Richard’s interview with cnbc.com about election security for voters & poll workers

Richard’s interview with cnbc.com about election security for voters & poll workers

Richard’s interview with cnbc.com about election security for voters & poll workers: the CNBC article:

“‘We’re going to hang you’: DOJ cracks down on threats to election workers ahead of high-stakes midterms”

Key Points
  • The Department of Justice has reported a string of violent threats against election workers ahead of the Nov. 8 midterm elections.
  • Threats against election workers and officials have increased since the 2020 presidential election.
  • Some states also have taken measures to ensure the safety of workers at the polls.
LA County voters go to the polls to vote in-person the day before Election Day at the LA County Registrar-Recorder on June 6, 2022 in Norwalk, California.
LA County voters go to the polls to vote in-person the day before Election Day at the LA County Registrar-Recorder on June 6, 2022 in Norwalk, California.
Gina Ferazzi | Los Angeles Times | Getty Images

A 64-year-old Iowa man was arrested earlier this month for threatening to kill election officials in Arizona’s Maricopa County — a pivotal county at the center of the 2020 election and subsequent state recount where former President Donald Trump lost by about 10,000 votes.

“When we come to lynch your stupid lying Commie [expletive], you’ll remember that you lied on the [expletive] Bible, you piece of [expletive]. You’re gonna die, you piece of [expletive]. We’re going to hang you. We’re going to hang you,” the man allegedly said in a voicemail left for Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich on Sept. 27, 2021, according to the Justice Department.

Arizona election officials step up security after reports of voter intimidation

VIDEO02:15
Arizona election officials step up security after reports of voter intimidation

That is just one example of the rising number of violent threats election workers in the days leading up to the Nov. 8 midterms. The Department of Justice and other law enforcement agencies are cracking down on the escalation of the threats ahead of the U.S. election that could flip the balance of power in Congress.

“Threats to election workers not only threaten the safety of the individuals concerned, but also jeopardize the stability of the U.S. electoral process,” the FBI said in a public service announcement earlier this month. Homeland Security warned in June that “calls for violence by domestic violent extremists” against election workers, candidates and democratic institutions will likely rise the closer we get to the midterms.

An observer watches as contractors working for Cyber Ninjas, who was hired by the Arizona State Senate, examine and recount ballots from the 2020 general election at Veterans Memorial Coliseum on May 8, 2021 in Phoenix, Arizona.
An observer watches as contractors working for Cyber Ninjas, who was hired by the Arizona State Senate, examine and recount ballots from the 2020 general election at Veterans Memorial Coliseum on May 8, 2021 in Phoenix, Arizona.
Courtney Pedroza | The Washington Post | Getty Images

DOJ has fielded an increasing number of reports of threatening voicemails, online messages and even in-person encounters since Trump lost the 2020 election.

“These threats against election officials continue,” Michael McDonald, a professor of political science at the University of Florida and author of “From Pandemic to Insurrection: Voting in the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election,” told CNBC. “It’s straining and stressing election officials. And in some cases, they are opting to retire from running elections.”

Unprecedented intimidation

Earlier this month, DOJ Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite Jr., who runs the agency’s criminal division, briefed hundreds of election officials and workers on federal government grants available under the 2002 Help American Vote Act to bolster physical security at election locations. The act authorized an additional $75 million for security for this year — up from $425 million in 2020. Additional funding from the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan can also be used to protect election workers, Polite said.

The precautions stem from the unprecedented intimidation of election officials and workers during the 2020 presidential vote — an election that Trump continues to falsely claim was rigged — even though numerous courts, law enforcement and high-ranking Republican officials have found no evidence of widespread fraud.

Workers in battleground states in 2020, notably Georgia and Arizona, have been repeatedly targeted by extremists since those states’ races were contested and lost by Trump.

Gabriel Sterling, Georgia Secretary of State’s chief operating officer, told U.S. lawmakers in June that one of the state’s election workers was threatened to be “hung for treason” after transferring an election report to a county computer.

Wandrea "Shaye" Moss, former Elections Department employee in Fulton County, Georgia testifies during the fourth of eight planned public hearings of the U.S. House Select Committee to investigate the January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S. June 21, 2022. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst
Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, former Elections Department employee in Fulton County, Georgia testifies during the fourth of eight planned public hearings of the U.S. House Select Committee to investigate the January 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S. June 21, 2022.
Jonathan Ernst | Reuters

Former Georgia election worker Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss testified at the same hearing about racist threats and death wishes she received after becoming the focus of a Trump conspiracy theory.

‘Turned my life upside down’

Moss, who was falsely accused of election tampering, said the harassment stemming from those accusations “turned my life upside down.”

“It’s affected my life in a major way. In every way. All because of lies. From me doing my job, the same thing I’ve been doing forever,” Moss told the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

DOJ launched an election threats task force in July 2021 to ensure voters are safe at the polls and to look into the rise in threatening behavior against election workers like Moss. Over the past year, it has held approximately 40 meetings, presentations, and trainings with the election community, state and local prosecutors, state and local law enforcement, vendors providing services to support election administration, and major social media companies, a DOJ official told CNBC.

Gwinnett County election workers handle ballots as part of the recount for the 2020 presidential election at the Beauty P. Baldwin Voter Registrations and Elections Building on November 16, 2020 in Lawrenceville, Georgia.
Gwinnett County election workers handle ballots as part of the recount for the 2020 presidential election at the Beauty P. Baldwin Voter Registrations and Elections Building on November 16, 2020 in Lawrenceville, Georgia.
Megan Varner | Getty Images

The task force reviewed over 1,000 contacts reported by elections officials as hostile or harassing, the agency said in August. In cases where they could identify the offender, half of them contacted officials on more than one occasion and about 11% of the incidents merited federal criminal investigation, according to the task force.

Close elections

“Election officials in states with close elections and post-election contests were more likely to receive threats,” DOJ said. More than half 58%, of the potentially criminal threats were in states that underwent 2020 post-election lawsuits, recounts, and audits, including Arizona, Georgia, Colorado, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada and Wisconsin.

A March report by the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan policy institute, showed nearly one in three local election officials know at least one worker who has left their job due in part to safety concerns, elevated threats or intimidation. One in six local officials has personally experienced threats and more than half of this number have been threatened in person, according to the report.

“Who’s going to run the election, if sensible people aren’t willing to do it because they’re under threat?” McDonald said.

Richard C. Bell, a legal analyst and author of “Voting: The Ultimate Act of Resistance,” says federal and state government officials are stepping up their response to ensure election integrity and to make election workers feel safer.

“It is going to be safe for voters to vote, and it’s going to be safe for election officials to carry out their work,” Bell said. “This is not 2020 when some people got taken by surprise. We’re very well aware of the possibilities.”

Georgia launched a statewide text alert system this month to report incidents of violence against poll workers. The office of Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger, a Republican who defied former Trump by certifying that state’s 2020 election results favoring Joe Biden, created the tool after the last presidential election. Raffensperger said he and his family have been targeted with numerous threats since Trump lost.

A transcript of a phone call between former U.S. President Donald Trump and Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State, appears on a video screen during the fourth hearing on the January 6th investigation in the Cannon House Office Building on June 21, 2022 in Washington, DC.
A transcript of a phone call between former U.S. President Donald Trump and Brad Raffensperger, Georgia Secretary of State, appears on a video screen during the fourth hearing on the January 6th investigation in the Cannon House Office Building on June 21, 2022 in Washington, DC.
Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images

The FBI sent out a memo this month warning the public against threatening election staff in Arizona, where workers have received death threats.

In June, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis signed an act protecting election workers from threats, coercion or intimidation into law.

Fair and free elections

The Office of U.S. Attorneys, which prosecutes federal crimes in local regions across the country for DOJ, is also assigning local prosecutors to help oversee election safety in every state as part of the Justice Department’s routine Election Day Program.

“Every citizen must be able to vote without interference or discrimination and to have that vote counted in a fair and free election,” U.S. Attorney Dena J. King said in a statement. “Similarly, election officials and staff must be able to serve without being subject to unlawful threats of violence. The Department of Justice will always work tirelessly to protect the integrity of the election process.”

The same day the Iowa man was arrested for threatening Arizona officials earlier this month, DOJ said a man in Nebraska was sentenced to 18 months in prison for threatening an election official and posting threatening messages on Instagram to Biden and another public figure.

“Do you feel safe? You shouldn’t. Do you think Soros will/can protect you?” prosecutors said the man told the election official, referencing billionaire Democratic donor George Soros. “Your security detail is far too thin and incompetent to protect you. This world is unpredictable these days … anything can happen to anyone.”

In Support of the Freedom to Vote Act

In Support of the Freedom to Vote Act

You may have read that the Freedom to Vote Act, national legislation to combat voter suppression (placing barriers to voting which often discriminate against certain groups such as African-Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, young voters and disabled voters) and electoral subversion (laws that intend to overturn election results by empowering partisan politicians over professional and competent election administrators in counting votes and certifying results) was prevented from being passed by Republicans in the senate.  Unfortunately, due to the senate filibuster rules there is no chance it will pass the senate without a reform or carve out of the filibuster rules.

An excellent analysis of the Freedom to Vote Act is contained in a recent online article by the Center for American Progress.  It clearly explains how this law “would counteract state laws that undermine elections”.  It is a great read and an important educational tool for voters who believe in free, fair and easy elections for all.

After you read it, you may want to contact your senator to voice your support for the bill.  Our democracy depends on it.

Before you contact your senator be sure to review the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act if you agree that potential voter suppression laws should be pre-cleared by the Attorney General of the United States or the U.S. District Court in D.C.  Then you need to call or email your senator to support this additional important piece of legislation that honors American voting rights and civil rights hero John Lewis.  Your senator works for you.  Tell her/him your opinions.  NOW.

A Storied Newspaper Takes a Stand Against The Big Lie

A Storied Newspaper Takes a Stand Against The Big Lie

A Storied Newspaper Takes a Stand Against The Big Lie: This past week the latest attempt to perpetuate “The Big Lie”, a/k/a Trump’s completely baseless and thoroughly debunked theory that he really won the election, came to an embarrassing end. Not only was the Arizona so-called “audit” of the Maricopa County 2020 election vote count an inept circus run by unqualified amateurs (The literal name of the firm in charge was Cyber Ninjas), by it own admission President Biden won the county by even a few hundred more votes than the official certified tally. That, of course, is not stopping the Trump sycophant legislators in Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin from trying to move forward with wasting taxpayer’s money to conduct useless “fraudits” in their states to perpetuate “The Big Lie” and undermine the foundation of our democracy, the integrity of our elections and the peaceful transfer of power (See 1/6/21) and acceptance of certified election results. Evidence be damned in the view of these opponents of free and fair elections. One great American newspaper has taken a stand against giving credence to these opponents of Democracy. The Philadelphia Inquirer will not dignify the upcoming frivolous Pennsylvania “audit”  with the name “audit” because words matter. A must-read piece about this act of honesty and journalistic courage by The Philadelphia Inquirer is in The Washington Post:

“Words matter. So these journalists refuse to call GOP election meddling an ‘audit.’” written by Margaret Sullivan was originally published by The Washington Post [Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com]:  There’s a simple but powerful idea behind the Philadelphia Inquirer’s recent decision not to use the word “audit” when referring to an effort by the state GOP to investigate the 2020 election:

Words matter.

The words that a news organization chooses to tell a story make a difference. If a journalist calls something a “lie,” that’s a deliberate choice. So is “racially tinged.” Or “pro-life.” Or “torture.”
Such decisions carry weight. They have power.

Acknowledging this power and being transparent about those choices is exactly what the Inquirer did the other day when it embedded within a news story a bit of explanatory text, under the headline: “Why We’re Not Calling It an Audit.”

In clear language, the paper explained that it’s because “there’s no indication” that this effort, which follows months of demands from Donald Trump alleging baselessly that the election was rigged, “would follow the best practices or the common understanding of an audit among nonpartisan experts.”

How so? The Inquirer noted that when it asked how the review would work, how ballots and election equipment would be secured, who would be involved, and so on, the leaders of this effort did not explain.

The Inquirer stated some reporting-based facts linked to the paper’s previous stories about them: That Joe Biden won the state by more than 80,000 votes, that state and county audits affirmed that outcome, and that there is no evidence of any significant fraud.

“We think it is critical to speak plain truths about efforts to make it harder to vote and about efforts to sow doubts about the electoral process,” Dan Hirschhorn, senior politics editor at the Inquirer, told me. “These are not ‘he said/she said’ stories — there is clear, objective truth here.”

More plain truths from the Inquirer: In the story carrying this explainer box, the paper uses the term “forensic investigation” — which is what the GOP wants to call it — in quotation marks. A sub-headline makes it clear that this effort is “modeled off the months-long partisan review in Arizona,” widely regarded as irrevocably flawed and unnecessary to begin with, initiated by Republican lawmakers carrying water for Trump and placed in the hands of dubious private firms. (“Fraudit” may be a more accurate term.)

Hirschhorn said there wasn’t a lot of internal discussion at the Inquirer about the decision, in part because it all flowed from the work of the paper’s excellent voting-rights beat reporter, Jonathan Lai, which provided the factual basis for the statements.

But it also flows from a clear philosophy at the paper.

“We are pro-democracy,” he said. “We believe voting rights are fundamental and it should be easier, not harder, for people who are legally allowed to vote to do so,” within a safe and secure voting system.

He was careful to say that the language is “narrowly tailored” for these recent developments: “We’re not making general statements about the Pennsylvania Republican Party.”

The decision reminds me, in some ways, of the admirable moves by another Pennsylvania news organization, the public radio station WITF in Harrisburg. As I wrote this spring, the station took some unusual steps to remind listeners and readers of how state Republicans had tried to undermine the 2020 election results.

In late January, the station posted an explanatory story stating that they would be regularly reminding their audience, in day-to-day coverage, that some state legislators signed a letter urging Congress to vote against certifying the Pennsylvania election results, and that some members of Congress had voted against certifying the state’s election results for President Biden, despite no evidence to support their election-fraud claims.

These elected officials, WITF reminded its audience, either knowingly spread disinformation or flat-out lied in an effort to keep Trump in office. “This was an unprecedented assault on the fabric of American democracy,” the statement said.
When I learned over the weekend about what the Inquirer was doing, I couldn’t help but think about the deeply flawed media coverage that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The way mainstream journalists, under pressure to appear patriotic in the aftermath of the attacks, too often adopted the language of politicians and failed to muster enough skepticism in the reporting that led up to the American invasion of Iraq.

In subsequent years, the press used euphemisms like “enhanced interrogation techniques” when they should have said “torture.” Or they called suspected terrorists at Guantánamo Bay “detainees,” as if they were being sent to the principal’s office rather than serving what amounted to a prison term of many years.

Who gets to decide what language is used? Should it be advocates, like activists who oppose abortion and insist that they should be called “pro-life” even if they favor the death penalty? Should it be politicians like those in Arizona and Pennsylvania whose “forensic investigations” are motivated not by any democratic impulse but by a purely partisan agenda?

Or should news organizations employ clear thinking and plain language, intended to serve the public’s understanding and interests? That’s what the Inquirer has decided to do in this case.

There’s a word for that, too: Integrity.