Vote fraud scheme in Philadelphia busted, judge of elections pleads guilty to aiding Democrats
Now that Democrats are pushing universal mail-in ballots, making vote fraud easier than ever before, we are repeatedly hearing the false claim that "there is no evidence of widespread vote fraud" from Democrats. Just yesterday, I heard Democrat activist and Fox News contributor Chris Hahn make that claim in a segment discussing mail-in voting. Stacey Abrams, who delusionally claims to be governor of Georgia because of "vote suppression," says vote fraud is largely a "myth."
Election fraud has a long history. Cartoon by Thomas Nast.
On the same day that Hahn was making his claim, U.S. attorney William McSwain held a press conference to announce that his office had obtained a guilty plea from a judge of elections in Philadelphia, who admitted accepting bribes to add votes to the totals of those who bribed him (all Democrats, as these were primary elections, and Republicans don't win elections in Philly), through the intermediation of a "consultant" they hired to pay the actual bribes. Neither the consultant(s) nor the clients who obtained election via the fraudulent schemes were named, suggesting that further indictments or guilty pleas may be forthcoming.
Alarmingly, the elections that were fixed were for "judicial office," which seems to mean judges. If no further prosecutions are announced, then Philadelphians will have to realize that they are being handled by corrupt courts.
Video of the press conference is embedded below. In it we hear key details, as McSwain explained the scheme:
A political consultant gave DeMuro directions and paid him money to illegally add votes for certain Democratic candidates on the primary ballots in 2014, 2015, and 2016. These candidates were individuals running for judicial office whose campaigns had hired the consultant, as well as other candidates for various federal, state, and local elective offices who were preferred by this consultant for a variety of reasons.
The raw numbers of votes involved were small, but because so few people vote in judicial elections, they could swing the elections:
DeMuro's fraudulent votes accounted for over 22% of the total voting in that Division in 2014. In 2015, his fraud accounted for over 15% of the votes in the Division; in 2016, his fraud accounted for over 17% of the votes.
The mechanism of fraud was particularly blatant:
After receiving payments ranging from between $300 to $5,000 per election from the consultant, DeMuro would add fraudulent votes on the voting machine – also known as "ringing up" votes — for the consultant's clients and preferred candidates, thereby diluting and distorting the ballots cast by actual voters. DeMuro would add these fraudulent votes to the totals during Election Day, and then would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate. He would add the fraudulent votes by literally standing in the voting booth and voting over and over, as fast as he could, when he thought the coast was clear.
The specific crimes charged were somewhat technical:
DeMuro has been charged with two counts: first, for conspiring to deprive Philadelphia voters of their civil rights by fraudulently stuffing the ballot boxes for specific Democratic candidates in the 2014, 2015, and 2016 primary elections; and second, for a violation of the Travel Act, which forbids the use of any facility in interstate commerce (here, a cell phone) with the intent to promote certain illegal activity (here, bribery). DeMuro has pled guilty to both of these charges.
I eagerly await identification of the elected "judicial officials" who bribed their way into office.
Here is the press conference:
Hat tip: The Conservative Treehouse.