President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
November 14, 2011 11:42 PM UTC

When Gessler alleges election fraud, journalists should report whether he has evidence of it

  • 48 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

(Gessler doesn’t need to show you any stinking “evidence” – promoted by Colorado Pols)

In an an article in the Pueblo Chieftain Thurs, Secretary of State Scott Gessler was quoted as saying, as he has in the past, that some mail-in ballots are fraudulent.

The Chieftain reported:

Verifying the validity of voters’ signatures on mail-in ballots also poses a challenge, according to Gessler.

“A fair number of ballots are rejected because signatures don’t match,” he said. “Signature verification is sort of a black art.”

“Signatures vary a lot, and sometimes people’s signatures don’t match what’s on file. Some are fraud, some are innocent mistakes.” [BigMedia emphasis]

You can argue about Gessler’s definition of the black arts, but the Secretary of State either has data to back up his assertion of election fraud or he doesn’t, and it’s such a serious allegation, possibly bringing into question people’s basic trust in our representative government, that a reporter shouldn’t let it slide by without reporting whether Gessler has evidence of it.

I mean, if it’s not in the public interest for all of us to know about election fraud, when it’s alleged by the Secretary of State, I don’t know what is.

So I emailed the Chieftain’s Patrick Malone, who wrote the piece, and asked if Gessler told him how many instances of fraud he’s found and when and where Gessler found them. I asked if Gessler thought Pueblo was particularly problematic, fraud-wise.

Malone responded: “On the topic of fraud, I took [Gessler] to be speaking in general terms about the statewide picture and basing it solely on his suspicions.”

I would argue that if Gessler tells a reporter that election fraud exists, and it turns out to be, in fact, based on Gessler’s suspicions without proof, then a phrase like “Gessler could provide no proof of election fraud in Colorado” should be included after the Gessler allegation, because it’s such a serious accusation.

The burden of proof is on Gessler to supply the proof of fraud, not on reporters to prove that his assertion of election fraud is not true.

So reporters don’t need to do any research here. Just asking for the facts and reporting the answer is what’s required.

Tweet
Share

Comments

48 thoughts on “When Gessler alleges election fraud, journalists should report whether he has evidence of it”

  1. I 100% agree with the sentiments you have repeated here numerous times.

    But at some point, you have to ask yourself is ColoradoPols the most effective way to beat this drum?

    Would it not serve the cause better to write directly to the reporters AND their editors, not just asking the question, but pointing out they should be ones drawing Gessler out on the carpet?

  2. I’m convinced that Gessler has never actually visited a clerk and recorder’s office at any time during an election. Yes, there are some signatures that don’t look exactly like the signature on file. That’s why there is a process in place to verify them.

    Step one, person opening the mail compares the signature to the most recent one on file. If it is a match, the ballot is accepted. If it is not a match, it is set aside for further review. At that point election judges, which have access to copies of the signature over time, compare the signature to all documents on file. If it is a match, the ballot is accepted. If it is not, a letter is sent to the registered voter informing them to contact the clerk’s office or the ballot will be sent to the DA for prosecution of voter fraud.

    So, Gessler has no idea if there is any fraud, because he is clueless about the procedures being followed all across the state.

    As for this being the wrong venue to get out information about Gessler’s attempts at voter supression… If we are talking about it, somebody else is reading it and the message is getting out. This shouldn’t be the only venue, but it is a pretty good one for people who actively participate in the political process.

    1. In any instance of a Clerk having adequate evidence of fraud, the case should be turned over to the DA. It seems logical that such information–at least information about the number of such cases–should be provided to the SOS. Or, the SOS who is so concerned about such things can request that information from the Clerks.

      Suggested letter from SOS to Clerks:

      1. How many cases of suspected voter fraud did you turn over to your DA for investigation?

      2. How many of those cases were of suspected fraud related to signature verification?

      3. Please follow up with statistics on the outcome of those investigations.

      No one should give Gessler the time of day on this issue until he has taken these steps. Of course, we then have to rely on the media to make the distinction that “investigation” is not proof, and to make clear that proof of voter fraud (involving signatures or other factors) is with a conviction, not merely an accusation. But Gessler must be forced to deal with facts and proof rather than vague charges, and this is a first, minimal step toward such facts.

      1. At the polls signature verification is buttressed by visual age verification, visual gender identification, the presence of someone claiming to be who they say they are in front of partisan poll watchers and several election judges and fellow voters all of whom live in the neighborhood when there is precinct voting.

        This doesn’t mean that mail in balloting is not sufficiently good at verifying identity, but it is surely less good at verifying identity than in person polling.

        Given the very low rate of fraudulent voting in recent history, however, the extra verification is probably unnecessary.

        2. is really the only thing that I can think of that would increase with mail-in ballots. Signature and ID requirements are quite good at preventing outright voter fraud.

          Filling out a ballot for your spouse and forcing them to sign it is a much greater threat that the GOP’s freakout would have no effect on at all.

              1. to support your repeated claims that mail in ballots are ‘ripe’ for fraud, based presumably on the high incidence of such.  Thanks, I honestly thought you wouldn’t do it, that–as usual–you were just blowing smoke out your ass and making up unsupported claims.  If its long enough, I suggest your own diary, I mean I suppose there must be thousands and thousands by now.  Or you could post it as a reply to this comment.  

                Of course you could just ignore it.  Like one expects a coward would.  

          2. They said ok, let’s vote and sat down at the kitchen table expecting my wife and me to do so also. They then started discussing each question/person, pulling us into the discussion, and then announced how they were voting and asked us how we were voting.

            It was very weird as I had always viewed voting as something we each did privately. But they view it as a social event.

        3. At the polls signature verification is buttressed…

          No, identification at a polling place is done by one of the forms of valid ID for such purposes: Driver’s License, passport, etc. The voter signs the poll book, but there is no process of verifying that signature. Some of the valid forms of ID (birth certificate, for example) have no signature to compare. And the elections judges at the polling place do not have any signature list to use as comparison. The signature in the polling book might be used later if there is a question of validity (fraud), but it is not used for ID. So the polls signature does not “buttress” anything at the polls.

    2. Essentially what Gessler is arguing. I would think that, given the problems Democrats have had with mail ballots in this election, that many of you might agree with him that mail ballots may just be inherently problematic.

        1. I don’t think he or I have been inconsistent at all. Mail ballots, and the way they are distributed, are far less secure than a staffed polling place and are ripe for fraud. It looks to me like Democrats don’t like mail ballots either. Instead of turning this into partisan mudslinging, perhaps common ground?

          I predict the clerks would be the greatest foe of any attempt to do away with mail ballots, and Democrats who may or may not want to exploit the vulnerabilities of mail ballots would hide. 🙂

          1. And since CO has been using mail in ballots for several cycles now, I’m sure you can list the specific cases of fraud that have occured.

            Since so many were at least ripe over several cycles, shouldn’t be hard.  How about if I give you 4 hours.  I’ll check back tonight.  

            1. How do you ever prove that a ballot was not filled out by the voter it was intended for, if the whole process takes place outside a supervised environment?

              Just because it can’t be documented doesn’t make all the many ways it could still happen go away. I like how Democrats pretend these obvious things are so hard to understand. It doesn’t make you look stupid, just corrupt.

          1. is the most commonly offered Republican response.

            Jason had an early diary where the response was that they would be happy to provide him the facts if only he was a Republican. In that instance, they had the facts but wouldn’t divulge them to anyone who didn’t belong to the United States of Republicans.

            I guess they have to play this game if their true intent is to suppress the Democratic vote in 2012 but it could backfire if they get called out for specifics and have none.

  4. Our esteemed fps made a CORA (Colorado Open Record Act) request some time ago asking the Secretary of State to produce the documents for review that proved voter fraud.  What happened, Progressive Cowgirl?  where are you with your quest????

    And, as for you, Jason.  Why ask the editor of the Pueblo Chieftain, why don’t you just file a CORA request.  I believe it was MADCO who gave everyone here a template.

    Jason, did you ever take calculus? There is a classic problem. If you jump half the distance from a set point to the wall each time you jump, how many jumps will it take to reach the wall?  The answer is an infinite number, you will never reach the wall.  You can only halve the distance.  That is what you remind me off….you never get to the target.  

    I think you are trying to set yourself up as a critic of the media. I don’t know why.  I don’t know why anyone would think that you have the experience or the credentials to be criticizing any journalist.

    1. It would be kind of useless if it claimed that. Zeno’s paradox is actually not a big deal, and to the extent it’s worth caring about, the process of taking limits resolves it satisfactorily.

      1. I would like to thank again the CU Boulder Political Science Department circa 1961. In those long ago days, students had to declare a major by the end of their Sophomore semester.  As the deadline approached, the poli sic department was open 24/7 and accepted students, erstwhile organic chem majors, almost math majors (me), bewildered wannabe zoology majors, with open arms, no questions and no prerequisites. We had found a home, touched the wall, so to speak.

        All I remember from my college calculus days is that jumping paradox.  I actually tested into college calculus my freshman fall semester, god knows how.

    2. Got a response and I need to scan it in and get feedback from some of the wonderful folks who have offered to help, then respond to him again with further instructions. He’s trying to scare me off with a high cost estimate.

      Sorry I haven’t been around. I just really needed some time out from Pols the last few days.  

      1. That you are willing to come review the docs in person.  Then go in and read through the docs, flag the individual (much fewer usually) that you want for copies.  There is a limit on how much you can be charged per copy.  

            1. P SOS did his job and presented the actual evidence no one would need to do that would they?  I guess in your world we should just trust the government, gut open meeting and open record laws?

            2. I’m well aware on many Republican fishing expeditions that wasted plenty of time and taxpayer money.

              Don’t call out someone when your side does the same thing with the same frequency.

              At least this request is seeking to find something specific, as opposed to some of the lame ass requests I’ve seen Republicans submit.

              2. every school district in the state instead of just the online ones?

                Republicans must be lower on cash than I thought to only be able to afford one shill for this site.  Makes me pine for the good old days when Laughing Boy would post up something genuine and thoughtful.

                Please please please Lord.

                Speak to Herman Cain and tell him to send someone to Colorado Pols who isn’t a mindless parrot.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

110 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!