Election Fraud: 'It's Against the Law, So Nobody Would Ever Do It'

hotair.com

There are a lot of stupid arguments being made to justify California's fraud-prone election laws, but the dumbest of them is the claim that ballot security and checks on election fraud are unnecessary because, well, cheating is illegal. 

Advertisement

Uh, yeah. Got it. That's why nobody ever breaks the law. It's why, when you drop your wallet, it gets returned with all the money 100% of the time, and why crime is unheard of. 

Imagine your bank explaining why they have no vault, no security, and leave the doors unlocked every night. 

"It's illegal to steal money!" Pretty sure that explanation wouldn't fly, but the money would right out the door. 

Yet this article in the San Francisco Chronicle trashes a Virginia man who has been sent value ballots despite being a longtime Virginia resident, claiming he is making a mountain out of a molehill. Just because ballots are sent to ineligible voters doesn't mean the system is insecure, because if somebody voted it would be violating the law, and nobody would do that!

The CA ballot saga just got worse!

I laid a trap and a Contra Costa County government official named Helen Nolan, along with journalists @sara_dinatale + @demianbulwa, walked right into it.

When they put together their hit piece on me in the @sfchronicle (link in replies), they didn't know that I received a SECOND ballot at the same address...but this one was sent to someone no one in my family has ever heard of...despite the fact that we've owned the house continuously since 1962...

THREAD! đŸ§”

Advertisement

Their argument here is that it’s actually my fault I keep receiving ballots — despite leaving California more than ten years ago — because the way I notified the state I had moved was insufficient to be removed from the rolls.

Apparently I didn’t file the correct TPS report.

According to Nolan and the journalists, the government bears zero responsibility for maintaining clean voter rolls.

Even if we accept that premise (and it’s absurd), how do they explain THIS


There’s a second live ballot for the June primary arriving at the same address — except this one is for a woman named Magdalena Fregoso.

No one in my family has ever heard of her. We’ve owned this house continuously since 1962. We’ve received ballots for her for YEARS.

Under their argument, only ‘Magdalena Fregoso’ can get herself off the rolls
 except she doesn’t even know she’s receiving ballots here!

WHAT’S THEIR PLAN TO STOP THESE BALLOTS FROM COMING TO THE HOUSE?

I could hand Nolan this live ballot tomorrow, along with a sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury stating that Fregoso has never lived at this address — and they still wouldn’t remove the registration.

If I were one of the hundreds of thousands of Californians willing to break the law, I could have easily voted TWICE in this June primary.

The Chronicle's position, echoing election officials, is that they have no responsibility to maintain clean voter rolls, even though they send valid ballots to everyone on their registration list. They can even send ballots to people who were NEVER registered to vote at that address, and it's on them to go down to the registrar, fill out paperwork, and leave it to bureaucrats with a yearning for naps instead of doing their jobs. 

Advertisement

“If not for my integrity, there’s nothing stopping me from voting in the June primary from the comfort of my home in the Commonwealth of Virginia,” Wolf wrote the first time he shared a photo of the Contra Costa ballot on May 27.

Except there is something stopping him: Federal law. Not only is it against the law to vote where you’re not a resident, but counties can’t just kick people off voter rolls. And that’s exactly what Assistant Registrar for Contra Costa County Helen Nolan wrote to Wolf in a letter dated May 30. The office saw Wolf’s initial post and reached out to him directly. 

What a crock. 

Let me spell it out so a 5-year-old could understand it: winning elections is far more valuable than any amount of money in a bank vault. Smaller branches will have a few tens of thousands of dollars, and larger ones may keep half a million dollars or so (I looked it up). A standard bank ATM generally has anywhere from $10,000 to as much as $50,000, and people steal them, which is pretty damn hard. 

That is against the law, but people do it, and if it were as easy as it is to vote illegally, a whole hell of a lot would do it. 

Winning a local election gives you access to BILLIONS of dollars. L.A.'s budget, for instance, is $15 billion. California's is $350 billion. 

If you can steal one of those elections (I don't think Spencer Pratt would have won in the general, but with that much money on the line, the Democrats will stab each other in the back to control Los Angeles),  you have quite the piggy bank to play with. 

Advertisement

So OF COURSE people try to steal elections, and when you make it easy to do and hard to detect, it is as certain as death and taxes that people will try. 

The people who make these arguments aren't doing it in good faith, and everybody knows it. For that matter, if Spencer Pratt had been well behind in the initial vote count, fewer people would be suspicious about this election outcome. 

When fentanyl zombies get their ballots mailed to NGOs, which in turn get their budgets from government, you know that the system is rigged. There are both illegal and illegal but easy ways to cheat in California elections, so it's a given that the system is rigged. 

You don't have to change vote totals in the counting process if you can cast the ballots themselves in a manner that is impossible to detect, and saying "But that is illegal" is hardly persuasive to any serious person, and California's election defenders know that. If the same process had led to Viktor OrbĂĄn winning, everybody who loves California election procedures would be crying foul. 

Advertisement

Hell, they all cried foul about Stacey Abrams losing, and Hillary Clinton for that matter. 

Perhaps this line of reasoning is why leftists want to defund the police; it's not because they love criminals, but because they are certain that nobody breaks the law. 

Nah. They like the California election process because they love insecure elections, and want to defund the police because they love criminals. 

One last thing: people are noticing a trend, although I can't say how widespread it is: the votes NOT being counted. 

Advertisement

So a doodle or a dot is A-OK, but a valid signature can get you booted, despite the standard being so weak. 

Editor’s Note: Every single day, here at HotAir, we will stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical Left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve.

Help us continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration and its successes. Join HotAir VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.