Ballot Stuffing in the CDP Elections? Might Have Seen It!




When Dean Inada and I walked in to vote in the California Democratic Party elections yesterday at about 5 p.m. — I had been carrying around a small sign trying to induce people to read the “Closing Argument” I published yesterday afternoon in favor of Kimberly Ellis, while he was waiting to vote so as to try to give someone whom he had promised would first have the opportunity to lobby him — we came across a scene that was so bizarre as to be comical.

There were a couple of dozen or more booths for people to register based upon their last name.  Most were empty or almost so.  But one of them had a line that had literally as many people waiting in it as all of the rest combined.  It was two or three tables away from the line that I was in, “Da-Dr” (or something) and there was someone who looked like a party staffer guiding people like a traffic cop to the left (with very few tables) or the right (with very many.) I believe that the sign for that line began with “Ca” as in California.

I laughed at the notion that so many delegates might have names like “Cabrera,” “Callahan,” and “Cantor” and why they were voting as a flock.  (I’m not laughing now.)  When I asked the supposed staffer who was waiving people in one or the other direction why there were SO many people in that line, he simply ignored me.  Well, that sometimes happens.

I thought nothing more of it because I had not yet been processed and found that I needed to have no identification other than my signature.  I had not yet known that what I’d heard were 260o-odd legitimately registered delegates who somehow produced 2900-plus votes.  I had not yet learned that Eric Bauman would claim victory in the Chair’s race by 62 votes when projections had had him down by almost 400.  And most importantly, I had not yet read an email from a Bay Area attorney named Rafael Trujillo where he wrote of hearing of a plan by a club of voters in San Francisco to do something much like this.

I wasn’t thinking about ballot fraud, but now I am.  I was not recalling that one way to create ballot fraud in an otherwise generally honest organization was to create ONE BAD APPLE — one bad table that would facilitate everyone getting through, with no Registrar of Voters to serve as a backstop.

Luckily, while those signatures aren’t MUCH identification, they are probably enough.  They can be cross-checked against the actual signatures of the people who voted with those who are supposed to have voted, either based on their legitimately holding a seat themselves or being the lawfully appointed proxy of someone who was.

And we use signed ballots, so we can also see who fraudulent voters (IF any) voted for — and subtract out their votes and see whether that changes the outcome of any elections.

I know that some people will say that it is wrong to even suggest the possibility of voter fraud in our party, especially given our party’s stance — verified by countless studies — that voter fraud hardly ever happens out in the wild.

Ah, but we’re not out in the wild here in Sacramento.  We’re in a Petri dish — and you never know what’s going to start growing in one.  The famous story of the Ring of Gyges — the original “ring of invisibility,” cautions us that when people can act in secrecy — say, if they know that the agent in a given line will wave them through with a wink — they are much more likely to do so.  Far too likely.

The statistical odds against what those of us voting at around 5:00 saw in that one line, based simply on the distribution of people’s last names, are astronomical.  If there were 40 tables, and 39 of them were honest, that is not enough if a huge number of people stream through that 40th line.

We need a forensic audit of the vote — and we need it before a winner of any election in which fraud may have been decisive is certified.

About Greg Diamond

Somewhat verbose attorney, semi-retired due to disability, residing in northwest Brea. Occasionally runs for office against bad people who would otherwise go unopposed. Got 45% of the vote against Bob Huff for State Senate in 2012; Josh Newman then won the seat in 2016. In 2014 became the first attorney to challenge OCDA Tony Rackauckas since 2002; Todd Spitzer then won that seat in 2018. Every time he's run against some rotten incumbent, the *next* person to challenge them wins! He's OK with that. Corrupt party hacks hate him. He's OK with that too. He does advise some local campaigns informally and (so far) without compensation. (If that last bit changes, he will declare the interest.)