Another Illegal Effort by Trump
Today in USA Today;In response to:
'Talk with your lawyer, Bill Barr:' Kamala Harris warns Trump against attempt to 'suppress the vote'
William Cummings, USA TODAY
USA TODAY May 26, 2020, 12:52 AM EDT
Sen. Kamala Harris tore into President Donald Trump Wednesday night for his threat to withhold federal funds from states over absentee ballots, warning such an act would be illegal.
"Mr. President, it is a federal crime to withhold money from states with the purpose of interfering with people's right to vote," the former California attorney general told MSNBC host Joy Reid.
"So, you may want to talk to your lawyer, Bill Barr, about that," Harris added, in an apparent swipe at the independence of Attorney General William Barr, whom critics have accused of acting more like the president's personal attorney than the nation's top law enforcement official.
On Wednesday morning, Trump said in a tweet that Michigan had sent millions of voters absentee ballots "illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State."
"I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path!" wrote the president, who has railed against efforts to expand mail-in-voting in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
The president was referring to Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson's announcement on Tuesday that absentee ballot applications – not actual ballots – would be sent to all of the state's 7.7 million voters, giving them the option to receive a ballot in the mail to vote in the Aug. 4 primary and Nov. 3 general election, rather than going to a polling place.
While it is illegal in Michigan to send absentee ballots to voters who do not formally request them, it is far from clear that there are the same legal hurdles to sending applications for the absentee ballots to registered voters, though it could be challenged in court.
Trump later deleted the initial tweet to clarify he was referring to applications, and not ballots, though that was the only aspect of the tweet he changed.
"To have this kind of distraction is just ridiculous," Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, whose state is facing a massive flood on top of the coronavirus pandemic, told "CBS This Morning" on Thursday.
"Threatening to take money away from a state that is hurting as bad as we are right now is just scary, and I think something that is unacceptable," Whitmer said.
The president made a similar threat against Nevada, where Republican Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske has ordered an all mail-in election for the state's June 9 primary – which has no bearing on the presidential race because Nevada held its Democratic presidential caucus in February, and canceled its Republican presidential caucus.
Cegavske, whose decision was upheld by a federal judge earlier this month, defended the move as "necessary and prudent" in order to "protect the health and safety of voters and election workers," in a statement responding to the president's tweet.
"For over a century, Nevadans, including members of the military, citizens residing outside the state, voters in designated mailing precincts, and voters requesting absentee ballots, have been voting by mail with no evidence of election fraud," Cegavske said.
"For the President to threaten federal funding in the midst of a pandemic over a state exercising its authority to run elections in a safe and legal manner is inappropriate and outrageous," said Nevada's Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak in a response to Trump on Twitter.
Trump, who himself votes absentee, has said voting by mail is a "dangerous thing" and "subject to tremendous corruption," despite a lack of evidence that there is a statistically significant amount of fraud in the five states that conduct their elections entirely by mail.
'Talk with your lawyer, Bill Barr:' Kamala Harris warns Trump against attempt to 'suppress the vote'
William Cummings, USA TODAY
USA TODAY May 26, 2020, 12:52 AM EDT
Sen. Kamala Harris tore into President Donald Trump Wednesday night for his threat to withhold federal funds from states over absentee ballots, warning such an act would be illegal.
"Mr. President, it is a federal crime to withhold money from states with the purpose of interfering with people's right to vote," the former California attorney general told MSNBC host Joy Reid.
"So, you may want to talk to your lawyer, Bill Barr, about that," Harris added, in an apparent swipe at the independence of Attorney General William Barr, whom critics have accused of acting more like the president's personal attorney than the nation's top law enforcement official.
On Wednesday morning, Trump said in a tweet that Michigan had sent millions of voters absentee ballots "illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State."
"I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path!" wrote the president, who has railed against efforts to expand mail-in-voting in response to the coronavirus pandemic.
The president was referring to Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson's announcement on Tuesday that absentee ballot applications – not actual ballots – would be sent to all of the state's 7.7 million voters, giving them the option to receive a ballot in the mail to vote in the Aug. 4 primary and Nov. 3 general election, rather than going to a polling place.
While it is illegal in Michigan to send absentee ballots to voters who do not formally request them, it is far from clear that there are the same legal hurdles to sending applications for the absentee ballots to registered voters, though it could be challenged in court.
Trump later deleted the initial tweet to clarify he was referring to applications, and not ballots, though that was the only aspect of the tweet he changed.
"To have this kind of distraction is just ridiculous," Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, whose state is facing a massive flood on top of the coronavirus pandemic, told "CBS This Morning" on Thursday.
"Threatening to take money away from a state that is hurting as bad as we are right now is just scary, and I think something that is unacceptable," Whitmer said.
The president made a similar threat against Nevada, where Republican Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske has ordered an all mail-in election for the state's June 9 primary – which has no bearing on the presidential race because Nevada held its Democratic presidential caucus in February, and canceled its Republican presidential caucus.
Cegavske, whose decision was upheld by a federal judge earlier this month, defended the move as "necessary and prudent" in order to "protect the health and safety of voters and election workers," in a statement responding to the president's tweet.
"For over a century, Nevadans, including members of the military, citizens residing outside the state, voters in designated mailing precincts, and voters requesting absentee ballots, have been voting by mail with no evidence of election fraud," Cegavske said.
"For the President to threaten federal funding in the midst of a pandemic over a state exercising its authority to run elections in a safe and legal manner is inappropriate and outrageous," said Nevada's Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak in a response to Trump on Twitter.
Trump, who himself votes absentee, has said voting by mail is a "dangerous thing" and "subject to tremendous corruption," despite a lack of evidence that there is a statistically significant amount of fraud in the five states that conduct their elections entirely by mail.
(continued in my first comment below)
Comments (143)
In a March 30 "Fox & Friends" interview, Trump also said he feared a shift to vote-by-mail could lead to "levels of voting that – if you ever agreed to it – you'd never have a Republican elected in this country again."
Harris said she believed the latter concern was the primary reason Trump tweeted his threats against states shifting to mail-in ballots.
"He is always in the business of attempting to intimidate, and using his tweets as the method by which he does that," she said. "But also it's clear that he's worried about whether he's going to win this election."
Harris, who is on the list of potential running mates for the presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden, said Trump's aim was to reduce the number of people voting because he thought it would improve his chances of reelection.
"This is another example of Donald Trump being complicit with an attempt, or even purposely attempting, to suppress the vote in an election."
Then my dog ate it.
German Shepherd? Just a hunch.
Trump wants to win, and he will do anything to win.
It's time the rise up America. Get out and vote, the dictatorship of Trump has to go.
Nothing is remotely legitimate. Trump hasn't tried stopping absentee ballots. He understands that there are some.
The key word is "documented" Since there isn't ever full fledged audit unless demonrats lose and try turning the outcome, there's no possible way it's less. Every bit to believe it's even higher than known.
It's not an illegal effort on Trump's part, but more of an illegal attempt on the part of demonrats.
No. It's not more of a crime to with hold aid to states than it is for states to break federal laws with their own regulations.
Maybe gretchen should resign since she's the reason the state is hurting so bad. Why aren't our dams fully inspected along with being shored up and/or repaired?
The protection of others is quite the joke. Why all the masks and temperature checks in the work place, then try pulling the mail in applications for extended voter fraud possibilities?
It has nothing to do with suppression and every bit to question actual voter integrity. My state had quite the fraud happening to the point some precincts couldn't be counted in 2016. To play that it doesn't happen and couldn't pose more opportunity for fraud is the full support of actual criminality.
No. It's not more of a crime to with hold aid to state
Trump believes that many democrats will not go vote due to the pandemic and the propaganda
he's been pushing. Meanwhile, he believes he can motivate his base to ignore the virus and go out to vole.
Allowing republicans. democrats and independents to vote by mail would allow more voting.
Trump believes that he can win again with less votes, as he did last time. But fears the surge from
mailed-in votes. So, he wants to surpress those.....illegally by threatening witholding pandemic aid.
It's the demonrats trying to do away with voter integrity.
I fail to see why a mail vote is any different to voting in person, it is, without doubt, just a way to suppress voters rights.
To condone Trump's actions is, in all honesty, deplorable
to put it simply, would you hand your credit card and social security card to a complete stranger and hope it gets safely to its final destination?
#1. There is no history of massive voter fraud with mail ins.
#2. There is a pandemic currently under way and mail in voting would make it safer to vote.
#3. This is actually Trump's illegal effort to surppress votes, so he has a better chance of winning the election with a minority of votes.
I am there less than 5 minutes.
Jim - I think at times you are a bit harsh in your responses. But then I think a lot of people here should take a chill pill now and then.
Uber lays off 3,000 more employees in latest round of COVID-19-inspired cuts
Trying to process everyone who has been allowed to vote and wishes to do so whilst still maintaining social distancing in one day would require an extraordinary number of polling stations.
The alternative is that only a very small minority of people get to vote. They will be the people who are physically able to queue without needing to use a restroom for the best part of a day, those who can get childcare, those who will get a paid for vacation day, or don't need that day's pay and those who aren't at risk of losing their jobs if they miss a day.
It will mostly exclude poor people, women, and people of colour who have historically had to fight to get the vote. It's regressing to a time when only a privileged few had voting rights and were represented by government.
Also, Democrats sent millions to the polls recently on March 17th in the middle of the pandemic in order to help Biden secure the nomination. All they care about is power. Their phony narratives - from 'voter suppression' to anything else - are just that - phony narratives. They're obsessed with power and will go to any lengths to get it. Outside of legitimate absentee ballots, turning up in person with voter ID should be required. And it's not even a Republican versus Democrat thing. It's an election integrity and transparency thing. Transparency and integrity are best served via proper ID, and counting (and double checking) of ballots in public view, with additional election monitors to ensure everything is being done legitimately.
Some make it, a lot don't.
Which "curtain" are you referring to ?
The unmasking of all of Trump's thousands of lies, or the complete list of all his crimes ?
But, the reality is, that you've been a starving artist.
If you were a real patriot, you would not be siding with Russia's candidate.
What I said was:
Lastly:
The assumption was yours that I was excluding white people of a lower economic status.
'Poor' encompasses a range in it's demographic, but does tend to include the socially disadvantaged as well as the economically disadvantaged. The term 'socio-economic' puts those two factors together for a reason: if you have a low social status, it's harder to dig your way out of poverty; if you are poor, you have a low social status.
There is a history of poor people, women and people of colour being oppressed and one of the means of subjugation was not having the right to vote. Only land owning men had franchise and only white men had land.
The methods of voter suppression, including blocking remote voting, specifically target these same groups of people. The various methods might not stop all poor people, women and people of colour from voting, but they are an effective enough inhibitory factor to skew outcome.
When, as a woman of low socio-economic status you buy into the rhetoric that remote voting is unfair, your are shooting yourself in the foot as well as helping to disenfranchise other disadvantaged people.