Search This Blog

Defying the Odds

Defying the Odds
New book about the 2016 election.

Wednesday, November 11, 2020

Fraud?

In Defying the Odds, we discuss Trump's dishonesty and his record of disregarding the rule of law.  His legal challenges to the election of Joseph Biden have toggled between appalling and farcical.

Nick Corasaniti, Reid J. Epstein and Jim Rutenberg at NYT:
 Election officials in dozens of states representing both political parties said that there was no evidence that fraud or other irregularities played a role in the outcome of the presidential race, amounting to a forceful rebuke of President Trump’s portrait of a fraudulent election.

Over the last several days, the president, members of his administration, congressional Republicans and right wing allies have put forth the false claim that the election was stolen from Mr. Trump and have refused to accept results that showed Joseph R. Biden Jr. as the winner.

But top election officials across the country said in interviews and statements that the process had been a remarkable success despite record turnout and the complications of a dangerous pandemic.

“There’s a great human capacity for inventing things that aren’t true about elections,” said Frank LaRose, a Republican who serves as Ohio’s secretary of state. “The conspiracy theories and rumors and all those things run rampant. For some reason, elections breed that type of mythology.” 

Shawn Boburg and  Jacob Bogage at WP:

A Pennsylvania postal worker whose claims have been cited by top Republicans as potential evidence of widespread voting irregularities admitted to U.S. Postal Service investigators that he fabricated the allegations, according to three officials briefed on the investigation and a statement from a House congressional committee.

Richard Hopkins’s claim that a postmaster in Erie, Pa., instructed postal workers to backdate ballots mailed after Election Day was cited by Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) in a letter to the Justice Department calling for a federal investigation. Attorney General William P. Barr subsequently authorized federal prosecutors to open probes into credible allegations of voting irregularities and fraud before results are certified, a reversal of long-standing Justice Department policy.

But on Monday, Hopkins, 32, told investigators from the U.S. Postal Service’s Office of Inspector General that the allegations were not true, and he signed an affidavit recanting his claims, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe an ongoing investigation. Democrats on the House Oversight Committee tweeted late Tuesday that the “whistleblower completely RECANTED.” 

 

 Rich Galen at Mullings:

If any of them have evidence of a crime, then let them state that evidence in front of a Federal Officer.

Let's see if their phony charges trip off the tongue as easily when they're staring down the barrel of a potential crime known in these parts as a "1001 violation."
Section 1001 of the U.S. Code states in part:
"Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully-
falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact; [or] makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation …shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years…"
Five years, Mrs. Bueller.

Pending that, let every reporter covering those clowns ask, "Would you be willing to state your claim before an FBI Special Agent?" and watch them scuttle for cover like the anti-democratic roaches they are.