not a smooth handoff.

Remember that election workers get to the polling place at 5:30 AM to prepare the polling place to open at 7:00 AM, as required by law. Polls close at 7:00 PM—plus processing any voters in line by 7:00 PM. Then there is shutdown. The new equipment is slower and more complicated to shut down. We’ve done it with the new machines three times now, and we’re pretty quick. But it’s taking us about 30-45 minutes longer than the old system. Election workers haven’t been able to get dinner yet. So then you add on these extra hours and/or long drives, and you discourage a lot of workers, especially the older ones who think, “I’ve put in my time, and I just don’t want to go through this anymore.”

This past week the County wanted to try yet another new idea. “Hey, how about if we have someone pick up the materials from every polling place?” They decided to use the Constables for that, the local law enforcement. But, again, there were failures. In our case, the Constables assigned to pick ours up were stuck at another polling location where the workers had trouble figuring out how to print out their tally and shut everything down; and the Constables, instead of taking care of the other locations on their route and then going back, stayed and waited. So our polling place Presiding Judge and Alternate Judge had to wait the extra two hours until the Constables came. I heard that others waited even a couple of hours longer than we did.

The real problem came when the Election Administrator (the one who resigned but hasn’t gotten out of the way) decided that, since there weren’t enough Constables, they’d just hire other people. Some of these other people were County Sheriff Deputies, which seem as reliable as the Constables. But others were simply County employees, from whatever department. Law enforcement officers ought to be trusted not to break the law. But I have no such reason to trust some random Democrat-hired county employee.

Harris County Republican Party Chair Cindy Siegel has called them out for breaking the law. The law requires the Election Judge to hand off custody of the ballots and equipment only to another Election Official—somebody from the Ballot Board hired to do receiving and counting. There should be signatures to verify this handoff; there were not.

That means the Election Administrator actually eliminated chain of custody on all Election Day ballots. Oops.

So who knows what the drop-off procedure will be for the May 24 Primary Runoff Election. But it won’t be one of the past failures. They’ll want to fail in a whole new way. If it’s enough of a spectacular failure, maybe they’ll use it for the November Midterm Election.

As my friend, ballot security expert Alan Vera says, “Incompetence is the perfect camouflage for malfeasance.”

They are trying to get us to quit, so they can hire their cronies, who will “count” the ballots the way they want—keeping them in power perpetually. We must not quit.

In November, Harris County Republicans are planning to put a poll watcher at every polling location. In the past we’ve concentrated mainly on troubled areas. But now, with county-wide voting, every place might be a troubled area. We might get a poll watcher at our location for the first time. This is not to show that we are distrusted; it is to show that we all care that the law is followed. 

Alan Vera told us precinct chairs on Monday night that it is all hands on deck this November. No one should be sitting home on election day. Most precinct chairs will be running their elections. So they'll need to recruit other poll workers and an army of poll watchers.

Free and fair elections—what a concept! 



[i] “Whistleblower USPS Truck Driver Reveals Trailer Filled with up to 288K Ballots Disappeared” NTD News, Dec. 6, 2020. The original link no longer works, but I found the archived video here

Thursday, May 14, 2020

Secret Acts Shall Be Revealed


These scriptures came to mind as I was thinking about my writing today:

Luke 8:17  For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.
Luke 12:3  Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.
Doctrine & Covenants 1:3 And the rebellious shall be pierced with much sorrow; for their iniquities shall be spoken upon the housetops, and their secret acts shall be revealed.
I’m pleased when the truth comes out. That is happening, at last, in a couple of places. One is a news story beginning to have the name Obamagate attached to it; I’m going to wait for another day for that.

Instead, I’ll start with a more local story, related to ballot security here in Texas—with lessons, hopefully, to help voters everywhere.

Last Saturday, mid-afternoon, I started seeing notices that our County Clerk, here in Harris County (where Houston is) had resigned. Diane Trautman, who was elected in November 2018, has the main responsibility of handling elections.

Diane Trautman, Harris County Clerk, until May 31, 2020
image from the HarrisVotes.org website


During her relatively short time in office, she made a number of missteps—some from inexperience, some from attitude.

There had been a lawsuit, from 2016, against the county regarding disability accessibility, which had been held off indefinitely by the previous county clerk, Stan Stanart—because there was not a single case of discrimination brought as evidence. No individual had been affected; some activists just went around and speculated where a problem might have been possible, and sued based on that. County Clerk Trautman decided to settle the lawsuit—costing the county taxpayers about a couple million dollars, and requiring hours and hours of tedious training for absolutely every poll worker, regardless of previous experience, regardless of lack of issues at their polling places—but the poll workers were paid for this training, again at county taxpayer expense.

The training could have been done in five minutes: “Remember to treat everyone with respect and courtesy. And if your polling place has issues that need remediation, we provide materials and instructions when you pick up your voting materials.” Done.

The hours and hours of training didn’t totally replace voting judge training, but did replace other poll worker training, including bilingual training.

Also, even though there was an election in November, we were required to get training again (this time shorter and online) before the primary election—after which we learned that we only need the training no more than annually. So, another error at county expense and poll worker inconvenience.
The only change at our polling place was the use of a call buzzer for curbside voting. In November it didn’t work, so we just went back to the usual protocol, having a poll worker watching outside to address needs. While I have seen curbside voting used at a location where I was a poll watcher, we have never, in all our years of running elections at our precinct’s polling place, had a request for curbside. But we were provided a temperamental machine, just in case—plus a technician to make sure it works, or to pack it away if it doesn’t—paid for by the county taxpayers.

Trautman changed the county website quite drastically, from one that worked well and was easy to navigate to one that was quite glorifying of her but was difficult to use. I had occasion to help a friend update her voter registration after a move to a nursing home, which also included needing to change the address on her ID. This involved a phonecall to someone in a state office to help us iron out some detail—because we hadn’t been able to get what we needed on the county website. He tried using the site himself and said, “What have they done to this website? It didn’t used to be this difficult.” So, it’s not just me.

She instituted countywide voting—which has been quite popular for voters, but less so for poll workers, who tend to be people from their own precinct. She tried to cut out precinct chairs from their role of providing judges and workers, so that all would be hired directly by the county for their personal list. They also tried (mostly unsuccessfully because of Republican Party intervention) to eliminate polling places, further cutting off precinct chairs from their ability to reach their voters. And she vowed to throw out the very safe and successful Hart e-Slate voting system, with the new and more secure e-poll books (a tablet dedicated to the purpose), and return to paper only—at the expense of several million dollars and reintroducing many old fraud practices inherent in paper only ballots. So far she hasn’t been successful at this. Also, her system has failed repeatedly to meet requirements for updating in time to prevent a second vote by the same voter, which means it makes in-person voter fraud possible in ways it wasn't before.

Her first night of polling, returning tallies was disastrous. It took more than all night to tally, because she had failed to follow the practices of her predecessor, and thought she’d just send results over an insecure internet line—even though the state had warned her repeatedly that this would not be allowed. So she gathered the tallies from the various locations in person, rather than give an unofficial count by phone followed by a (hopefully matching) official count after everything arrived at the central location and was verified.

For the Primary, the parties gave her estimates for voting machine needs at the various polling places, based on previous elections. But she decided that every polling location needed the same number for each party. So in some heavily Democrat areas, Republicans were given far more machines than they had requested, and Democrats had extremely long lines. Because of countywide voting, locations were harder to predict, and she was afraid of backlash for not being equitable to both parties. Instead, the backlash was from angry mostly Democrats, with Republicans rolling their eyes and trying not to speak aloud, “I told you so.”

Anyway, all of this is to say—hurray! She’s stepping down.

Why is she stepping down just a little over a year into a 4-year term? She says it’s because of her age and the Covid-19 threat. From her statement:

After much deliberation and discussion with my family and physician, I am resigning from my position as Harris County Clerk due to personal health concerns. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, my age, and underlying health issues, I do not feel I can safely continue to carry out my duties as Harris County Clerk.
I was surprised to learn she is 70; she appears younger. But this comes among more than a pandemic.
She has been pushing for mail-in ballots for all upcoming elections—particularly the primary runoff election, which was postponed until July, and then the presidential general election in November.
There’s a problem with mail-in ballots: getting proof that the person voting is the person entitled to the ballot. The only security Texas has so far is a signature comparison between the application for mail-in ballot and the signature attached to the ballot when it comes in. Someone (of both parties?) has to visually examine each signature to determine if it appears likely that the same person signed both. If there’s a question, then signatures going back several years can be compared. But this is often difficult to determine. And, unless there’s an additional reason to question a ballot, it’s usually just accepted and counted. Once the paper ballot is separated from the envelope it came from, there is no retrieving it. And, as with other paper ballot systems, this is how an additional couple hundred ballots just happen to get added to the stack.

Trautman planned to send ballots, unrequested, to every voter age 65+ in the county. That would mean no original signature to compare to when the ballot was returned. The only security measure would be eliminated.

There’s been a particular problem with ballot harvesting in nursing homes. Activists request ballots for voters at nursing homes—with or without permission of the residents—and they can receive, fill out, and return those ballots sometimes without the residents even seeing their own ballot, possibly not even knowing it was being done in their name. The only way to prevent this fraud is to compare signatures—but, beyond that, to compare multiple signatures from the same place, because, examined individually, since the deceptive activist would have signed both, application and ballot signatures would technically match.

If the same writing style happens to appear on many at the same location, that’s an indicator of fraud.
But who’s going to do that work?

It turns out Colleen Vera is the person.

Colleen Vera's blog, where she detailed her findings
April 22, 2020


She has spent the last two years digging into ballot harvesting in the Harris County. That was her goal, and she was finding it. But she found much more.

She found, for example, a location where it was being done, and the persons requesting the ballots were from a particular consulting company—in other words a name to hide the harvesters names— paid out of campaign funds by, among others, Diane Trautman.

And there’s more. The ballot harvesters in at least three cases were convicted forgers. Forgers being paid to write signatures. What could go wrong?

Other officials who had paid for forgers? US Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, a Justice of the Peace and several District Judges, a Constable, and a Harris County Board Trustee. Vera points out that, while she names names, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

She details her investigation—with plenty of visual evidence—in her blog, Texas Trash Talk, posted April 22, 2020. It’s thorough, and lays out the evidence and what it means, ready for easy prosecution.

32 handwritten applications for mail-in ballots,
all from different voters, but in the same handwriting.
One of the pieces of evidence Colleen Vera dug up
and presented in her Texas Trash Talk post April 22, 2020

She ends her piece with this:

As a citizen there isn’t much we can do. Texas does not allow us to challenge other voter’s signatures or ballots.  All we can do is:
1. Send a complaint to the Secretary of State and hope (s)he sends it on to the Attorney General for investigation. (Which I’ve already done with this research.)
2. Contact our legislators and insist they tighten security for ballot by mail.
3.  Pray the Democrats don’t succeed in using the courts to expand our currently flawed vote by mail system.
Colleen’s husband, Alan Vera, is our Harris County Republican Party ballot security expert. He helped found True the Vote, and has trained people across the country so other states can improve their ballot security. (He trained me as a poll watcher almost a decade ago.) And he lobbies our legislature for improvements. They’re a handy couple to have on our side.

After Trautman’s resignation the other day, Alan posted this timeline on Facebook:

4/15/20: Colleen Vera files a complaint with the Texas Secretary of State regarding mail ballot harvesting in Harris County. Among the evidence submitted are payments by Dr. Trautman’s campaign directly to a convicted forger.
4/22/20: Colleen Vera publishes her evidence of Harris County ballot harvesting in her blog Texas Trash Talk (www.texastrashtalk.com) The Trautman evidence is included.
4/28/20: Commissioners Court approves $12 Million for Dr Trautman to use to expand mail ballot voting in both the Primary Runoff and the November general election. The budget includes money to send mail ballot applications to every 65+ voter in Harris County.
5/1/20: Texas Attorney General Paxton sends a letter to all Texas county judges and election authorities warning them not to mislead voters about using fear of Covid-19 as a “disability” to vote by mail[i]. His press release on that letter calls out Dr. Trautman and Judge Hidalgo specifically for crossing that line. AG Paxton states that criminal charges could result.
5/4/20 to 5/7/20: Dr. Trautman tries to get “guidance” from the Texas Secretary of State on how to carry out the mass mailing of mail ballot applications without crossing the line laid down by AG Paxton. Reportedly, the SOS does not respond to Dr. Trautman’s requests.
5/7/20: The Texas SOS notifies Colleen Vera that he has found sufficient merit in her ballot harvesting complaint to forward it to the Texas Attorney General with a recommendation to investigate the allegations.
5/7/20: Reporting that she has not received a response from the SOS, in a Zoom conference planning the 7/14/20 Primary Runoff election, Dr. Trautman announces that she will NOT mail absentee ballot applications to every 65+ voter in Harris County. Harris County Democrat Party representatives in the conference demand to know why. Dr. Trautman says she won’t do it in the current environment.
5/9/20: Dr. Trautman resigns for health reasons related to Covid-19 concerns.
So, was the reason for Trautman's resignation worry about getting the virus? Maybe that played into it. But maybe it’s just thinking, at age 70, there might be better ways of using your remaining healthy days (at least those not spent in prison) than doing all you can to manipulate elections for a particular party while you’re being paid to provide free and fair elections.

Alan Vera explained what happens from here. The Commissioners Court will appoint a replacement—which means it will be a Democrat. The office will be on the ballot in November to fill the remainder of the 4-year term. Then it will be on the ballot again in 2022, when the term ends. That means we could get someone with experience and a will to provide free and fair elections by January 2021. I don’t know how this election will be done, since our primaries are already over. Is it done with all comers and then a runoff? Not sure. But I’m so glad we don’t have to spend yet another 2 ½ years trying to block this woman’s attempts to make voter fraud easier for people like herself.

Here's to hoping all the guilty parties get justice.

Thanks go to Colleen Vera for the digging. Our freedoms depend on people like her who take good citizenship to another level.




[i] You can read about that here.  The actual letter is found here