On the LA vote-counting process that is giving LA two leftist Democrats to choose from for mayor
We knew it would probably happen; Pratt would be shut out of the election. The only question is whether the process was fraudulent, and if so what method was used. Although we cannot say for certain, it’s incredibly hard to maintain the idea that the post-Election Day surge for Raman was bona fide; the details point so strongly in the direction of fraud.
In other words, the process gives us the appearance of fraud. That is built into the system, which allows vote-counting of mail-in ballots a week past election day as long as they are postmarked on that day (and “postmarked” is rumored to be interpreted as including a handwritten note), and which features mail-in ballots to everyone on the rolls plus liberal ballot-harvesting.
California has some of the most permissive — if not the most permissive — vote-by-mail laws in the country. Every active registered voter is automatically mailed a ballot before each statewide election. Because the state has refused to allow the Department of Justice to review its voter rolls, there’s no way to know how many registrations belong to deceased individuals, voters who have moved, duplicate records, or were actually fraudulent registrations to begin with. …
Additionally, California accepts ballots that arrive as late as one week after Election Day. Although the law requires those ballots to be postmarked on or before Election Day, claims circulating on social media suggest that even a handwritten date may be enough to meet that standard, raising further questions about the state’s ballot-counting process. For obvious reasons, this is impossible to confirm.
That time frame is inherently untrustworthy and should never be allowed, unless perhaps for absentee ballots from military personnel. Why would anyone implement a system like that, with so few ways to check on it? Hard to believe it’s for any reason other than to make it more possible to cheat if necessary, once the counters know how many ballots they have to create in order to make up the difference. And with the universal mail-in voting and ballot harvesting, it’s even more suspect.
So either there was an amazing bona fide surge for the most far-left major candidate in the mayoral race, Raman – hard to believe – or there was cheating here. And the argument made by the left, that late-arriving mail-in ballots in California always go for Democrats, is unconvincing. Do such ballots go disproportionately for Democrats compared to the earlier mail-in ballots? More importantly, do they go for the non-frontrunner – the person in third place? And if so, does the phenomenon occur even when there is no threat from a Republican or a candidate the Democrat establishment doesn’t want – in other words, when there is no reason to manufacture votes? In the case of this LA mayoral primary, there wasn’t so much a late surge for Democrats as a late surge for Raman in particular, the third-place candidate prior to that, and the one who is most to the left.
Because only the top two vote-getters in the California primary advance to the general, if the counters of votes wanted to push Pratt out of the running, they had two choices to eliminate him. The first choice would be to help the frontrunner and incumbent Bass reach 50% and win outright; if a candidate gets over 50% in the primary that person is the outright winner and there’s no further voting [CORRECTION: This appears to be incorrect information, and therefore this option was not available]. But Bass was about 13 or 14 points away from 50% on election night, so that was probably a bridge too far. Too many votes to manufacture. But Raman and Pratt were only five or six points apart on election night. Much easier to make up that difference and set up an obligatory Democrat/Democrat twosome. And that’s what has happened.
Bass had been consistently beating Raman in the ballots arriving by Election Day. And then suddenly Raman beats Bass in the later ballots. See this:
The big tell about Los Angeles Mayor right now is not that Nithya Raman has gained massively on Spencer Pratt. It’s that she’s gained on Karen Bass *while Bass’ share actually declined* in two full days, Thursday PM to Saturday PM.
Bass and the Normie Dem Adam Miller both dropped slightly in share while Raman essentially took all the net gains.
Thursday Left, this morning Right. Raman gained 3.1 points on Bass. Conventional wisdom was that late voters would’ve consolidated around the incumbent, not bolt for the upstart extremist.
A candidate who was getting around 20% of the vote is suddenly getting 40% of the vote, and those votes are coming at the expense of Spencer Pratt.
Not her Democrat opponent, whose vote percentage has remained steady.
Not a “Democrat” surge; a Raman surge.
I’m not sure where this guy gets his information, but it’s certainly interesting:
As @BoredElonMusk & the data show, Raman’s late mail in ballot surge was fueled in large part by ballots from Skid Row.
Tens of thousands of homeless whose ballots are sent to central addresses (not the sidewalk) & can be filled out/returned by someone else.
There’s also this:
Many have been asking me describe the potential signature verification loophole for Los Angeles mail in ballots.
It says: “If a voter is unable to sign, the voter can make a mark witnessed by one person.”
Here, the person drew a happy face & “witnessed” it with a scribble. That scribble isn’t validated as being a real person. No name, nothing.
While a happy face may draw scrutiny, a plain line would not.
This could hypothetically enable mass harvesting where the voter never fills out, signs or even sees their own ballot.
We should be told how many ballots show up without the voter’s signature.
A hundred, two hundred years ago, a lot of people couldn’t even sign their name. Today? No excuse for this except in extremely rare circumstances. Combined with ballot harvesting, it’s an obvious travesty. And yet how can the fraud be proven in such a situation? It can only be inferred, but there’s no way to check on who made that mark.
More numbers here:
Mail-ins arriving before Election Day:
– Bass: 38.1%
– Pratt: 27.9%
– Raman: 20%Mail-ins arriving after Election Day:
– Raman: 37% (+17% surge)
– Bass: 34.9% (-3% drop)
– Pratt: 19% (-9% drop)
Add to all this a fact that many have not considered: you don’t even need to manufacture ballots after election day. All you need to know is the approximate results beforehand (Raman comes in third), and fill out the harvested ballots from the homeless, apartment buildings, and fake voters, ensuring that the correct result is overturned after the election is held. You have over a week to get them in, so you can even wait until the polls close and initial results come in and still get that vote counted “legally.” …
Most of the “cheating” can be done legally, save for the actual filling out of the ballots, which is practically impossible to detect. Simply have the harvested ballots ready to fill out when the initial results come in on election night, vote the ballots, and send them in. No magic USB drives necessary. No video trail. No paper trail. No examination of the ballots. …
As far as I can find, which is not admittedly definitive, there is no case where a third-place candidate far back vaults into first place in ballot counts days after the initial results come in. It beggars belief, violates common sense, and depends on the belief that late-breaking voters surged to a candidate everybody knew was rightfully dead and buried. That pattern is never observed in the wild. …
But it is the pattern necessary to kick Pratt off the ballot, giving Karen Bass a clear and easy path to victory over a candidate few people like, and nobody is enthusiastic about, and with the charisma of a rock.
I don’t see any remedy possible for this particular election. One very slight comfort (very slight) is that, if Pratt had been allowed to get on the ballot against Bass in the general, I think it’s highly likely he would have lost the election. I suppose it’s theoretically possible he could have won if he ran an amazing campaign in the next few months. But we haven’t been allowed to find out; it was too dangerous to let us see what he was saying, or to have another debate where he might show Bass up to be a fool. And the Democrats couldn’t even risk the remote possibility of a Pratt win.
However, for the future, there’s this possibility:
The case before the Supreme Court is Watson v. Republican National Committee. The question is direct: When Congress established a national Election Day for federal elections, did it mean ballots must be received by Election Day — or merely mailed by Election Day?
During oral arguments in March, Justice Samuel Alito warned that confidence in election outcomes can be seriously undermined when the apparent result on election night is later flipped by a large batch of late-arriving ballots.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh likewise pressed attorneys on whether history supports requiring ballots to be received by Election Day. Their questioning reflected broad skepticism from the court’s conservative majority.
Sacramento should be paying attention.
Most Americans understand Election Day to mean the deadline. California’s system tells them otherwise.
When vote totals keep changing for days after the polls close, suspicion naturally grows — because the process looks like it has no real endpoint.
I would say it has no objective endpoint other than 30 days after Election Day. It does have a goal, though – which is to select and then elect the preferred candidates of the Democrat powers-that-be.
The article mentions that, even if SCOTUS decides that Election Day is the final acceptable day for mail-ins, that rule would only apply to federal elections. State and local elections could still use the old method – which means the primary rules for governor and mayor would not change, as far as I can tell.
Once states go this way, it’s very hard to reverse the trend. And that is part of the design.
ADDENDUM:
A similar reversal has been starting to happen in the governor’s race; see this. Will Hilton make it into the general? I submit that it looks better for him than it did for Pratt. I think it’s more difficult to commit enough fraud to matter on the level of an entire state election unless the percentages are very close to begin with. On the state level, there are too many red areas which are not amenable to Democrat vote-counting control, plus the sheer number of faked votes needed is higher. So maybe Hilton will hang in there – although if he doesn’t, it would not surprise me either. It would be third-place Steyer who would have to outperform both Becarra and Hilton as time goes on.
DOJ absolutely has to sue CA and LA in federal court and stop this.
If legit votes can be diluted by fake votes, we don’t have a democracy.
Cornhead:
Why would it be a federal issue if these are state and local elections?
In California, the California Highway Patrol is also the State Police, with full jurisdiction in criminal affairs. You would think the Highway Patrol would be going, ” now just wait a minute ” , about something as openly and brazenly fraudulent as this.
I just saw a graph of votes vs time for the 3 candidates. Both Bass and Pratt curves follow a slow rise heading to a plateau and the curves parallel each other. Raman’s does the same until a few days later when a large spike occurs. Just absurd. And as I said before, they have no shame about it. It’s all, “nah nah nah…whatya gonna do about it?”
Worse than third world…..and it’s happening in the USA.
The Supreme Court case will decide whether California mail-in ballots will need to be received by election day to count. But they already have to be *postmarked* by 6 p.m. on election day — so it’s not really true that “you can even wait until the polls close and initial results come in [before voting] and still get that vote counted ‘legally.’ ” Whatever fishy things may be going on, that’s not one of them.
When the next large quake hits the Los Angeles basin the Palisade’s Fire effect will be horrendous, SMOD level catastrophy. But of course the undocumented, unhoused, LGBTQ++–><+* will be disproportionately dead (sarc x 11). Elections have consequences, cue The Gods of the Copybook Headings.
The Democrats will not allow a proper investigation into the election that could prove fraud, but that also means it cannot be proven to be a clean election. All the LA voters are left with is a subjective assessment of the credibility of their election system. I’m not an Angelino but from my perch this result is manufactured.
Seth Barrett Tillman wrote extensively about Article 4 Section 4 of the US Constitution in which the United States guarantees citizens of a state a “republican” (small r) form of government. The applicability of that section, and the procedural hurdles might be daunting, but the spirit of that provision is compelling.
I am a forever opponent of mail in voting, but know that I am shouting into the wind on that topic.
if a candidate gets over 50% in the primary that person is the outright winner and there’s no further voting.
I’ve seen this said before by Ace and others but according to California Secretary of State it does not appear to be true:
If I understand correctly, the mayor and gubernatorial elections are not special elections even though voter-nominated and getting over 50% would still result in a general election.
“We knew it would probably happen”
Gov Newsom came right and announced publically that he would make it happen: no Republicans elected to important offices (like LA mayor or CA Guv).
And that’s what is happening.
@Cap’n Rusty:the United States guarantees citizens of a state a “republican” (small r) form of government.
The huge variety in republican governments that the Founders were familiar with at the time of the writing of the Constitution would suggest to me that they understood “republican” to mean something much more general than we do. James Madison wrote a short book on republics and John Adams wrote a long one.
TR:
In the post I mentioned that some reports are that the postmarks can be handwritten. If true, that would make them highly suspect.
In my state, ballots must be received by the time the polls close on election day, whether or not the Post Office stamped them. Late-arriving ballots go in the trash.
Kate:
As it should be.
Niketas:
That does appear to be the case, although I’d previously read otherwise. Will fix.
Illegitimate government can’t really complain when some other illegitimate government that is more ruthless than them replaces them. And kills them.
Chases Eagles:
That’s how the socialists/communists usually settle their minor disagreements after gaining power. Then they deal with the people.
And so, an excellent reason NOT to deal with the homeless problem.
(Actually , it’s not really the homeless “problem”; it’s the homeless “tool”…)
Is this ___ against Pratt or for Raman?
If it is against Pratt, the actors could be Bass and/or Raman supporters, with, perhaps, equal likelihood. But, if it is for Raman, the actors could be Bass and/or Raman supporters, but with greater likelihood Raman supporters.
My guesses of likelihood are based on my guesses of their motivation, which are based on these predictions:
Bass will beat Pratt,* though Pratt will embarrass her.
Bass probably will beat Raman,* w/o embarrassment.
* Search: Polymarket and Los Angeles Mayoral Election
I think this effort of ginning up votes for Raman from vagrants is to benefit Bass. She appears to be likely to easily defeat Raman, but a general election race against Pratt might have been … interesting.
Perhaps when I visit next month I might find out whether my Los Angeles brother is bothered by this election being swayed by the same group who spread third-world diseases in the streets and start frequent fires.
At this point, all I can do is laugh. And be glad I left California. New Mexcio, where I live now, is headed in the same direction, but there are still enough normies here to curb, barely, the worst of the D cabal.
The first question to be asked when considering the possiblity of voter fraud should be, ‘why construct a convoluted, irrational voting system that lends itself to fraud if you don’t intend fraud?’.
The intent in places like California, or in Pennsylvania in 2020 when the electoral powers violated their own state constitution to distort the system, is patently clear.
Chases Eagles, what you folks need to worry about is historical precedent. There are boundless examples of ruthless entities overthrowing an existing system, only to attract even more ruthless predators. If the people who are attacking the foundations of our system with law fare and political shenanigans, creating distrust in the very system that has nurtured us were to succeed, and believe that they are likely to survive the ensuing chaos, they are rather naive. They may think they are ruthless, until they meet the real thing.
om and Oldflyer,
Ruthless doesn’t have to mean evil. It might be an American Pinochet. Donks get lucky and murder Trump and Vance then SecWar kills them all to restore constitutional government.
Niketas Choniates: I tried to edit my comment to add the point that rigged elections violate the principles of a small r republican form of government. But the edit function wasn’t working at the time.
I am a very bad person – I now want the worst one to win, whomever that might be.
Chases Eagles:
There are probably more than one General “White Rage” Miley who would contest martial law actions if the 8647ers succeed.
The BHO cancer in the military is disconcerting.
DecisiondeskHQ calls the California governor race for Steve Hilton and Xavier Becerra
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cameron-arcand/2026/06/08/republican-advances-to-general-election-in-california-governors-race-n2677448
Pajamas Media had a story about the Supreme Court case and also this good news:
https://pjmedia.com/catherinesalgado/2026/06/08/california-republican-steve-hilton-advances-to-general-election-n4953747
Maybe it’s harder to rig statewide races than municipal ones.
However, it ain’t over till it’s over.
https://pjmedia.com/victoria-taft/2026/06/08/what-happened-to-las-spencer-pratt-is-why-the-supreme-court-decision-on-election-day-is-key-n4953708
“In the Supreme Court case’s oral arguments in March, several justices mentioned that these extended election days cause mistrust of the process among voters. A person who looks to have won on election night suddenly becomes an also-ran within four days. Better to know on election night and rip off the bandage than slow roll the count. “
I call it 3 Vote Card Monte, it’s a scam.
A election with 2 candidates of same party isn’t a choice.
“I don’t see any remedy possible for this particular election.”
There lies the rub, There is no recourse but do it over and that extremely rarely happens. They know it, steal the election and hopefully live to do it again next time.
California voting is too corrupt to change it is impossible, and it’s not the only state in that situation.
AJW had a good vid on this. Most damning to me was Newsome assurance they had things in place.
https://youtu.be/_VlBcdVEGGA?si=ze6ZpTKBWcDEPRlR
After the NYC mayoral election I wouldn’t bet on a compromised Democrat machine pol winning against a Commie Theater Kid.
I don’t see boosting Raman makes any sense in terms of helping Bass get re-elected. Recall that city workers (IIRC) union who were backing Bass made an ad that read like a pro-Pratt video. I don’t see anybody switching from Pratt to Bass in the general, those folks have already revealed their preference to replace her. The folks who voted for Raman have revealed they won’t vote for Pratt (and the harvested ballots certainly wouldn’t, of course). If Bass had been selected by the Democrat CA PTB then Raman would have stayed in third place since Bass winning head to head against a quasi-Republican is expected. Bass is gonna be ahead on November 6th and then lose just like Pratt did to Raman by November 13th.
One can’t eliminate the possibility of fraud because the whole system is so opaque. But this is entirely consistent with regular old ballot harvesting, and illustrates why that practice is so pernicious.
In a state like CA, where there are huge caches of low propensity D voters, ballot harvesting turns elections into a battle of organizers. Democrats don’t even have to cheat. They just need an organization with the money and resources to harvest ballots from the reservoirs of voters who ordinarily wouldn’t bother to show up, but will vote blue if you shove a ballot in front of them and tell them to sign.
Is it a rigged system? In a state like CA where you can go to skid row and “harvest” thousands of ballots, yes. The Republican will never stand a chance. There simply aren’t comparable reservoirs of low propensity Republican voters whose votes could be harvested even if Republicans had the money and organization.
The CA system is rotten to its core, including the lack of ID, the possibilities for fraud, the counting of ballots received after election day, etc.,
But the big one is ballot harvesting. That fundamentally changes the relationship between the voter and the government by changing the direction of the transaction. Instead of voters granting power the governing class by providing their votes, the governing class buys power by harvesting votes from the (right) people.
It makes a mockery of democracy, but its legal in CA and it perfectly explains the LA mayoral election. Nithya Raman had unions and progressive big money out harvesting ballots right up until the deadline and those ballots hit and were counted a few days later, knocking Pratt down to third. Was there fraud? Maybe. But there didn’t have to be.
Going around crying “fraud” doesn’t help. There’s no proof of fraud, and frankly the scandal isn’t fraud, it’s what’s legal. If Republicans attack this by claiming fraud, without evidence, then they sound like lunatics who can and will be easily dismissed.
Don’t cry fraud. Attack the vote harvesting. Call it what it is, a Democratic Party attempt to destroy democracy. And a perfect illustration of why we need the Electoral College.
physicsguy: I just saw a graph of votes vs time for the 3 candidates. Both Bass and Pratt curves follow a slow rise heading to a plateau and the curves parallel each other. Raman’s does the same until a few days later when a large spike occurs. Just absurd.
Here’s the closest graph I can find to this:
https://scontent-ord5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/716050558_1406317464857037_4535421051838493141_n.
The problem is that one has to think about the odds that Raman’s late spike would only take votes from Pratt. But yes, it does look like fraud.
That vote ain’t done until Pratt won’t run.
I understand that a national Election Day may have no bearing on a primary, and I suppose a state or local election. However, on the statewide ballot in California are federal positions for US Congress. I suppose California could try to have an election with similar ballots yet claim those received after Election Day cannot count in the federal competitions, but that’s another level of gaming the system.
At the state level, I was looking at the possibility of denying Hilton. Like everything, the statistics don’t work in favor of him falling into third. It just doesn’t seem California cares about statistics. Politics is the art of the possible, not science. Nominally, I don’t care to see things get worse, so they can get better. However, I think Pratt losing is an act progressives can get away with happening. I don’t think Hilton falling to third will pass muster. If they try, I think they’ll find ever more backlash against the election results, so I hope they do try. They did this in 2022 to retain the House, so I think they’ll do it again.
I think it’s quite likely this isn’t fraud. I think it’s strategic voting and ballot harvesting that takes advantage of how California stretches out the election.
All they have to do is see what numbers are reported and then SEIU or whoever targets whoever they want more votes from to get the outcome they want. They don’t have to have fake ballots or dead people or noncitizens, though probably there is some small percentage of these. They just have to watch the news and know where to lay hands on their voters.
It may be an unfair way to conduct elections in a one-party state, but it’s been designed so that the one party can get its way without massive fraud. I’m sure there will be a few thousand bogus votes found that will make no difference and that the legally cast ones will still produce the result that the machine wants.
Most of us grew up in times and places where we didn’t see machine politics so this looks like fraud to us, our perceptions are shaped by an Election Day that was one day and almost everyone had to vote that day and vote without being able to see how the results were going, but I don’t think it really is. Yes, they can get the outcome they want, but they can do it by following the rules they themselves set up. They’d be pretty stupid if they couldn’t. They did it this way for a reason.
Fundamentally people in California will have to want something different in order for it to change. If the overwhelming majority wanted change SEIU et al couldn’t prevent it this way, but that’s not the case, hard as it is to believe.
And there’s little point in people from outside the state being indignant on their behalf. We can’t save people who don’t want us to save them. Especially when we mistake what’s going on, which they will know better than we will.
Besides “a republic, if you can keep it”, Franklin also said:
I am fairly confident that (i) the Republican US attorney will bring no claims of election fraud in court and (ii) Neo will never mention that event when it occurs. Prove me wrong!
Niketas Choniates – At the risk of ruining your reputation around here, I have to say that I completely agree.
Adding to that, we really need to change the conversation on the right. This is (probably) not (much) fraud. As you suggest, this is Tamany Hall, just playing out in slow motion because of the asinine voting system in CA. And, frankly, given what can be done legally in CA, Democrats would be stupid to engage in fraud. They don’t need to.
It does the right absolutely no good to go around crying fraud and calling for prosecutions without any evidence. We need to be finding and making better arguments against ballot harvesting.
@Bauxite:It does the right absolutely no good to go around crying fraud
I disagree with that. It’s like saying we should ignore murder when there’s an epidemic of shoplifting that needs cracking down on.
Fraud should always be called out when it happens. It should also be called out that election rules which make fraud impossible to detect are in play. Plenty of states that don’t hold elections like California have fraud and should not. All the fraud, whatever scale, going on in California or anywhere else should be exposed.
It’s just that for results of this particular election, fraud is not the primary driver. Doesn’t mean we should let fraud go. In this case it may be a problem that people not in California can’t solve, but they can prevent it from spreading to their own states.
What we should give up is any idea that exposing fraud in California is going to change the results of any election in California even if we got those ballots thrown out. But calling out fraud might result in a change in how they do their elections, though I don’t have much hope for that. Might help people in other states though.
Democrats would be stupid to engage in fraud. They don’t need to.
Some Democrats are stupid and will do it, needed or not: I know a few who claim they have, even though it wasn’t needed. (Some people like the frisson of doing something illegal in what they see as a good cause and getting away with it.)
Like it or not, people respond to multiple anecdotes better than they respond to statistics. I hope they find 100,000 dead people or non-eligible-to-voters voting or manufactured ballots and that gets exposed even if it would not have changed the outcome.
What we need is some way to revoke California’s statehood.
Obvious place to find fraud, is that tens of thousands of people, most of them homeless, have their mail sent to “general delivery”. Anyone harvesting those ballots almost certainly did so fraudulently because there is no way they tracked down all those individuals.
Won’t change the result, but would be worth looking into and publicizing.
A question I don’t know the answer nor how to find out.
% of possible voters in other states who vote
% of California voters who vote
@skip:A question I don’t know the answer nor how to find out.
% of possible voters in other states who vote
% of California voters who vote
Key word is “turnout”. Here’s one source for those numbers. Found by typing “election day turnout %” into a search engine. If you need more info, the power is in your hands, and you need never wonder again.
This source has 46% of people eligible to vote nationally actually voting in the general election in 2022, and California was 43%.
For 2024, these numbers were 64% and 62% respectively, reflecting the changes in how elections have been done plus the higher turnouts in presidential elections.
They won’t have 2026 numbers for a year or so yet.
@Niketas Choniates – Of course, if there’s evidence of fraud, call it out. If you don’t have evidence of fraud, don’t. It’s not that hard.
@Bauxite:If you don’t have evidence of fraud, don’t. It’s not that hard.
You don’t get it without looking for it, and the first place to look is anomalies. It’s not wrong for people to call attention to the anomalies and say “this looks like fraud”. Without that there’s no investigation. When you find a stabbed body it’s legitimate to say “this looks likes murder” even if you find video later showing he just fell on a knife four times.
They are right, it does “look like” fraud. It may not be, and probably isn’t, the kind of fraud they are thinking of. If they find that the vast majority of Raman’s ballots are legitimate but that 100,000 or even 1000 of her votes were General Delivery filled out by a team of SEIU workers two days later, they will never know without digging in, and they would need to expose that as part of any effort of getting people to support California’s laws being changed.
People on our side are calling for it to be dug into. They should.
Den of locusts
https://open.substack.com/pub/insurrectionbarbie/p/the-board-that-runs-los-angeles?
Probabilities of time and number of ballots suggest fraud along with no chain of custody no voter id good faith attestations of the vote
How did trump win seven states but lose four senate seats
Its not the candidates its the system
Some people are calling for anomolies to be investigated.
Bauxite defaults to the “nothing to see, move along” because, reasons.
They must cheat in order to steal and their theft has been legendary tens of billions just in one states
The possums like cornyn or dewine or cassidy dont care how much is wasted
Just when does the Article IV Section 4 promise that “The United States shall “guarantee” to “every” State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, … ” [scare quotes added as my emphasis] actually come into play. How problematical must the situation become that some form of federal “take over” of a state’s government is justified? There have been selective judicial controls over school boards and racial integration, etc. Probably a few other cases I can’t recall.
Such a federal level take-over certainly becomes more difficult if the Congress is divided, the Presidential office is not fully endorsed by enough people or supported by the sub-agencies, or if the Judiciary is excessively partisan.
But in some ways it becomes a secession in fact, if not in law or explicitly claimed via proclamation.
Related to this topic but off topic: earlier this evening I read this L&L article that I believe neophiles will find meritorious. https://lawliberty.org/book-review/a-strict-construction-handbook/
Some commenters at Coffee and Covid pointed out that the identified problems are not technically fraud, since they are all legal.
However, they are certainly unethical and immoral, and contrary to the purpose of the Constitution and Founding of America.
https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/keep-on-trucking-tuesday-june-9-2026/comment/273224478
GregWA
Before even reading Jeff’s post for today, I have to pass along this from Larry O’Connor at Townhall ( I saw it on X):
Useful Idiot Kristen Welker’s PATHETIC defense of California election fraud DEBUNKED
Larry O’Connor takes Welker to task for the rigged system she’s dismissing.
“The real scandal coming out of California right now is quite possibly every single thing we are seeing transpire before our very eyes is 100% legal.”
O’Connor explains that anyone with a functional brain can see what’s happening in California and know that the election is being stolen.
“You can steal something and not break the law. And that’s what’s happening here. They are stealing it without actually breaking the law.”
As a former Californian resident, O’Connor breaks down the entire process.
“This is the election system in California as we speak. Anybody who is a registered voter gets a ballot mailed to them, and you register to vote because you walk into a DMV, and you automatically get registered no matter what. And as you know, California leads the nation in giving driver’s licenses and registrations to illegal immigrants, people who are in the country illegally, and they’re getting driver’s ed. They’re getting commercial driver’s license in California right now. And when you go through the process, they register you to vote. And there is no check for citizenship. There’s no check for ID, there’s no check for anything. And they’ll register to vote. And you’re on the voter rolls.”
O’Connor even stated he hasn’t lived in Los Angeles County since 2012, and he’s STILL being notified by email that his ballot has been mailed to him.
“I don’t know who’s got it. Whatever address I used to live in has has the Lawrence O’Connor ballot, and I’d love to know if I voted. I probably have without anyone knowing it.”
And then comes the issue of ballot harvesting…
“In California, individuals can go and collect ballots from anyone. They can go and knock on the doors and say, ‘Hey, give me your ballot. I’ll take care of it for you’ legally. And those people who knock on your door and collect your ballot, they call it ‘ballot harvesting,’ they can work for political entities. They can work for political action committees.”
“They can go and they can pick and choose what ballots they want to collect. And they bring them in or they don’t. And every mail in ballot, there is no ID required for every single mail in or drop box ballot. All you’ve got to do is sign the ballot. But of course, it would be discriminatory to allow somebody who is illiterate and can’t write their name to not vote.”
“So when you sign your ballot, you can just make a mark. You can make a smiley face if you want, but it’s witnessed. Don’t worry. There’s a little box for a witness to sign. But of course, there’s no name associated with a witness. It’s just a signature. And oh, by the way, when those ballots are collected, the witness signature isn’t checked.”
“They just check that there is a signature for a witness. So, of course, there’s nothing keeping people from making a little mark on the signature for the voter. And then that same person squiggling the witness box, putting it in an envelope and then having those votes come in. Oh, what else are they doing in California? Well, they allow ballots that come in as late as a week after Election Day to be counted. That doesn’t seem right. Oh. It’s okay. The ballot had to be mailed or put into a Dropbox or delivered by Election Day. But of course, if it’s not postmarked, they’ll overlook that. If there’s no postmark at all on the envelope, they’ll just look at whatever date you put on it and they’ll trust you, and then they’ll count the ballots.”
“Every single thing I just described for you is accurate and legal. They’re not breaking the law. They’re following the laws that they have written so that they can get away with this garbage and everyone knows it.”
********
Yuri Bezmenov
California has legalized voter fraud. No ID, automatic registration, universal mail-in ballots, mass harvesting operations, and counting for weeks make it impossible to trust or audit the system. If this happened in any other country we would consider their elections invalid. Thanks to investigative journalists like James O’Keefe, a woman was federally charged for paying homeless people on skid row to vote. Can TFP do this work instead of parroting MSM talking points that any skepticism is baseless misinformation?
Communists burned down Pratt’s home. Now they have stolen an election from him because they couldn’t let him expose their incompetence and fraud for 5 more months. Raman’s surge is statistically impossible. She was further behind Pratt than he was behind Bass after election night, during which she cried in her speech – all but conceding defeat. Los Angeles will now choose between a foreign-born communist and the incumbent communist. Anyone running cover for this blatant corruption is as much a joke as California.
Los Angeles, the city of my birth and early youth.
Now that AI is decimating the last of the film and TV business, I find myself wondering just what kind of wealth generating industry is left there?
In my lifetime I’ve seen LA drive out oil, small manufacturing (surfboard blanks for Heaven’s sake!), most of aerospace, and now – according to friends in the industry – film and tv are dying. What are people going to do to earn a living besides rip off the taxpayer?
El Pueblo de Nuestra Senora la Reina de los Angeles.
It used to be dynamic.
Now it might as well be Cleveland.
Why don’t we just call the LA election amazingly “fortified” and leave it at that?
(Seemed to work pretty well in 2020…etc.)
More importantly, where’s Molly Ball when you really don’t need ‘er …?
File under: Fraudified