The Blaze is hardly known for being a news organization critical to Donald Trump, and yet, they’ve assessed that the president’s legal challenge to the 2020 Election results has yet to provide a superabundance of voter fraud evidence.
The conservative Glenn Beck-founded outlet published an examination over 200 affidavits the Trump campaign collected in Michigan as evidence of “widespread [voting] irregularities.” The piece explored numerous allegations from the affidavits, accounting for both fraudulent actions and odd behavior that raises questions about elements of the vote processing system.
The assessment of the site’s managing editor, Leon Wolf, is that the affidavits raise legitimate questions about less than 1,000 ballots in Michigan — while Joe Biden’s vote count in the state exceeds Trump’s by over 140,000. Wolf further explains that many of the allegations are themed around the idea that Republican poll watchers weren’t treated as well as Democratic ones, though “they do not directly pertain to the issue of voter fraud, so I have not included them in this list.”
One of the article’s core conclusions, however, is that “the affidavits are rife with complaints about things that were, in fact, done properly and in accordance with the law.”
From the piece:
For example, one affiant described at length how she insistently and repeatedly attempted to challenge a group of ballots that had already been placed in a “problem” ballot box (i.e., they had already been successfully challenged). This is, again, not the fault of people who got about 10 minutes of training in the procedures, but you can imagine that the cumulative effect of these challenges (which appear to have been quite voluminous, just based on the people who submitted affidavits) may have led to some short fuses and unwillingness to explain the same thing to each of the 200-plus watchers who were present.
The article goes on to say some of the affidavit concerns stem from the coronavirus pandemic, due to the complications of conducting the election in compliance with public safety guidelines. It also omits complaints involving personal insults, the amount of poll watchers permitted in voting locations, and failure to comprehend the process’s legalities.
Many of the allegations present an incomplete picture, from which it is impossible to draw any conclusions at all. For instance, numerous affiants complained that people who showed up to vote but who had requested a mail-in ballot were allowed to vote. This was proper procedure, and their in-person ballots were supposed to be provisional until it could be determined if they had turned in a mail-in ballot or not…Having personally worked as an observer for elections before, I will say that none of the complaints strike me as representing unusual behavior; however, perhaps many of these complaints should lead to reforms in the security process for counting votes.
Have a tip we should know? [email protected]