Joe Biden’s Department of Justice is using scare quotes in a new guidance that it has issued to threaten state election integrity efforts.
The guidance repeatedly refers to post-election “audits,” using the quotes to suggest that’s not what they really are.
And it lists a number of examples of illegal activities – although it does not connect those with the Arizona election audit that has been going on for some months already, or the other states that are considering them.
The recounts and reviews of election results from the 2020 presidential race were triggered by evidence that suggested fraud or manipulation. Multiple legacy media outlet fact-checkers have said there was absolutely no inappropriate behavior in the election.
But it’s not even contested that there were outside influences, that leftist Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook handed over some $350 million to mostly leftist elections officials to help them “run” the 2020 count. Further, multiple state officials arbitrarily changed state voting laws and procedures to accommodate COVID conditions, even though the Constitution limits those who can make those changes to state lawmakers.
And a survey showed that had legacy and social media corporations not put them thumb on the scale – by suppressing reporting by the New York Post about a new scandal just before the vote involving both Hunter Biden and his father, the candidate, Joe Biden would have lost the election to President Trump.
The result is that state senators in Arizona have organized a full audit of the ballots in Maricopa County, a process that is expected to reach a conclusion soon. Other states also have been considering the idea of audits.
The DOJ, under the management now of Joe Biden, is making clear its opposition to any such verification of votes, or election integrity efforts.
Just the News reported the DOJ’s comments indicate “that the federal agency is apparently deeply unsettled by the string of election audits and election reform efforts carried out by state Republicans since last November’s presidential election.”
The federal department gives orders how “states must comply with federal law” when conducting election audits, the report said, and, “It also addresses efforts by some state legislatures to repeal emergency COVID-19 voting rules that other states have in some cases sought to make permanent.”
The report explained those audits and various election integrity strategies that have been developed are “political flashpoints,” with “Democrats insisting that those measures are intended to either suppress the vote or overturn November’s election results, and Republicans countering that both efforts are meant to strengthen the U.S. voting system and address any underlying security issues.”
The DOJ denigrates the state ballot integrity efforts by referring to them repeatedly as “audits,” using the scare quotes indicating that’s not what they really are.
And after citing federal law against voer intimidation, it cites a number of previous cases:
For example, it said sending a letter to foreign-born Latino registered voters warning them that their personal information would be collected was not allowed.
And it said having police officers take down the license plate numbers of individuals attending voter registration meetings was wrong.
And it said sending robocalls telling people if they voted by mail, their personal information would be in a public database was wrong.
And it said linking individual voters “to alleged illegalities in a way that might trigger harassment was wrong.”
And the DOJ even warned that plans that have been considered, such as in Arizona, to canvass voters to see if they actually voted, could be intimidating if it’s “directed … at minority voters or minority communities.”
The DOJ cited a statement that “The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history” that was from the federal Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. But that statement has been discounted by many since it was made only days after the election, before many of the sworn affidavits from witnesses to what they thought was election manipulation emerged.
Just the News reported of the DOJ guidance, in two documents, “In neither case does the document cite any instances of real or even suspected violations of the law, suggesting that the DOJ’s objections to the investigations may have more to do with undermining the credibility of the numerous audits playing out in states across the country as with any theoretical infractions of federal law.”
Further, the DOJ warns against dropping the emergency provisions imposed on voters for the 2020 election because of the COVID pandemic.
“The Department’s enforcement policy does not consider a jurisdiction’s re-adoption of prior voting laws or procedures to be presumptively lawful; instead, the Department will review a jurisdiction’s changes in voting laws or procedures for compliance with all federal laws regarding elections, as the facts and circumstances warrant,” the guidance threatens.
The Supreme Court, however, in one case just weeks ago, did not align itself with the Democrats’ agenda.
In a ruling on a Voting Rights Act challenge by the Democratic National Committee to an Arizona ban on ballot harvesting, the court ruled 6-3 that state’s ban was constitutional.
Whether there was vote fraud in the 2020 election is without dispute, there already have been criminal cases filed. Whether it was enough to alter the outcome, which swung on a few tens of thousands of votes in several swing states, hasn’t been documented.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.