"Democrats” Are Ignoring True Voter Intimidation

In case you missed it, early this week Pennsylvania’s Attorney General came down hard against voter intimidation in Philadelphia:

Attorney General Josh Shapiro said the charges should “draw a very clear line ahead of next week’s election.”  

One elderly couple, both Republicans, cast their ballots together, but only one of the votes was recorded, while the other appeared to have been replaced with a write-in vote for the Democrat in the race, Shapiro said.

A voter intending to cast a ballot for the Green Party candidate was told the ballot machine was broken and later was cursed at when he returned to try again, Shapiro said. Another voter supporting the Green Party candidate was aggressively questioned when he tried to bring someone into the polling booth to assist him, as allowed by law.  

“One should not chalk these actions up to typical partisanship or typical electioneering,” Shapiro said

To anyone who has followed Philadelphia elections, none of this is a surprise. Dozens of Republican court appointed election inspectors and poll watchers were turned away in the 2016 election and since they are also voters in that precinct: "People are leaving and they’re scared to come back and vote."

 

What is pleasantly surprising is that the Pennsylvania Attorney General did the right thing and went after a few of the "intimidators."  Kudos to him. 

Why is this not fought more often?  Well, take a look at the webpage of the nonpartisan “Election Protection” coalition.  The coalition of over 100 groups allegedly fights against voter intimidation which it defines as “putting undue pressure on or trying to coerce a person or group to suppress votes or to vote a certain way.”  This is obviously exactly what happened underlying the charges earlier this week in Philadelphia and has been happening since at least 2008.  Yet, the coalition is silent on this. 

The most recent story on their homepage is about Pennsylvania as well.  Yet nothing on the recent charges in Philadelphia in front of a Mayoral election in just a few days.  It seems like the entire “Election Protection” coalition looks the other way when voter intimidation happens to members of the Green or Republican Party.  Or put another way, they are ignoring the voter intimidation done by Democrats.  Shameful, and certainly not “nonpartisan.”   

Philadelphia Election Fraud Trial Pending in Federal Court

As we blogged earlier, in March 2017, a last-minute Democratic candidate, Emilio Vazquez, for the 197th Pennsylvania House race unexpectedly won a write-in campaign, after the former Democratic nominee was disqualified and another candidate could not be added to the ballot in time.

The only two candidates on the ballot were a Republican and a Green Party candidate, in a heavily Democratic district. Republicans had a shot at winning this normally Democratic state legislature seat. However, with the help of "non-partisan" poll workers, the write-in candidate won in a landslide.

This vivid case of election and vote fraud is now pending before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Currently, the case is facing pretrial motions to dismiss. Philadelphia Metro reported:

The parties on both sides of a potential lawsuit that claims illegal electioneering took place during a special election in the city’s 197th Pennsylvania House District will need to wait more than six weeks before they will know if the case will be heard in federal court. . . . Judge Joel H. Slomsky requested all parties involved to submit supplemental materials after they receive a transcript of the day’s proceedings before he would rule on whether the case could be brought to trial.

Lawyers for both [Green Party's Cheri] Honkala and [Republican Lucida] Little, as well as the Republican City Committee, contend that the pair were deprived of a fair election, with several alleged examples being brought up in court, including poll workers going as far as following voters into voting booths on the day of the election in order to force voters to cast their ballot for Vazquez.

“This is massive fraud on a regular basis, and we have to stop it if we can,” Sam Stretton, an attorney for Honkala, told the judge during the hearing. . . Stretton argued that they have reviewed all avenues available to them and have determined that the most appropriate action was to file a federal lawsuit hoping to void the results of the election that put Vazquez in office. They also claimed that their rights under the Federal Voting Rights Act and Philadelphia and Pennsylvania Election Codes were violated during the election. “We did not bring this lightly,” said Stretton. “This is a pattern where everything that could happen wrong, happened wrong.”

While both parties saved specifics of their cases for the full trial, Linda Kerns, an attorney for Little and the Republican City Committee, said that, if the case were brought to trial, they could prove that poll workers gave write-in voters stamps that forced them to vote for Vazquez and had images that could prove at least four people – “eight legs,” as she told the judge – could be seen in one voting booth in the district, which she said indicated that poll workers followed voters into polls in order to manipulate their votes. . . .

[Judge] Slomsky’s decision isn’t expected to be heard for at least six weeks, as obtaining a transcript of Thursday's hearing is expected to take 30 days and the attornies have an additional two weeks to submit additional materials. 

We will also keep you posted once the Court issues its ruling. Tonight, the RNLA's Southeastern Pennsylvania Chapter will be hosting a Fall Reception. This Philadelphia election and vote fraud story is surely going to be one of the topics of conversation. There is still time to RSVP if you are interested in attending this reception and meeting fellow members and friends of the RNLA.

Write-in Democratic Candidate Wins in Philadelphia Special Election?

On March 21st, Philadelphia held a special municipal election to fill one State Legislature seat for the 197th District in North Philadelphia. The only candidate with a name on the ballot was a Republican; meanwhile, the others, including the leading Democratic nominee and the Green Party candidate, were write-in candidates. However, the Democratic candidate—against the odds—won.  But likely due to fraud and unlawful electioneering by the Democrats.

The Philadelphia Daily News reported on March 30th:

Democratic write-in candidate Emilio Vazquez won the election, beating Green Party write-in candidate Cheri Honkala and Republican Lucinda Little, the lone candidate with her name on the ballot… [Little received 198 votes, or 7.4 percent of the 2,681 ballots cast.  Vazquez won 1,970 votes, while Honkala received 282. Only 5 percent of registered voters turned out. Democrats make up 85 percent of those registered in the district.] 

Joseph DeFelice, chairman of the city’s Republican Party, and state GOP chair Val DiGiorgio held a news conference to announce the joint lawsuit. DeFelice said the party is suing not because he thinks Little might have won in the heavily Democratic district, but because the violations were so rampant that those responsible should face fines and, if applicable, criminal charges. The ultimate goal is to have the results invalidated, DiGiorgio said. . . “I’m a Republican in Philadelphia, I’m used to losing,” DeFelice said. “I just want to lose fairly.”

Accusations include illegal voter assistance, specifically poll workers handing out Vazquez stamps. GOP leaders said they have signed affidavits from poll workers as well as photo and video evidence of poll workers entering voting booths. The city GOP Twitter feed includes photos that the party argues show doctored "pink slips," the ballot sample sheets that are posted for voters outside the polls.

Linda Kerns, attorney for the GOP city committee [and RNLA Southeastern Pennsylvania Chair], said the alleged fraud should bother people who live beyond the borders of the 197th... “What happened in this special election in the 197th should have every Democrat in the city from [Democratic Party Chairman] Bob Brady on down hanging their heads in shame,” Kerns said. “This was an election they could have won just by following the rules…. They cheated their way through this entire day with absolute impunity.”

Late last week, Linda Kerns filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the GOP and the Green Party outlining the widespread fraud vote during the March 21st Election. The Philadelphia Inquirer reported on April 6th:

Two losing candidates [last] Thursday asked a federal judge to throw out the results of the controversial March 21 special election for the 197th Pennsylvania House District and order a new election, alleging the Democratic Party and its candidate engaged in illegal electioneering. 

The lawsuit from Republican nominee Lucinda Little and Green Party nominee Cheri Honkala was filed one day after Democrat Emilio Vazquez was sworn into office…. The 29-page suit is a litany of complaints about shady tactics in the North Philadelphia district.  The two candidates, along with the city and state Republican Parties and the state Green Party, are suing Vazquez, Philadelphia’s Democratic City Committee, and the Board of City Commissioners and Department of State, which oversaw the election…. Vazquez, in his new office in Harrisburg on Thursday, shrugged off the legal claims. . . .

The suit repeatedly cites allegations that election board workers, “virtually all of whom are registered Democrats,” engaged in or allowed electioneering such as passing out literature in support of Vazquez, allowing his supporters to linger in polling places, and allowing nonvoters to follow voters into polling booths…. “The voters for the special election were told by election board workers and representatives of the Democratic City Committee that they were only allowed to vote for the write-in, [Vazquez], and no other candidate,” the suit claims. “Voters were threatened or intimidated if it was thought they were going to vote for another candidate.” . . . 

The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office’s Election Fraud Task Force reported receiving “approximately 50 calls” and responding to “several dozen allegations of illegal activity at polling places.”  It is now investigating, working with the state Attorney General’s Office.

These irregularities are only the latest of consistent problems of fraud and voter suppression by Democrats in Philadelphia elections.

RNLA Calls Upon Clinton Campaign to Condemn and Stop Recounts

RNLA officially called upon the Clinton campaign to condemn plans by the Green Party to hold recounts of the presidential election results in several states:

The Republican National Lawyers Association (RNLA) calls upon the campaign of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to stand down and condemn the recount effort in Wisconsin and possibly other states. We are extremely disappointed by the change of heart of Secretary Clinton in deciding to participate. This is an unprecedented effort to divide our country.  

RNLA President Larry Levy said: “The alleged concerns that the recount is to ensure every vote is properly counted is ludicrous. If that were true, why aren’t they seeking recounts in every state or at least include New Hampshire where Secretary Clinton won by a scant 2,736 votes or other states with narrow Democrat wins? This effort diverts attention from the critical work of President-elect Trump and his team to form a new Administration and to be prepared to lead America forward on day one.”  

The recount is pointless, a waste of resources, a squandering of taxpayer funds, and flies in the face of the long tradition of accepting results. Do not take our word for it. Look at the past statements of Secretary Clinton and her lawyer. Further, RNLA agrees with the Obama Administration in its opposition to the recount.  

1. Previously, Secretary Hillary Clinton called the very thought of not accepting the election results “horrifying.” . . . 2. To be clear, there is no doubt about the election results. This is why the Clinton campaign decided previously not to pursue the recount. . . . 3. The Obama Administration also agrees that there is no basis for a recount . . . .

Whatever the fundraising and publicity goals of the Green Party are, Secretary Clinton and her campaign should not approve them.  As her running mate Sen. Kaine said the day after the election, "Nobody — nobody had to wonder about Hillary Clinton, whether she would accept an outcome of an election in our beautiful democracy."

Stein's Recounts Are Not About the Election Results

The current recounts of the presidential election requested or planned by Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party are not about ensuring the integrity of the election outcomes:

RNLA President Larry Levy said: “The cynical and false narrative being pushed by Jill Stein and the Green Party that they are trying to ensure all votes were properly counted is nothing more than an effort to undermine our democracy and proud history of peaceful administration change through contested elections. Ms. Stein doesn’t concern herself with any contests won by Secretary Clinton, including the razor thin margin she enjoyed in New Hampshire, rather she is attempting to disrupt the Electoral College vote for Donald J. Trump in an un-American and vulgar attempt to delegitimize the next President chosen by the American people. And Secretary Clinton’s support for this effort is a disgrace that exposes the hypocrisy she practices.  

“We cannot and will not stand silent in the face of this malicious effort to undermine our democracy. Join the Republican National Lawyers Association and all people of good will in fighting this insidious attack and show the world that democratic elections still count in America.”  

RNLA Board of Governors Member John Ryder further explained: “A recount does not shift more than a few hundred votes unless there are allegations of irregularities or vote fraud. There are no such allegations in this case.”

Dr. Stein has said in multiple interviews that she is not attempting to change the outcome of the election through her recount requests.  But she, with the support of Hillary Clinton, is putting states and election officials through an expensive process in a fool's errand to accomplish a victory through the press that liberals could not accomplish at the polls.