Search Results

Today, Tuesday, August 8th, 2023 at 6PM, Ned Jones of the Election Integrity Network will be having his weekly Citizen Research Project national Zoom call. He will be reviewing the information on the FOIA requests for the leftist organizations that we need to expose at our local BOEs. Please try to make the call. I will put together a blurb for each one in the next few days as requested on our Tuesday call. Thanks. This is the link. You have to register to get into the call. Tuesday, August 8th, 2023 weekly call. * 6 p.m. | EIN: Citizen's Research Project | https://virginiainstitute-org.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZwuf--rrD8sHdzRTe66AgWBqCiijOrfc6S0#/registration We'll be discussing the Six Left-wing initiatives that we're researching. 1. The US Alliance for Election Excellence (USAEE) 2. The Committee For Safe and Secure Elections (CSSE) 3. The Center for Internet Security (CIS) 4. The ALL IN Campus Democracy Challenge (and partners) 5. The High School Registration/Lower The Voting Age Groups 6. The Center for Voter Information/The Voter Participation Center These are links to info about the above n nefarious organizations. Center for Voter Information/Voter Participation Center https://www.restorationofamerica.com/uncategorized/inside-democrats-best-kept-secret-mass-nonprofit-voter-registration-pt-1/ https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2023/03/09/activists_are_screwing_up_wisconsins_elections_its_time_to_stop_them_148960.html https://www.wizmnews.com/2023/03/07/wisconsin-voters-warned-about-misleading-mailers-with-false-absentee-ballot-info/ https://www.npr.org/2008/05/01/90114863/group-with-clinton-ties-behind-dubious-robocalls Kansas Lawsuit with Center for Voter Information https://watchdoglab.substack.com/p/does-freedom-of-speech-allow-interference?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=998138&post_id=131216404&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1680588/how-simpson-thacher-beat-kansas-vote-by-mail-restrictions Call To Action: We need to submit FOIA/Public Records Requests to every local Election Office and every state Election Department to get their communications with the Center for Voter Information/Voter Participation Center. The Center for Internet Security (CIS) See Attached Manual https://www.cisecurity.org/ https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/dhs-funded-nonprofit-censoring-election-info-also-provides-cybersecurity Documents from Virginia. https://u.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=kZwBuPVZ042YCFbOJ2BR8nIcIf8zI57Gq1x7 Press release from ES&S and Albert Sensors https://www.essvote.com/blog/our-technology/partnerships-to-further-election-security/ Link to list of CIS Locations. https://web.archive.org/web/20220122215430/https://www.cisecurity.org/ei-isac/partners-ei-isac/ Here's a link to an interesting report about possible censorship using the CIS, EI-ISAC network. https://report.foundationforfreedomonline.com/11-9-22.htm These subpoenas, one for CISA, were issued this week. https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/chairman-jordan-subpoenas-cdc-cisa-and-gec-documents-and-communications The Center for Internet Security to develop a testing system for non-voting equipment. https://www.heraldstandard.com/elections_ap/national-push-to-bolster-security-of-key-election-technology/article_fbaf666d-7c2b-5974-bac0-1296d64f0cf5.html CISA response to questions from Representative Cloud. See attached document Lawsuit filed on behalf of Jim Hoft and Jill Hines seeking information about the Government Censorship Program with Social Media in elections. https://aflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Doc-1-Complaint.pdf America First Legal (AFL) DHS FOIA Documents https://aflegal.org/case/2022-npfo-00105/ DHS Cyber Agency, CISA, Labels Our Thoughts 'Critical Infrastructure' to Justify Censoring Us https://thefederalist.com/2023/06/02/dhs-cybersecurity-agency-labels-your-private-thoughts-critical-infrastructure-to-justify-censoring-you/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=dhs-cybersecurity-agency-labels-your-private-thoughts-critical-infrastructure-to-justify-censoring-you&utm_term=2023-06-03 Center for Internet Security connection to the Democracy Fund https://dailycaller.com/2023/06/09/left-wing-billionaires-nonprofit-funded-dhs-linked-portal-used-to-censor-social-media-platforms/ Center for Internet Security Report on 2020 Election MDM - https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23834944/cis-2020-report.pdf Center for Internet Security https://www.judicialwatch.org/hunter-biden-sham-plea-deal/ Center for Internet Security - Letter from Congress https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/free-speech/catherine-salgado/2023/06/23/gop-reps-issue-blistering-letter-2020-election Congressional Staff Report on CISA https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-judiciary.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/cisa-staff-report6-26-23.pdf Judgement in Government Censorship case. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23867004-08917380420?responsive=1&title=1 Judge denies government appeal. Doughty-denies-DOJ-censorship-motion.pdf (justthenews.com) Censorship Injunction https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/14/tech/election-disinformation-chilling-effect-injunction/index.html Call To Action: We need to submit FOIA/Public Records Requests to every local Election Office and every state Election Department to get their communications with the Center for Internet Security, particularly, their Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with CIS."Alliance " partners. The Committee For Safe and Secure Elections - See the report that I sent out on 2/22/23. Here are links to CSSE (It doesn't always work), Fusion Centers and the longer version of the "Staged" R Street video that was played at the conference. https://safeelections.org/members https://www.dhs.gov/fusion-centers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMYF8V5t-L4 Link to the Elections Assistance Commission Webinar - "Committee for Safe and Secure Elections" on March 2, 2023. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVpnCzMB878 https://www.eac.gov/Election-Official-Security-discussion-with-CSSE Two articles about The Committee for Safe and Secure Elections and the Left's false narrative about threats to Election Workers. https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/behind-curtain-policies-could-intimidate-citizens-election-worker-threat https://pjmedia.com/uncategorized/lincolnbrown/2023/04/18/monitoring-an-election-could-get-you-into-trouble-n1688127 New articles about the Left-wing false narrative about threats to Election Workers. https://thefederalist.com/2023/04/24/corrupt-media-fight-election-accountability-with-democrat-manufactured-lies/ https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/securing-2024-election CEIR (David Becker) Summit https://www.summit.electioninnovation.org/live-stream Klobuchar/Durbin Threats to Election Officials Legislation https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/4/klobuchar-durbin-colleagues-reintroduce-comprehensive-legislation-to-address-threats-targeting-election-workers Hayden's article on the Committee for Safe and Secure Elections https://thefederalist.com/2023/05/09/democrats-far-reaching-reforms-are-the-real-threat-to-election-security-not-violent-conservatives/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=democrats-far-reaching-reforms-are-the-real-threat-to-election-security-not-violent-conservatives&utm_term=2023-05-09 "The Trust Project" / New Venture Fund https://gazette.com/news/wex/democratic-tied-dark-money-kingmaker-behind-nonpartisan-group-fighting-misinformation/article_5c9149fb-9f0d-5721-ae3d-7d1697e04f63.html Becker/Gates in Arizona https://www.azmirror.com/2023/06/15/preparing-for-the-fight-against-2024-election-misinformation/ Call to Action: Meet with your local election official, or file a FOIA/Open Records Request, if necessary, to learn as much as you can about any communications with CSSE, Fusion Centers, and DHS. Every state has an association of election officials, and they all have an annual convention. Another call to action is to find out if CSSE and EAC made, or are making, a presentation at the annual convention in your state. The US Alliance for Election Excellence - "Push Back" against The "Alliance" in Brunswick County, NC https://portcitydaily.com/local-news/2023/03/25/brunswick-commissioners-spurn-private-money-running-boe-cite-zuckerburg-and-tech-billionaires-influence/

From Jim Womack,NCEIT Coordinator, July 27, 2023 I received an email this weekend that was forwarded from one of the more prominent election directors in NC- Sara LaVere from Brunswick County. I am curious about whether she has actual knowledge of a planned PCS to H772. If so, I am surprised she was provided this PCS to circulate when the general public and other advocacy groups are completely unaware of its existence or that any such proposal was being made. I pray our conscientious House Elections and Rules Committee members will reject any moves to alter what was a superb piece of legislation (House Bill 772) by watering it down and making it ineffective in fulfilling the spirit and intent of the existing general statutes. Frankly, none of the proposed changes in the attached PCS would improve H772 or amplify the spirit and intent of the existing language in NCGS 163-45. Here is the text of Mrs. LaVere's email (in Black) sent to all election directors, statewide. My comments on behalf of thousands of trained poll observers across the state are annotated in red: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Good morning, all. This is a proposed committee substitute for H772 that is likely to be introduced when this bill is heard again in committee (not currently scheduled). (See below.) I believe we can all recognize that observers need clearer guidance than the present law provides - and that clarity would also help voters and election officials. (I could not agree more with this one statement. That is precisely why H772 was so important- 2700 precincts and 2700 different interpretations of standards for poll watching.) This alternative (bill) still gives observers rights to look closely at voting operations - BUT it set clear limits. Here are some key ways this alternative differs from the current iteration of H772: * Political parties can still recruit observers countywide and statewide, but instead of allowing up to 3 observers per party per site at any one time, as in H-772, the alternative sets the limit at 2 observers per party per site at any one time. (The provision for up to 3 partisan observers extends from interpretation of language in the current statute. While 3 observers from one party rarely occurs, there are occasions when it may be necessary for short periods, namely when an election violation is occurring and witnesses are needed. Also, at shift change incoming and outgoing poll observers may require a brief overlap for orientation purposes.) * The observer can move around, but not into the voting booth area as allowed in H-772. (H772 does not allow the poll observer to venture into the actual voting booth, or any closer than five feet from any voter. However, the language in this PCS could be used to prohibit the poll observer from observing activity in the voting booth area from an entrance way or remote area. Poll Observers must be able to watch for violations in the voting booth area at all sites. We have had numerous reports of violations in the voting booth area at polling sites and those violations need to be observed and reported.) * Subject to the physical limitation of the voting enclosure, the observer can observe the check-in process from 8 feet away, rather than 5 feet away as in H-772. (Clearly, this was written to prohibit poll observers from effective monitoring of the check in process. Eight feet separation is NEVER adequate. Current statutes allow the observer to hear the name and address of the voter, and eight feet is far too distant to perform that duty in the vast majority of polling places. The proposed five foot rule in H772 was derived from thousands of poll observer reports indicating the maximum distance at which observers could actually watch and listen for election violations without intimidating voters or viewing their ballot markings.) * The observer can observe tabulating machines, opening & closing poll tapes, emergency repairs, etc., but not with a camera as in H-772. (The present statute does not prohibit the use of cameras nor should cameras be prohibited. H772 has superb language addressing the proper and improper use of cameras- no voter or ballot may be photographed, but cameras should be allowed to capture violations of election site set-up, improper electioneering, and other violations at polling sites. Barring cameras from use prevents the gathering of evidence of elction malfeasance and damages voter confidence in election outcomes.) * The observer can report an election worker's alleged violation to the county board of elections for appropriate action, but it's not a criminal offense as in H-772. (This proposed change contradicts federal law. 18 US Code 245 clearly prohibits interference with poll watchers. Thus, this citation ought to be made known in NC statutes as well, as it is in H772. It is imperative that election officials are aware of the criminal nature of their interference with statutorily allowed poll observation activities.) * The observer can use an electronic device to take notes, but not for filming or audio recordings inside the poll, unlike H-772. (Again, poll observers must be free to record audio instructions or admonitions they are being given by election officials. Denial of that right allows an election official to abuse his authority over the polling site with impunity. This abuse is reported at dozens of sites in each election. State law allows the recording of conversations so long as one of the two parties is congizant the recording is being made.) * The election official can remove an observer for misconduct but needs to give them a warning first, as in H-772, unless the misconduct endangers voters' safety (like brandishing a gun) or security of the voting process (like tampering with machines) - these safety/security exceptions are not in H-772. (This is a misconstrued provision. The local Sheriff, Police Chief or other law enforcement official has the authority to respond to a report of dangerous or disruptive behavior at the polls. The Chief Judge has the authority to contact law enforcement and arrange for the removal. Election officials have no authority or right to order the removal of anyone without a warning until or unless law enforcement arrives. H772 merely establishes the need for warnings before ordering a poll observer from the site. The PCS language is superfluous.) * The law becomes effective Jan. 1, 2024, instead of immediately when it passes as in H-772. (The provisions of this law are easily taught and enforced within days of its passage. No reason to delay its implementation until the 2024 election cycle, as the provisions of H772 are already inferred in NCGS 163-45 already, just not as explicitly as in H772.) IN ADDITION, the State Board will turn these restrictions and rights into an online training video and a form that observers sign to indicate they understand; they present the signed form to the election official when they begin service. (Note- the North Carolina Election Integrity Team (NCEIT) teaches poll observers their duties in accordance with the entirety of NCGS 163. In fact, our organization trains and educates many election officials around the state. Feedback from election officials indicates NCEIT training is far more detailed and generally superior to what local boards of elections and the NCSBE provide to election workers around the state. There is no need for the NCSBE to specify that poll observers must sign a form attesting to their understanding of the NCSBE 's convenient interpretation of the law. There is no statutory requirement necessitating such a form and the NCSBE ought not burden itself with managing those forms and activity. They have enough to do already in meeting their statutory obligations.) Sara LaVere | Elections Director Brunswick County Board of Elections ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks in advance for your support for H772 in its present form. House Judiciary I provided a favorable report of the bill out of committee, without change, because it is a solid piece of legislation. The attached PCS would not improve it in any way. NCEIT is eager to see the current form of this bill get a vote on the House floor and cross over to the Senate, or for the provisions of H772 to be rolled into the House version of S747 now in the House Elections Committee. We sincerely need passage of these poll observer provisions. Warm Regards/ Jim Womack President, North Carolina Election Integrity Team www.nceit.org Tel. (919) 770-4783

Subject: Fwd: County elections board member send letter to NC legislators, more comments invited We're giving the Left heartburn. From Leftist Activist Bob Hall on meltdown over our Poll Observer bill, H772. He sent this to every BOE elections office in NC. 15 stupid Republicans signed on to this trash. There were 31 signers. Links for the letter and the article from WRAL are below. If these signers are from your county, you need to raise cain with your local GOP or Dem office. This is a breech o their oath to remain non-partisan while serving on the BOE. Their job is to make sure the election laws are enforced. Not to lobby for or against them. (Please note: As individuals, they have a 1st amendment right to their opinion. As BOE members, they have overstepped their bounds. Expose them!) Also signing: The 6 other incumbent EBA-NC executive board members and 25 of the longest serving members of county boards of elections. Rs in red. Ds in black. Alan Carpenter (D-Iredell County), first appointed 1993 Alice Malesky (R-Currituck County), first appointed 2013 Allen Langley (R-Cleveland County), Executive Board Member, Barry Cheney (D-Catawba County), first appointed 2009 d Member, Barry Cheney (D-Catawba County), first appointed 2009 Carlton Hawkins (D-Richmond County), first appointed 2008 Chip Futrell (D-Wilson County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC Courtney Patterson (D-Lenoir County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC David Hood (R-Catawba County), first appointed 1998 Florence Armstrong (D-Edgecombe County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC Hal Culberson (R-Scotland County), first appointed 2008 Inetta Knight (D-Tyrrell County), first appointed 1993 Jeffrey Smith (R-Yadkin County), first appointed 2013 Jonas Buff (D-McDowell County), first appointed 2013 Juanita Colvard (D-Graham County), first appointed 2007 Kelly Shore (D-Nash County), first appointed 2011 Laurie Heise (D-Chatham County), first appointed 2007 Lucinda Minges (R-Lenoir County), first appointed 2013 Luther Potts (R-Davie County), first appointed 2003 Lynn Day (R-Wilkes County), first appointed 2013 Martha Schronce (R-Alexander), first appointed 2013 Michele Aydlett (D-Pasquotank), first appointed 1993 Nancy Sharpe (R-Alexander County), first appointed 2005 Sheena Amos (R-Gaston County), first appointed 2013 Stuart Smith (R-Brunswick County), first appointed 2003 Tim Joines (R-Wilkes County), first appointed 2013 Tommy Pharo (R-Lenoir County), Executive Board Member, EBA-NC Vivian Branch (D-Northampton County), first appointed 2012 William Newsome (D-Martin County), first appointed 1988 Yvonne Saul (R-Caswell County), first appointed 2001 Zeda Trice (D-Craven County), first appointed 2010 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Bob Hall Date: Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 8:55 PM Subject: County elections board member send letter to NC legislators, more comments invited To: CBOE members and directors Dear County Elections Board Member, I’m taking the liberty of sharing a couple items with those of you who I can reach via email before your board meeting on July 18. First, you may have heard that 32 long-serving Republican and Democratic county elections board members sent a letter to legislative leaders on Wednesday expressing their concerns about pending legislation in Raleigh. A WRAL-TV news story about the letter is here: https://www.wral.com/story/local-election-officials-say-proposed-nc-election-changes-would-be-disruptive/20954589/ And the letter is here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23875784-eba-nc-2023bills-julyletter#document/p1 Second, the Graham County Board of Elections used that letter as a basis to send their own letter to their local legislative delegation. That letter is attached. At the end of the WRAL news story, legislative leaders say they “welcome feedback from elections officials across the state.” Your county board may want to consider adopting a letter at the meeting on July 18 or discuss other ways to express your concerns about pending legislation. Some of you have already reached out to your legislators and it’s having an impact. It’s vitally important for them to hear the perspective and concerns of elections officials like you. Thank you, Bob Hall

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-lefts-elections-fortification-in-2024/ "The right conservative response is clear: Halt the advance of automatic voter registration laws and roll back same-day registration in Virginia, North Carolina, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, New Hampshire, and Iowa. The left demands you expand their pool of voters for zero conservative gain. Republicans, tell them to pound sand—do not be bullied by whiny self-servers. ..." The left wants all future elections to look just like they did in 2020, and we have the blueprints to prove it. Covid-19 was the excuse Democrats used to radically transform our nation’s election systems in ways that make them less secure, less fair, and more vulnerable to mischief. Virtually all of the “temporary” changes introduced—ever-earlier voting, mass mail-in balloting, and lax penalties for fraudsters—have become codified everywhere Democrats rule unopposed. It was never about protecting Americans from the coronavirus; it was always about seizing power. If conservatives are to win in 2024, they must be all-in. In many states that will mean using the left’s tools against them, until principled patriots once again have the power to restore trust and confidence in our elections. That starts by understanding the left’s playbook for meddling with 2024. The 2020 election might fairly be called the country’s first all-mail election, given how Democrats changed our laws and procedures to encourage voting by mail simply to defeat Donald Trump. Credit the National Vote at Home Institute for that grift—whose ex-leader, Amber McReynolds, now leads the campaign to seize control of the U.S. Postal Service in order to continue the campaign for all-mail elections. Every “progressive” group supports that objective, but the left-wing NewDEAL Forum explains why in its “Democracy Playbook” for warping 2024, which the Washington Post endorsed in February. It is worth first noting the document’s authors: Michigan's Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who wants Michigan to adopt all-mail elections after trying the scheme in 2020, and Arizona's Democratic Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, who calls Republicans “fascists” and “election deniers”; Sandra Jauregui, a Las Vegas assemblywoman who introduced legislation in March to curb right-wing “domestic terrorism”; and Ken Lawrence, election board chairman for Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, which voted narrowly to certify the 2020 election results despite receiving numerous ballots after Election Day. NewDEAL wants every state to expand early voting and adopt no-excuse absentee voting—note that eleven of the fifteen states that require a reason to vote absentee are Republican-run—as well as automatically mail every voter a ballot without their solicitation. That is effectively adopting all-mail elections, something eight states currently do (only one of which, Utah, is Republican-run). Democrats knew they needed private drop boxes purchased with “Zuck bucks” to hoover up all of those mail-in ballots in 2020, so NewDEAL recommends making them a permanent feature of all future elections. (The true goal is to turn USPS into a mail-in ballot collection machine, with drop boxes as a stopgap measure.) NewDEAL also wants to weaken signature-matching requirements on absentee ballots because they “discriminate against voters who already face other obstacles to voting.” Any errors, the group says, can then be corrected with liberal ballot-curing laws. But that’s not all—states, they say, should also extend the deadline for postmarking absentee ballots to Election Day, guaranteeing that ballot-counting will drag on for days or weeks after the first Tuesday in November. Eighteen states plus D.C. currently accept and tabulate ballots received after Election Day, in some cases up to 14 days later. They aren’t all blue states, either—North Dakota is engaged in a lawsuit with the right-leaning Public Interest Legal Foundation for its late-acceptance law. Yet this policy is “the most voter-friendly,” the group assures us, with my emphasis allowing voters to fill out and mail their ballot on Election Day. While this method could result in a longer waiting period to determine the winner of an election, it allows the most voters to participate. The parties have known for decades that voting by mail is the least-secure way of conducting elections. That was a central finding of the 2005 bipartisan Carter-Baker report. Both Team Obama and Clinton protested a recount in Florida’s 2008 presidential primary because officials wanted to hold it via mail, with Obama campaign manager David Plouffe voicing his “real deep concerns” about the “reliability and security of a mail-in vote.” One of the ugliest features of the 2020 and 2022 elections was the way counting dragged on long past Election Day, creating ample opportunities for mischief and secrecy. No one seriously thinks codifying these malpractices will encourage trust in election security—that was never the point. Democrats have put all their resources into building a gigantic ballot-harvesting machine that can register and turn out tens of millions of voters each cycle. But this juggernaut relies on unreliable voters who fail to register or show up on Election Day. So operatives have staked everything on mail-in ballots, believing they can ensure those ballots are marked and counted, and each of these policies makes their job easier. For conservatives, the goal must be to block Democrats from expanding the all-mail election project in red and purple states while also teaching Republican voters to vote early and by mail. The 2020 election proved the left’s multi-million-dollar voter registration machine’s worth, by unseating a sitting president and seizing narrow control of Congress. Restoration News has written extensively on the premium Democratic operatives place on voter registration, something conservatives gave up on doing 15 years ago. Leftists have only doubled-down since then. The Brennan Center, the think tank largely responsible for devising this strategy, wants to cement the left’s advantage with automatically registering every citizen to vote. This is a key provision of the Democrats’ extreme “For the People Act” (H.R.1) that the think tank takes credit for first proposing. In practice, that means that individuals are “automatically signed up to vote,” when they “give information to [government] agencies.” Twenty-three states and D.C. currently do this, only three of which are reliably Republican. The Brennan Center estimates this policy would add 50 million people to the voter rolls nationwide—roughly one-third the number of ballots cast in 2020. Automatic voter registration’s “sister” policy is same-day registration (also in H.R.1), which allows individuals to register to vote and cast a ballot on the same day—often Election Day—leaving little time for officials to verify their eligibility. If that sounds trifling, consider that New York has both same-day registration and no ID requirement to vote. What is to stop a non-citizen from registering and voting under a fake name and address? NewDEAL Forum supports both of these policies while pretending they are fair and absolutely, positively won’t favor Democrats. NewDEAL also proposes pre-registering 16-year-olds to vote when they turn 18. But that is a smokescreen; the real objective is to lower the voting age to 16, something supported by the leftist group FairVote and enshrined in legislation introduced in January by Democratic Rep. Grace Meng of New York—with endorsements from Rock the Vote, Generation Citizen, and other left-wing activist groups. As if that was not enough, the Brennan Center urges states to automatically restore voting rights to felons, or even allow inmates to vote from prison. But they don’t want prisoners voting in their home states, but rather the states they are incarcerated in—giving them inroads into many southern and southeastern states such as North Carolina and Texas. The right conservative response is clear: Halt the advance of automatic voter registration laws and roll back same-day registration in Virginia, North Carolina, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, New Hampshire, and Iowa. The left demands you expand their pool of voters for zero conservative gain. Republicans, tell them to pound sand—do not be bullied by whiny self-servers. “The number one threat to democracy is unending misinformation,” Minnesota Secretary of State Steven Simon blasted in 2022. NewDEAL Forum agrees. Until recently, the terms “misinformation” and “disinformation” were confined to warcraft and espionage—then the left turned them into weapons to use against conservatives. Living in a free society means enduring opinions you dislike, whether spread by accident or by liars. The First Amendment to the Constitution does not recognize any authority (beyond God) to define “facts” and acceptable political speech. But that is exactly what the efforts to police mis- and disinformation are: A way to dictate politically expedient “facts” by a power-hungry party, Pravda-style. Conservatives rightly booed Biden’s Disinformation Board, but they haven’t paid enough attention to Democrats’ efforts to criminalize election integrity advocates’ speech in the states. NewDEAL wants election officials to “aggressively counter misinformation” in part by “form[ing] relationships with journalists”—doubtless those at the New York Times and not, say, Tucker Carlson—and supplying them with the “facts.” NewDEAL also wants heftier laws to prosecute voter “intimidation,” which the left may define as any effort by conservative groups to monitor election administration and polling places. Meanwhile, the Brennan Center goes much further. To counter “misinformation,” the center writes, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) should spread “accurate information” through “public-private partnerships.” The center wants states to “prohibit the spread of materially false information concerning the time, place, or manner of voting with the intent to prevent voters from exercising their right to vote.” But who is to prove intent? Further, the think tank demands, states must “establish [an] authority to prohibit individuals who violate election laws from administering elections and to decommission jeopardized equipment.” In practice, that almost certainly means barring anyone who raised objections to certifying the 2020 election from ever working in elections again. The center also proposes laws allowing “affected voters and other aggrieved parties to sue individuals...[who] deliberately spread election falsehoods,” an act that would unleash the ACLU and other professional litigation groups upon anyone who questioned the 2020 election results. And for those electors who threatened not to certify the Electoral College results in December 2020, the Brennan Center wants to open them up to lawsuits if they fail to certify by a certain deadline. Such a law would reduce the Electoral College to an absurd formality, rather than what the Founders meant it to be: One more check to prevent tyranny. But Americans don’t want the totalitarianism the left offers. Even run of the mill Democratic voters don’t consider “expanding voting rights” anything like a top priority, per a recent poll by the leftist group Data for Progress. Subscribe Today Get weekly emails in your inbox Email Address: Today’s Democratic Party is addicted to power and will not surrender it, no matter which presidential nominee Republicans put forth in 2024. Conservatives have a big opportunity to be the party of free speech and liberty, but only if they are serious about battling “misinformation” laws and defending the Electoral College. House Republicans’ newly introduced ACE Act suggests they might be. Almost every provision in the bill is designed to counter or preempt these measures, from mandating photo ID for first-time mail voters, to banning private funding for elections, to prohibiting non-citizens from voting in state and local elections. The ACE Act is an excellent start, but it needs to go further. Conservatives are learning that saving the country means learning to out-fox the enemy in mail-in ballots and ballot harvesting. That may look ugly to many, but they should remember this: The true glory we aim for is not simply to win an election, but to restore our republic. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Hayden Ludwig Hayden Ludwig is the director of policy research for Restoration of America. Articles by Haydentrending_flat COMMENTS

https://www.wtpevents.org/so/26Oc9EA1d?languageTag=en&cid=e74c2a67-0425-4432-9512-0b47c8ed055e The LEGISLATORS have REJECTED most List Maintenance suggestions for this session. Please contact them ASAP! Grey.Mills@ncleg.gov; George.Cleveland@ncleg.gov; Dennis.Riddell@ncleg.gov; Warren.Daniel@ncleg.gov; Ralph.Hise@ncleg.gov; Paul.Newton@ncleg.gov; Tim.Moore@ncleg.gov; Phil.Berger@ncleg.gov URGE the legislators to REQUIRE the State Board of Elections to: IMPROVE their method to locate then correct or remove voters who don't have a valid residential address in the voter registration system. URGE the legislators to CHANGE the Voter Challenge Law: ADD a Challenge Reason to 163-85(c) "Grounds for Challenge": (10) The voter's stated residential address is not a residential address. WHY make these suggestions? There are voters who have ILLEGAL RESIDENTIAL ADDRESSES in NC's voter registration system. The Boards of Elections need to determine where these voters, if indeed they're real people, actually reside. VOTER PHOTO ID... OPTIONAL?? Since there's an ID Exception Form for anyone who wants to use it, (which includes A NEW EXCUSE - "HECK, I DIDN'T KNOW I NEEDED TO SHOW A PHOTO ID"), no voters are required to show a Photo ID in North Carolina. Therefore, these invalid registrations can easily be used - or used again - to cast invalid ballots. EMAIL OR CALL: Issue: NCSBE Election System's Unsolved Problem with Mailbox Dwellers

ELECTIONS & PUBLIC INTEGRITY, LIBERTY WRAL Discovers Strange New Beasts Called “Election Observers” Observers Are Already an Established Part of the Election Process https://www.johnlocke.org/wral-discovers-strange-new-beasts-called-election-observers/?fbclid=IwAR0B655_bVcZo85dlLmBvMJLD8U7EyfYkXluE-5_LzKUPIZGPyjt8hRIo_c There have been some complaints about several election reform bills being considered in the General Assembly, including a bill on election observers. A Bill Clarifying What Election Observers Can and Cannot Do I recently noted how a bill in the General Assembly, House Bill 772, would help clarify what election observers can and cannot do in voting locations: Despite the importance of election observers, the law on their appointment and role in elections is overly broad and not always clear. Regulations from the North Carolina State Board of Elections (SBE) add more restrictions on their conduct but do nothing to clarify their rights or role in the election process. A bill moving through the General Assembly would provide that clarity… The bill would refine the space between allowing an observer to “make such observation … as the observer may desire” and ensuring the observer “shall in no manner impede the voting process” in current law. For example, the bill would spell out that observers can “move freely around the voting enclosure” but must remain “5 feet or greater” from registration or ballot tables, tabulation machines during voting, and vehicle compartments during curbside voting. It also would clarify that observers are “authorized to hear conversations between poll workers and voters” but reaffirm that they may not speak with voters… Even if the bill were to pass, there would still be a need for some local application and interpretation. For example, observers would have free reign in some of the larger, more cavernous voting locations, such as gyms and church fellowship halls. In contrast, they would have to work with officials on acceptable procedures for moving about some of the smaller precinct polling places. Does WRAL Know What Election Observers Are? But not everyone is convinced that election observer reform is a good thing or that election observers already exist. A recent opinion piece from WRAL includes this gem: [General Assembly leaders] believe voting sites should be chaotic madhouses where so-called “observers” wander freely to intimidate elections officials and look over their shoulders as voters fill their ballots. “So-called ‘observers?'” Why would the folks at WRAL use “so-called” for observers and put the word “observers” in scare quotes? That was not a one-off thing. They put “observers” in scare quotes again later in the piece. It is as if they believe HB 772 would create some strange new beast by that name. This may come as news to the folks at WRAL, but observers are not “so-called.” They are already enshrined by that name in law (G.S. § 163-45): The chair of each political party in the county shall have the right to designate two observers to attend each voting place at each primary and election… [emphasis added]. Those observers are already authorized to work in voting locations, and election officials are already required to “permit the observer to make such observation and take such notes as the observer may desire” as long as the observer does not “impede the voting process” or interfere with voters. The problem, as I previously noted, is that the details of what observers can and cannot do are only broadly defined in law. The State Board of Elections has been overly restrictive in its interpretation of the law and has even illegally suppressed observers, which is why HB 772 is a good idea. The rest of the WRAL piece is no better informed. About That Letter from Election Officials The supposed impetus for the WRAL piece was a letter from 32 of the state’s 500 county election board members, including the executive committee of the state election board association, to the General Assembly. The requests in the letter can mostly be boiled down to two things: We want power (in this case, to restrict election observers and pick county election staff). We want more money. Of course, election officials, like any other officials or individuals, will usually oppose bills granting them less power to make their own rules without outside interference. That is no different than bankers opposing banking regulations or city counselors opposing limits on the ability of municipalities to commit hostile annexations. It is just them doing their jobs. They will also, naturally, seek more money. That is just them doing their jobs. Legislators should consider input from election officials when passing election reforms, just as they should consider input from bankers when passing banking laws or from sheriffs when passing laws that affect their work. But those inputs must be balanced with the need for reform. HB 772 addresses just such a need for election observer reform. Sign up for our weekly newsletter to stay up to date on the latest h

Update needed on comment period to fix. https://s3.amazonaws.com/dl.ncsbe.gov/State_Board_Meeting_Docs/2023-06-27/Photo%20ID%20Exception%20Forms/Draft%20Photo%20ID%20Exception%20Form%20In-Person%2020230623.pdf

This is a comprehensive PRR seeking all public records for CTCL – The Center for Tech and Civil Life. Copy/Paste below into your email. Fill in the blanks with your county information. Copy/Paste into a 'clean' email. Send to your BOE local Director and cc all of the board members. We need an electronic trail. Keep track of it, as your other public records requests, and make sure you get a response. Save the response. We need these for evidence. Send to me, jane.bilello@gmail.com and to Ned Jones, ned@electionintegrity.network. Thanks. Jane ================================================================================== FROM: __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ TO: ______County Board of Elections ATTN: ___________, Director __________________________ __________________________ Date:________________ Pursuant to the North Carolina Freedom of Information Act, releasable under the provisions of NCGS 132-1, Public Records, I am requesting the following information. SUBJECT: Request for _________ County Correspondence with the Center for Tech and Civil Life (1 July 2022 through 31 the Present 2023) 1. This is a public records request seeking a digital copy of all correspondence, received by or transmitted from the ____ County Board of Elections, pertaining to the US Alliance for Election Excellence at the county or state level. This correspondence shall include all records of relevant communications between and among the US Alliance for Election Excellence and its subsidiaries, the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE), and any 501(c)3 organizations advertising or purporting to assist the _____ State or County Board of Elections with protection of election records, systems, or processes. 2. Subject materials of interest pertain to grants, scholarships, training assistance to the _____Board of Elections and the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE). 3. The period of interest for these records is from 1 July 2022 through the Present, 2023. 4. "Public records" shall mean all documents, papers, letters, maps, books, photographs, films, sound recordings, magnetic or other tapes, electronic data-processing records, artifacts, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received pursuant to law or ordinance in connection with the transaction of public business by any agency of North Carolina government or its subdivisions. 5. For any records found that are deemed non-releasable because of confidentiality or security restrictions, the County BOE’s response shall indicate the existence of those other records that are not releasable and identify all local officials who are authorized to review that documentation. 6. I am requesting this documentation be provided to me at no charge in an electronic format that is commonly machine readable (such as pdf, jpg, etc.) and in a common media form such as a thumb drive or DVD. Thank you. __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ Email: _____________________ Tel. _______________________ North Carolina Election Integrity Team NCEIT.org

July 20, 2023 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/07/its-official-texas-resigns-democrat-operative-founded-eric/ It’s Official: Texas Resigns from Democrat Operative-founded ERIC Voter Registration System- 9 States Out – Only 23 Remain Today, Texas Director of Elections sent a letter on behalf of the Texas Secretary of State notifying the Electronic Registration Information Center, Inc. know that they were resigning from the ERIC system. In March, The Gateway Pundit reported that Missouri, Florida, and West Virginia also were withdrawing from ERIC joining Ohio, Louisiana, Alabama, Virginia, and Iowa. Read more here.https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/07/its-official-texas-resigns-democrat-operative-founded-eric/

North Carolina Election Integrity Team (NCEIT) --Position Statement on Use of Election Machines & Technology— Purpose: The purpose of this position statement is to establish the official (NCEIT) organizational position with respect to the conduct of elections using election tabulation machines, ballot marking devices (BMD), direct record electronic (DRE) equipment, and paper ballots. This position statement does not address all aspects of election technology, but will provide the organization’s published preferences and policy pursuits for the use of machines and technology at all sites in the state. Background: The 100 counties in North Carolina presently use election machines from two state-approved vendors – ES&S and Hart Intercivic. It is state policy that all newly acquired machines should be compliant with the Election Assistance Commission’s (EAC) Voluntary Voting Systems Guidelines (VVSG) and that all machines are to be tested for logic and accuracy prior to each use in an election. All tabulation machines are required to process paper ballots as marked by the voter or as produced by a ballot marking device (BMD) or direct record electronic (DRE) machine. The machines used in each county were acquired by that county from the approved state vendor & model listing, using Help America Vote Act (HAVA) funding from the federal government and local taxpayer funds. Once acquired, the machines are managed and maintained by local election office staff under the direction and supervision of the local Boards of Elections (BOEs), consistent with policy and directives from the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE). Discussion: (1) North Carolina statutory guidelines require the availability and use of a pre-printed paper ballot wherein the voter can visually inspect and select his or her ballot, marking each race or issue to select the voter’s preferred candidate or position. Disabled voters and military/overseas voters have the ability to use purely electronic means of selecting preferred candidates using locally available BMD or DRE equipment or a web portal as part of the voting experience. The paper ballots that are created from the voting process are scanned into approved tabulation machines for purposes of recording and tallying the election results. The paper ballots are retained after the election and are subject to a risk limiting audit, as directed by the state. Tally tapes are generated from each machine and certified by the election judges or officials present. Electronic USB drives are used to record the electronic tallies from each tabulation machine. (2) Tabulation machines and voting devices are not allowed to be connected to any public or private network. It is unlawful in NC to connect any voting or tabulating device to the internet. However, in most counties, electronic poll books (E-Poll Books) are used for check-in purposes, and these systems are internet-enabled allowing them to access the statewide voter registration database and to preclude repetitive voting anywhere in the state by any person who presents to vote. (3) In some counties, on-demand ballot printing is performed for efficiency purposes (particularly in larger counties where many permutations of ballots are needed to accommodate many races and jurisdictions). In those counties, ballot printers are used and they are typically network addressable from anywhere in the voting enclosure. (4) It is therefore permissible and even necessary for voting enclosures to have internet accessibility and for some (non-voting or tabulating) devices to be connected to the network. In every instance of network configuration, the local (county) information technology office is responsible to secure the network from intrusion and manipulation. There is no one standard for intrusion detection systems (IDS) in the state, but there are a wide range of systems approved for that use. Each county prescribes the standard and acceptable devices/systems to be used in protecting elections from intrusion and manipulation. The state NCSBE also uses a protected network configuration to receive and compile county tallies daily during early voting and after poll closure on election day. NCEIT’s Policy Preferences and Standards for Secure Use of Election Machines & Technology: (1) All election machines to be used in conducting an election must be pre-tested for logic and accuracy under the watchful eyes of partisan observers. All test ballots, scripts, records and results must be inspectable on demand. (2) Electronic machines are conducive to achieving speed, efficiency and accuracy, particularly when large numbers of citizens are voting at one-stop early voting sites and precincts. But they are not a guarantee of a fair election. Machines must be closely monitored and inspected periodically to ensure they are not being externally manipulated or interfered with. (3) All election networks must be pre-tested and closely monitored during the election cycle for intrusion or manipulation. Each county must have a reporting mechanism that allows it to receive notifications from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISE) offices of the Department of Homeland Security. Each county should instantly alert its BOE and NCSBE if any suspicious activity occurs during the election cycle. (4) At no time during the election cycle is it permissible to connect any external device (other than the designated USB election drive for that machine) to any tabulation machine. (5) At no time during an election cycle is it permissible for a tabulation machine, a DRE device, or a BMD to be connected to a network using any form of modem, Bluetooth, or other networking device. (6) At all times during the election cycle all tabulation machines must be secured by numbered seal to prevent surreptitious insertion or removal of ballots. Under emergency mode, election officials may modify the tabulation machine to allow for temporary opening of the emergency ballot bin for closely monitored placement of completed ballots while the machine is not tabulating. When so used, the site Chief Judge or Administrator should log all actions, ensure continuous monitoring of the machine, and be careful to count all ballots so placed. When the machine is restored to full operating capability, the emergency ballots ought to be scanned immediately into the secured ballot bin/box. (7) Election machine seal numbers must always be recorded for proper chain of custody. It should be recorded each time a seal is broken for operational purposes. (8) Chain of custody must always be maintained for ballot boxes containing completed ballots. Once removed from their tabulation machines, these ballot boxes must be secured by seal and recorded. Transportation of ballot boxes must be directly to and from the voting site and designated storage location, without interruption. Transportation should always be by two or more individuals with permitted observation by partisan observers. (9) Source Code for all tabulation machines (including both software and firmware) must always be maintained in escrow by a third party escrow agent and subject to annual inventory and inspection by the respective political party technicians. (10) It is NCEIT’s position that all tabulation machines maintain for 22 months all cast vote records (CVRs) compiled from previous elections. Those CVRs should be de-identified as to the voter, publicly releasable on demand, and used as part of any post-election audit. Point of Contact: James K. Womack President, North Carolina Election Integrity Team (NCEIT) www.nceit.org Tel. (919) 770-4783

https://portcitydaily.com/local-news/2023/07/05/state-boe-tweaks-rules-for-voter-id-law-after-public-input/

Vulnerable Voters: Task Force #5: Purpose of the Meeting Give you the tools and resources you need to address the needs of Vulnerable Voters in your county and to help you to organize your local group What do I need to know to be effective in protecting the vote of the most vulnerable among us? What resources do I have? How do I get started? How many do I need in my county to have a Vulnerable Voters Task Force? Agenda Meeting 1 1) Welcome: Jane Bilello Host 2) Introductions: Your Name and County 3) Have you joined NCEIT so you can get into the site to communicate with us? NCEIT.org/Join Us https://www.nceit.org/ 4) Who are the Vulnerable Voters in the Eight Systems of Election Integrity that the Left has successfully infiltrated and exploited? · Senior citizens in assisted living facilities and nursing homes · People in group homes · The disabled and physically handicapped voters v. Homeless and other voters susceptible to being taking advantage of by political operatives · New citizens and voters in immigrant communities We need to be proactive if we are to protect the vote by reclaiming the election processes that have been hijacked by the Left. https://www.nceit.org/_files/ugd/71310c_f06a43795f68464c99002c03bbfda79d.pdf 5) How do I pre-empt the Left from exploiting Nursing Homes/In Home Care/Disabled individuals? https://www.ashevilleteaparty.org/post/judge-s-order-on-voter-assistance-for-disabled-voters See Chapter 8 Election Administrative Code: http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac.asp?folderName=\Title%2008%20-%20Elections The following information is designed to help you get organized in your county and region for Vulnerable Voters. 6) Questions to be addressed What is the background for voter fraud in nursing homes, the handicapped, military ballots? https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/03/wisconsin-special-counsel-finds-widespread-election-fraud-in-2020-nursing-homes/ 7) How do I report nursing home fraud and abuse in NC? To report fraud and abuse in state licensed facilities, agencies and nursing homes, contact the North Carolina Division of Health Service Regulation. www.protectelderlyvptes.org Health Fraud. NC Department of Justice efforts to stop ncdoj.gov/responding-to-crime/health-fraud/ See Chapter 8 Election Administrative Code: http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac.asp?folderName=\Title%2008%20-%20Elections 8) How do I join a MAT Team? (Multipartisan Assistance Team) What they are/How they operate: https://www.ncsbe.gov/voting/help-voters-disabilities/assistance-voters-care-facilities . You need to sign up at your local Board of Elections. Do it now so you are ready for November even if you are a UNA. MAT Teams: Administrative Code: http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac.asp?folderName=\Title%2008%20-%20Elections\Chapter%2016%20-%20Mulitpartisan%20Assistance%20TeamsAdult Care Home Ad 9) Why should I join a county Nursing/Adult Care Home Advisory Committee and/or Advisory Council on Aging, Regional Council? https://www.ashevilleteaparty.org/post/judge-s-order-on-voter-assistance-for-disabled-voters 10) How do I join my county Nursing/Adult Care Home Advisory Committee and/or Advisory Council on Aging Regional Council. This is how you do it: 1) Search the website for your local County Board of Commissioners. 2) Click on the link for Citizen Participation 3) Scroll down the page and click on one or both: Advisory Council on Aging and Nursing /Adult Care Home Community Advisory Committee 4) Make contact with the Contact Person. Sign up to join one or both councils. You will probably be sent an Application for Appointment to County Boards & Committees. Fill it out and mail it. Once approved, you will then have access to the facilities to attend patient/family meetings to discuss patient rights and caution against ballot exploitation. (There are education seminars that they will ask you to attend. Meeting are usually every month or every Info on absentee ballots NC State Statutes Absentee Ballots SUBCHAPTER VII. ABSENTEE VOTING. § 163-226. Who may vote an absentee ... See 163-229. Absentee ballots, applications on container-return envelopes, and instruction sheets. What is the process of handling Military Ballots? https://www.ncsbe.gov/voting/vote-mail/military-and-overseas-voting 11) Handling of Overseas & Military Voters: https://www.eac.gov/voters/overseas-military-voters Administrative Code for Military Ballots http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac.asp?folderName=\Title%2008%20-%20Elections\Chapter%2012%20-%20Rules%20for%20Military%20and%20Overseas%20Citizens%20Absentee%20Voting%20Procedures Administrative Code: How to find the buried code: https://www.ashevilleteaparty.org/post/found-it-nc-elections-administrative-code-what-the-ncsbe-doesn-t-want-you-to-find If you will set up a Vulnerable Voters Team in your county, let me know. We will set up your County on the NCEIT Task Forces where you will have a secure and private space to communicate and share info, conduct your own meetings, and communicate with the State Task Force, etc. Contact Jane@NCEIT.org or call me at 209 986 3845 Thank you for caring! Jane Bilello, NCEIT Board