Georgia Secretary of State: 1000 People Double-Voted In Primary
Tied to surge in absentee voting – just wait for November when mail-in balloting surges.
Voter fraud is not real, we are told.
Yet here is another example, on a large scale tied directly to the surge in absentee voting, via The Atlanta Journal Constitution:
Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger announced Tuesday that 1,000 Georgians voted twice in the state’s June 9 primary, a felony that he said will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law….
These voters returned absentee ballots and then also showed up to vote on election day June 9, Raffensperger said….
In all, about 150,000 people who requested absentee ballots showed up at polling places on election day, often because they never received their absentee ballots in the mail or decided to instead vote in person.
Of those, 1,000 voters had returned their absentee ballots to county election offices, and poll workers also allowed them to vote in-person….
Raffensperger said the sharp increase in absentee voting, from about 5% in past elections to nearly 50% of votes in the primary, increased the opportunity for double-voting.
Imagine the opportunity for fraud nationally with the surge in mail-in ballots.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
In Ohio, where I am an election judge, you were removed from the eligible voter list on election day if you requested an absentee ballot. If you insist on voting on Election Day, you were then given a provisional ballot and you have one week to show up at the board of elections and present your information allowing you to vote. The belt is not opened or counted until it is ejudicated in this manner. The fact that this double-voting occurred is as much an indictment of the state election system as it is the person double-voting
ALL the DEMS Crimes this year are in service of 2-bit street … Kamala – The Trojan Donkey –
“Since earning the nomination as the 2020 Democratic candidate for the presidency, Joe Biden has stated that he is a “transition candidate.”
This was an odd statement, especially for someone who has hardly begun his formal campaign. (He’s not even in office yet and he’s discussing being on the way out?)
Yet this was not just another one-off Biden gaff, as has been suggested by some. Since announcing his pick for vice president, he has stated, “Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else.”
Well, let’s have a look at that possibility.
Joe Biden, by any measure, is a poor candidate for the office. After almost half a century in politics, he’s had a career mostly as a political hack who would support any issue that seemed popular at the time. Similarly, his voting record in the Senate has been that of a man who supported whatever bill would please his peers and further his career.
Seemingly, he either has no inner core of belief, or he’s been willing to sacrifice it at a moment’s notice, if it might help his next election. After forty-seven years of elected office, he’s not regarded as having a commitment to… well, anything.
And yet he became the choice of the Democratic party as one candidate after another dropped out of the presidential race. Clearly this was a party that was not only leaderless, but couldn’t even seem to invent a leader for the sake of the election.
Kamala Harris, his presumptive vice president, dropped out of the presidential race in December 2019, when her popularity amongst democrats dropped to 3.4%. Since democrats make up roughly half of the population, this means that less than 2% of Americans would have wanted her as their president.
And yet, as stated above, candidate Biden announces, “Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else.”
That’s quite curious. He apparently is stating that his only purpose is to win the election, then pass the baton to the next leader. Presumably, his vice president.
…..
And that leads us to the possibility that the deal has already been brokered – that Mr. Biden would win the election, then have, let’s say, a “medical emergency,” at which point he would pass the reins to the new president – Kamala Harris.
Clearly, Ms. Harris could not have been elected on her own merit, as even democrats found her to be fundamentally lacking last December. Even the more radical elements of the party have sensed that she is untrustworthy and even dangerous.
Lots more good reading on that at:
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trojan-donkey
Only hope for Trump Winning is a huge turnout on Election Day for Trump. Then the Dems have to go to extreme measures to win. Prosecute all cheaters. lock them up. One person one vote – according to the rules.
FYI
What could this be all about?
Pile Of Mail Dumped From Rented Truck
In California Parking Lot..
https://www.air.tv/watch?v=fmQGSGTGSQ69p41f2Pwq7w
https://www.weaselzippers.us/455505-pile-of-mail-dumped-from-rented-truck-in-california-parking-lot/
To play Devil’s Advocate – is it possible that some of those accused of voting twice never received their mail ballot and decided to vote in person? It is possible some of these people could have been victims of fraud. This is why I detest voting by mail and “ballot harvesting”: once a ballot leave the controlled confines of a voting station ANYTHING can happen.
This is also why I have little trust in voting results in places that have gone ga-ga with these kinds of fraudulent measures (the People’s Democratic Republic of California). If the GOP takes control of the House in November they should refuse to seat any California Communist who “won” after counting that lasted more than 24 hours after the polls closed. And tell the Federal courts who try to muscle their way into the election to f-off
(“The Court has made its decision; let the Court enforce it.”).
If the GOP won’t get serious about voting fraud, they may as well pack their bags for the gulag and beat the rush.
It’s right there in the article quoted in the post:
often because they never received their absentee ballots in the mail or decided to instead vote in person
and
Of those, 1,000 voters had returned their absentee ballots to county election offices, and poll workers also allowed them to vote in-person….
Hence the 1,000 that double-voted, AND being prosecuted for it.
Without more information, we only know that the ballots were returned by someone, not that the person who voted received it and returned it.
Remember how in 2012 Obama conveniently lost half or some such of the overseas armed forces vote?
I posted this on another post, but applies here as well:
In 1982, a CONSENT DECREE was entered in the case of Republican National Committee v. Democratic National Committee that prevented the RNC from “engaging in some voter fraud prevention efforts without prior court consent. It specifically said the RNC could not engage in ballot security efforts (later defined in 1987 as “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”
It was STILL IN EFFECT in 2013!
In 2018, it FINALLY ENDED. Almost 40 years of hands tied behind their backs.
This is why the dems have had a blank check on voter fraud.
Yes, it went up to SCOTUS. SCOTUS loves them some voter fraud.
https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2013/01/scotus-wont-disturb-gop-voter-fraud-decree-154135
As I understand it, in NY this is perfectly legal; if you send in an absentee vote and then vote in person, the absentee vote, if and when it is received, will not be counted. As I understand it every absentee vote is inspected to verify that the person is enrolled, that they’re not marked as having already voted, and that the signature matches the one on file. So there’s nothing wrong or dishonest about deciding on election day not to rely on the vote you mailed in, which may or may not get there in time, and to vote in person after all.
This isn’t NY.
Also, do you think all of those absentees actually get stricken/tossed? Some places, sure. But not everywhere.
Some places, sure. But not everywhere.
Can’t pin that on the voter. That’s a failure of the state electoral bureaucracy.
Failure? You’re assuming incompetence in place of malice….
Please define the difference between an “absentee vote” and an “absentee ballot”. My understanding is that there is no such thing and an “absentee vote”. Either the “absentee ballot” is counted as a vote, or the in person cast ballot is counted as a vote. If both ballots are counted, shame on the officials for poor practice; whether malice intent or incompetence.
They are the same thing. And once a person’s vote has been recorded, whether in person or absentee, they are marked as having voted and no further vote received from them will be counted.
and no further vote received from them
willshould be countedFIFY
No, “will” is correct. Just as you can’t vote twice in person on the same registration, because the second time your name will come up as having already voted, exactly the same thing will happen when your postal vote comes in. Your name will come up as having voted, so the new vote will be automatically rejected.
The June 9 primary was three months ago.
A bit more speed in determining these things would be appropriate.
Give them until live voters stop voting on the election day.
Let’s be reasonable. The Democrats still don’t know who won Iowa.
So where are the indictments?
If you request an absentee ballot your name should be removed from the voter roll at the poll. If a voter that requested a ballot claims it never showed up they should be reminded that it is a felony to vote twice, and sign a document acknowledging that fact.
You have it backwards. Absentee votes are not counted until after the election, so there’s no reason why someone who sent one in should not decide on the day to vote in person instead. When he does that he is crossed off the roll, and when his absentee vote comes in it is rejected.
Your name is not removed from the voter rolls, but it is marked as having been sent an absentee ballot. Again, details of the law vary county to county, but that note should cause the poll worker to challenge someone who shows up in person after having been sent an absentee ballot.
The r are making a huge error, IMO, by not having proactively challenged the States maintenance of voter registration list. These lists are supposed to be trimmed of deceased individuals, individuals who have moved and those not responsive to voter contact cards.
Personally, I think this will be where the rubber meets the road. The d have a good argument to make against the r attempting to prevent some of these ineligible voters from casting a ballot.
Ask your local election officials what the voter registration list looks like in your area. Have they maintained the rolls to ensure that active registrants can vote but not inactive?
As I recall LA county had to be used into compliance and forced to purge several hundred thousand inactive names. Even a few thousand invalid names on a local roll give too much opportunity to capture an election.
If they counties have not done that, then the entire county and even entire states must be “disallowed” and not allowed any votes.
My question is how many of the double voters were alive and how many were deceased?
So what is Gov. Abrams going to do about this?
You mean President Abrams who “graces” the cover of this month’s BUST magazine…..
What magazine? Did Cosmo get a name makeover or something?
Impossible. Right?
Preventing the double vote is voter suppression or something.
“Voter fraud is not real, we are told.”
I was also told that nobody wanted to take my guns, if I liked my health insurance I could keep my health insurance, that the Big Dig would cost us “only” $2.6B (not $22B), and that the government was here to help me.