Download pdf - 2014-07-11 RedacteELECTION FRAUD REPORT OF COMPLAINANT SHAUN MCCUTCHEON, CHAIR OF THE CONSERVATIVE ACTION FUNDd Caf Ms Sen Double-Voting Complaint2

8/12/2019 2014-07-11 RedacteELECTION FRAUD REPORT OF COMPLAINANT SHAUN MCCUTCHEON, CHAIR OF THE CONSERV

1/8


2/8

2

Report of Election Fraud

Name: Shaun McCutcheon

Address:

City/State/Zip:

Contact Number: (703) 483-9784 (through counsel)E-mail: [email protected](through counsel)

Name of your polling place: All polling places in state

Date incident occurred: June 24, 2014

Please explain the circumstances surrounding your complaint. Please by very

specific and include all relevant information (2000 characters maximum):

Miss. Code 97-13-35 provides, Any person . . . who shall vote or attempt to vote in the

primary election of one party when he shall have voted on the same date in the primary election ofanother party, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. A primary election for an office and any runoff

for it comprise one election process. Letter from Atty Gen. Mike Moore to Hon. Walter Brown,1988 WL 250048, at *1 (Miss. A.G. Op. Apr. 7, 1988). Consequently, 97-13-35 bans

"crossover voting, which is participation in the first primary of one political party and

participation in the runoff of another political party. Id.

Based on press accounts of numerous individuals inspections of official voting records, it

appears thousands of people who apparently voted in the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate onJune 3, 2014, were permitted to vote in the Republican runoff for U.S. Senate on June 24, 2014

(Runoff). It further appears, in several counties, no steps were taken to enforce 97-13-35 toensure individuals who voted in the Democratic primary were barred from voting in the Runoff.

It is unclear how many fraudulent or illegal votes were cast in violation of 97-13-35. Theapparent widespread violations of this statute, along with the seeming failure of party or election

officials in some jurisdictions to attempt to enforce it, constitute a total departure from [ 97-13-

35s] fundamental provisions, destroy the integrity of the election, and make the will of the

qualified electors impossible to ascertain. Rogers v. Holder, 636 So. 2d 645, 647 (Miss. 1994).This Office should refuse to accept the current results of the Runoff without a complete

investigation and, if necessary, require the conduct of a special election. Allowing the current

Runoff results to stand would flout state law and violate the constitutional right to vote of thosewho complied with 23-15-575, by diluting their legally valid votes with invalid ones.

Are there other individuals we should talk to regarding these issues? Yes

Person 1

Name: Christina Sirois, Esq. (Counsel)

Address: 203 South Union Street, Suite 300

City/State/Zip: Alexandria, VA 22314

Phone: (703) 483-9784


3/8

3

If the Attorney Generals Office is able to prosecute this allegation of voter fraud: I wish toremain anonymous.

It Appears That Thousands of People Who Voted in the 2014 Democratic

Primary for U.S. Senate Subsequently Voted in the Republican Runoff forthat Office in Violation of Miss. Code 97-13-35, and That Party and Election

Officials in Several Jurisdictions Failed to Even Attempt to Enforce That Statute

Official election records suggest that thousands of votes were cast in the Runoff by

individuals who had voted in the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate, in direct violation of 97-

13-35, and that party and election officials in some counties may not have even attempted to

enforce 97-13-35s restrictions. Such a substantial number of illegal votes, combined with the

apparently flagrant disregard of fundamental election restrictions in multiple jurisdiction, taints

the Runoffs outcome and likely requires that a new election be conducted to prevent fraudulent

or otherwise improper votes from skewing the results.

The Mississippi Supreme Court has held that a violation of voting procedure which is

such a total departure from the fundamental provisions of [a] statute as to destroy the integrity of

the election and make the will of the qualified electors impossible to ascertain renders the tainted

votes void. Rogers v. Holder, 636 So. 2d 645, 647 (Miss. 1994) (quoting Stringer v. Lucas, 608

So. 2d 1351, 1361 (Miss. 1992)); accord Lewis v. Griffith, 664 So. 2d 177, 186 (Miss. 1995) (citing

Riley v. Cla yton, 441 So. 2d 1322, 1328 (Miss. 1983)). Alternatively, if there are willful

violation[s] of the election procedures, then a new election must be held, even if the total

percentage of illegal votes is small. Waters v. Gnemi, 907 So. 2d 307, 334 (Miss. 2005) (citing

Harris v. Stewart, 193 So. 2d 339, 346 (Miss. 1940));see also Rogers, 636 So. 2d at 651 ([E]ven

where the percentage of illegal votes is small, if attended by fraud or willful violations of the

election procedure, [a] Court will order a new election without reservation.). Moreover, when

legal and illegal votes are commingled, and it is impossible to distinguish between them, all the


4/8

4

commingled votes much be discounted. Thompson v. Jones, 17 So. 3d 524, 527-28 (Miss. 2008).

Applying these standards, there were fraudulent, illegal, and otherwise improper votes cast in the

Runoff that require the Runoffs results to be rejected. Miss. Code 97-13-35 provides,

Any person . . . who shall vote or attempt to vote in the primary election of one party when he

shall have voted on the same date in the primary election of another party, shall be guilty of a

misdemeanor. Under Mississippi law, a primary election for a particular office, and a subsequent

runoff election for that office, are deemed to be parts of one election process. Letter from Atty

Gen. Mike Moore to Hon. Walter Brown, 1988 WL 250048, at *1 (Miss. A.G. Op. Apr. 7, 1988)

(hereafter, Moore Letter). The runoff primary has been described as a continuation of the first

primary. Id. The Attorney General consequently has construed 97-13-35 to prohibit

"crossover voting, which is defined as participation in the first primary of one political party

and participation in the runoff of another political party. Id.

Neither the Attorney General nor any court has ever questioned the constitutionality or

enforceability of this provision. To the contrary, the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that a

State validly may determine that it is essential to the integrity of the nominating process to confine

voters to supporting one party and its candidates in the course of the same nominating process.

Am. Party of Tex. v. Wh ite, 415 U.S. 767, 786 (1974). The statute also helps to prevent party

raiding, in which one partys supporters attempt to alter the outcome of another partys primary.

Cal. Democratic Party v. Jones , 530 U.S. 567, 572 (2000). Restrictions on party raiding

preserv[e] the integrity of the electoral process. Rosario v. Rockefeller, 410 U.S. 752, 761

(1973); accord Kusper v. Pontikes, 414 U.S. 51, 59-60 (1973).

Based on numerous individuals reviews of official election records, it appears that there

are thousands of individuals who are recorded as having voted both in the Democratic primary


5/8

5

election for U.S. Senate and in the subsequent Republican Runoff for that office, in direct violation

of 97-13-35. See, e. g., Courtney Ann Jackson, McDaniel Volunteers Sort Through Runoff

Ballots, MSNEWSNOW(July 8, 2014) (The last count [the McDaniels campaign released] was

nearly 5,000 questionable votes statewide.), available at http://www.msnewsnow.com/

story/25970711/mcdaniel-volunteers-sort-through-ballots; Matthew Boyle, Team McDaniel: We

Have Found 3300+ Ineligible Votes, Half of Number Needed for Challenge , BREITBART(July 1,

2014), available athttp://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/01/Team-McDaniel-We-

Have-Already-Found-More-Than-3-300-Ineligible-Votes-Half-Of-What-s-Needed-For-

Challenge; MS Tea Party Claims At Least 800 Illegal Votes in Hinds County Alone , MS News

Now (June 26, 2014), available at http://m.msnewsnow.com/#!/newsDetail/25879385; Chris

McDaniel Challenges Mississippi Senate Primary Votes After Loss , REUTERS (June 27, 2014),

available at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/27/chris-mcdaniel-primary-

votes n 5537704.html?&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016.

One blog posted the following picture, apparently of Hind County Election Records,

purporting to show numerous entries for people who voted in both the Democratic primary (left

hand column) and the Republican Runoff (right hand column):


6/8

6

Jim Hoft, There May Be Enough Invalidated Votes to Overturn Cochran Victory, Gateway Pundit

blog (June 26, 2014), available athttp://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/06/

breaking-enough-invalidated-votes-to-overturn-cochran-victory. Popular press accounts go on to

suggest that election and party officials in certain jurisdictions did not even attempt to enforce

97-13-35s restrictions or otherwise attempt to ensure that individuals who had voted in the

Democratic primary were barred from also voting in the Runoff.

Widespread violations of 97-13-35, along with the potential failure of some jurisdictions

to even attempt to enforce its requirements, gave rise to a complete and total departure from

statutory procedures that destroyed ballot and election integrity. Lewis, 664 So. 2d at 186; cf.

Waters, 907 So. 2d at 335 (The gross deviation and total departure from mandatory election

procedure by [party and election officials] caused the result of the [election] to be completely


7/8

7

undermined as all indicia of reliability were compromised.). Section 97-13-35s prohibition on

crossover voting,see Moore Letter, 1988 WL 250048, at *1, is essentialto the integrity of the

nominating process, White, 415 U.S. at 786 (emphasis added), and helps to preserve the

integrity of the primary process by hindering party raiding, Rosario, 410 U.S. at 761.

Particularly as Mississippi does not have party registration, i.e., a citizen does not need to be a

member of a political party in order to run or vote in that partys primary, Letter from Atty Gen.

Jim Hood to Hon. Billy R. Nicholson & Jeffrey C. Smith, No. 2006-652, 2007 WL 852249, at *1

(Miss. A.G. Op. Jan. 29, 2007). 97-13-35 plays a critical role in helping to ensure that the results

of a partys primary accurately reflects the preferences of a partys actual supporters.

The thousands of fraudulent or otherwise illegal votes cast in apparent violation of 97-

13-35 also violate the fundamental right to vote of all statutorily eligible voters who cast legally

valid votes in the Runoff, by diluting the impact of their votes. The constitutional right to vote

includes the right of all voters in a federal election to . . . have their expressions of choice given

full value and effect, without being diluted or distorted by the casting of fraudulent ballots.

Anderson v. United States , 417 U.S 211, 226 (1974);see also Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 208

(1962) (recognizing that stuffing of the ballot box with votes of ineligible persons

unconstitutionally dilut[es] the votes of statutorily eligible electors). A persons right of

suffrage is denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizens vote just as effectively

as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise. Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 555

(1964);see also Crawford v. Marion Cnty Elec. Bd., 472 F.3d 949, 952 (7th Cir. 2007) ([V]oting

fraud impairs the right of legitimate voters to vote by diluting their votesdilution being

recognized to be an impairment of the right to vote.), affd553 U.S. 181 (2008);Farrell v. Bd. of

Elecs. in the City of Ne w York, No. 85 Civ. 6099 (JES), 1985 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16669, at *26


8/8