Skip to main content
You have permission to edit this article.
Edit
Our view: The voter fraud fraud
Our view

Our view: The voter fraud fraud

  • 6
{{featured_button_text}}

Finally, after years of searching and scouring voting rolls, processes and election cycles — and putting up with scorn from Democrats — proof positive of voter fraud, unequivocal and undeniable, has emerged.

Two weeks ago, the district attorney of Delaware County, Pa., charged Bruce Bartman of Marple Township, Pa., with illegally voting in place of his deceased mother.

That’s the way they always said it would be: “dead people voting.”

Bartman also registered in the name of his mother-in-law, who died in 2019, though he didn’t cast a vote in her name. He did also vote under his own name.

But Bartman was caught. He is said to have confessed and to be cooperating with authorities.

To some, this will be old news. The Trump campaign trumpeted this development, along with a few other “dead people voting” claims that haven’t panned out quite so explicitly.

But the campaign didn’t seem impressed that Bartman’s attempt failed — the regular voting safeguards worked. Trump’s campaign also failed to mention that Bartman cast his mother’s vote, and his own, in favor of President Trump.

“This is the only known case of a ‘dead person’ voting in our county, conspiracy theories notwithstanding,” District Attorney Jack Stollsteimer said in a statement. “The prompt prosecution of this case shows that law enforcement will continue to uphold our election laws whenever presented with actual evidence of fraud and that we will continue to investigate every allegation that comes our way.”

It would just be embarrassing to recount each of the Trump campaign’s claims of voter fraud, which have failed to sway any U.S. court, despite some 50 attempts.

It’s also embarrassing that so many American citizens who should know better believe Trump’s claims of a “stolen election” — including some Democrats, according to polls.

There will always be stories of boxes secretively carried into polling stations, or cheating poll workers or machines that switched votes — anecdotal stories offered by people unfamiliar with voting processes. But the vast majority of these stories turn out to be misunderstandings or human error that is quickly caught and corrected or outright lies — lies for which Trump is continually called out on Twitter.

And no claim explains how even Bartman-like actions would rise to the level of the five million-and-some votes it would have taken to “steal” the presidential election.

After their pundits ran with some of these stories, specifically involving voting machines manufacturer Smartmatic, Fox News and Newsmax were recently forced, under threat of lawsuit, to walk back their claims in embarrassing “clarifications” that cleared the company, as well as Dominion Voter Systems, of any wrongdoing. “Dominion has stated its company has no ownership relationship with the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's family, Sen. Dianne Feinstein's family, the Clinton family, Hugo Chavez, or the government of Venezuela,” Newsmax host John Tabacco said.

Pelosi? Clinton? Chavez? It’s like conspiracy theory Mad Libs.

Experience should have taught us something.

In 2016, Trump organized an advisory commission on election integrity that was supposed to blow the doors off election fraud. Instead, it was quietly disbanded with not so much as a quarterly report.

In November, Trump supporters hired Nevada data analyst Rex Briggs to investigate the state’s election returns for profligate voter fraud. Rather than proving their claims, he wound up debunking them.

Time and time again, claims of widespread voter fraud turn out themselves to be frauds. As even Republican authorities — many appointed by Trump himself — have attested over and over again, there’s no widespread voter fraud to prove.

But the myth lingers in Republican circles, including in North Carolina, becoming Gospel and polluting the electoral process. Is it really better than, occasionally, admitting defeat?

The legislators who support these stories may think they’re only following the will of their constituents. But at some point — a point many have passed — they owe it to their constituents to tell them the truth. Even if it hurts.

Catch the latest in Opinion

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

Like many in the state, we were saddened to hear about the death Monday of Marc Basnight, a well-known and highly influential former state sen…

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.

Topics

Breaking News