True the Vote is enlisting private citizens to help it overwhelm under-staffed and under-resourced election offices with voter roll challenges ahead of election day.
State legislatures need to take a serious look at getting laws on the books to penalize unsubstantiated voter challenges like these. They are just sheer harassment. These efforts are not truly intended to bolster the integrity of the elections process.
Dems should return the favor and challenge every Rethugliklan voter.
Just sayin’.
Could there be a class action suit on behalf of challenged voters against True the Vote?
I’m sure there’s someone out there who thinks that “Real Americans!!” only have names like John, while anyone that has some furriner sounding name is obviously here to steal our bodily fluids and has to be purges from the election. I hope that the swing states in the election don’t purge their rolls and are smart enough to see this for what it is…unfortunately this looks to be aimed at counties so they may get some staffers who go along.
Lawsuits should happen, anyone who is not allowed to vote needs to sue their local election board as well as groups like this, as really this is what election interference actually looks like.
I think they spelled “Screw” wrong …
There need to be penalties for false voter challenges.
No.
Sturmabteilung 2024
Meanwhile, in Wiscosin -
One guy went to far.
Peter Bernegger has spent the last three and a half years bombarding local election offices in Wisconsin with litigation and accusations of fraud. He’s brought at least 18 lawsuits against election clerks and offices in state court, and on social media, he has relentlessly promoted his litigation and circulated false claims about election fraud in the swing state.
His campaign has recently landed him in legal trouble – Bernegger now faces criminal charges for allegedly falsifying a subpoena in connection with a lawsuit against the state’s top election office.
State Legislatures are doing the opposite, in Georgia they just passed a law that makes it way easier to make unsubstantiated challenges. The law used to say that officials had to look at all “reasonable” challenges, they took away the “reasonable” now all challenges have to looked after. The idea is to overwhelm officials in counties with large population which are the ones that tend to vote Democratic. And they don’t care if anyone challenges rolls in Taliaferro (pop 1800) that would be sorted out quickly.
Same last name as a founding father?
Will take time, and they can all afford lawyers.
This passage strikes me as ambiguous. It seems to me that it could be understood to indemnify two or more persons who go on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured provided that they do so while not in disguise. Is this intended?
That word does not mean what you appear to think it means.
True the Group?
Also, I didn’t bother with an actual analysis but didn’t that article say about the same thing several times over?
Absolve? Exonerate?
Nonetheless, the passage seems ambiguous.
True the Vote is probably not bothering with red states.
Why do we keep referring to these groups as what they want to be called via a title they give themselves instead of what they are.
That is “True the Vote” is not what they are but what they want to be called to give them credibility to other than the most informed,. What they are is “Suppress” or “Stop” the vote.
That is what this group is attempting to do is win elections by through the act of voter suppression and intimidation and their goal is in fact an untrue vote. Therefore, they should be referred as Suppressing the Vote when discussing what they are doing because that is what they are doing.