Connect with us

Election News

New York Democrat Arrested and Charged with Felony For Faking Signatures on Election Petition, Including Dead People

Published

on

Peekskill Common Council member Rob Scott sought to advance his political career by challenging incumbent County Legislator Colin Smith for the seat in last year’s Democratic primary.

That effort ended in late April 2023 when the County Board of Elections threw out 217 of the 531 signatures Scott submitted on his ballot petitions, leaving him far short of the required number of 500.

Now, Scott is facing criminal charges for filing false documents.

In a statement, County District Attorney Miriam E. Rocah said Scott was arrested and charged with filing designating petitions containing forged signatures for a seat on the Westchester County Board of Legislators in the June 2023 Democratic primary election.

“Free and fair elections are the foundation of our democracy. Undermining the petition process in an attempt to get on the ballot in an election violates the public’s trust,” Rocah said.

Scott was charged with offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree, a felony, and was issued a desk appearance ticket for an April 30 arraignment in White Plains City Court. It is a class E felony. According to the District Attorney’s office, there is a wide range of potential sentences associated with this charge, ranging from a minimum of probation up to a maximum of one and a third  to four years in state prison.

The DA alleges that on April 10, 2023 Scott filed designating petitions with the Westchester County Board of Elections containing forged signatures of eight individuals who told DA’s Office investigators that they never signed a petition for the defendant.  The alleged forged signatures appeared on three of the 37 sheets that the defendant signed as a witness, the complaint alleges.

The Criminal Investigators Squad of the DA’s Office launched an investigation in July 2023 after receiving complaints from individuals whose signatures were forged. The case is being prosecuted by the Public Integrity and Law Enforcement Integrity Bureau.

Scott told The Herald that he was issued a desk appearance ticket and will have to go to court and take it from there. “It wasn’t like a dramatic, crazy thing it was very respectful. I have been in communication and in full cooperation with the DAs office since the beginning of this complaint and hope the matter can be put behind us shortly so that I, as an elected official, can get back to what’s most important, which is being in service of our community. I ask for patience as we sort through the matter, Councilman Scott said.

Scott’s ballot petitions challenged in court last April

Allegations charging Scott with falsifying signatures on his ballot petitions first surfaced in April 2023 when a lawsuit was filed against Scott and the Westchester County Board of Elections by Democratic party official Marcia Stone, Vice-Chair of the Yorktown Democratic Committee, and County Legislator Smith.

In their lawsuit, Stone and Smith listed 26 reasons the Scott ballots should be rejected. The allegations included signatures not signed by the person named, people who were not registered Democrats, alterations made to dates and signatures, signatures from people who had already signed Smith’s petitions earlier and that some signatures were forged and written by the same hand.

Four Peekskill residents – Debby and Bob Mickelson and Cathy Martone and David Hallerman – told the Journal News that their signatures were forged on Scott’s petitions.

All those allegations in the lawsuit became moot when the Board rejected Scott’s petitions and kept him off the ballot. The Board did not have the authority to pursue criminal charges and the matter seemed to be at an end. Now the County District Attorney’s office has charged Scott with criminal acts.

“Although I am disheartened at the news of Councilman Scott’s arrest, I applaud the District Attorney’s office for taking a strong stance on public integrity. Clearly, there was enough evidence of criminal conduct to warrant bringing these charges. Our elected officials must be held to a higher standard. Let this arrest serve as a warning to those who would attempt to subvert the rule of law for their own selfish gain that such self-serving behavior will not be tolerated. Councilman Scott should immediately resign,” County Legislator Colin Smith said.

Scott denied any wrongdoing in comments last year

In a published report last year, Scott denied forging signatures on his petitions and said that he was stunned to learn that his petition included the names of people who had not signed, including three dead people.

In his biography on the city website, Scott says he’s been a resident of Peekskill for over 25 years and is the owner/operator of the health establishment, PK Blendz Juice Bar.

Rob Scott at his business on Main Street. (Photo by Regina Clarkin)

“Scott is a vegan and licensed personal trainer. Mr. Scott is dedicated to building strong healthy families in the City of Peekskill through education and equitable grown. He is also a father of two children whom he is raising with his wife and high school sweetheart of 25 plus years,” his website bio reads.

“I’m a believer that we have the power to define and redefine, reality is only a reflection of our thoughts” – Rob Scott

SOURCE:

2024 Race

Over 9,000 uncounted mail-in ballots found in Illinois election

Published

on

By

The Chicago Board of Elections revealed on Saturday that more than 10,000 ballots hadn’t been included in previous vote totals by mistake, making unofficial counts lower than expected.

Preliminary Report:

SOURCE: https://cboeresults.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/results/Summary%20Report%20(2%20Column).pdf

In a news release, a spokesperson for the CBOE explained that while adding up vote-by-mail ballots, he accidentally left out additional ballots that had been delivered by the U.S. Postal Service on Monday.

“I traded speed for accuracy in reporting out numbers this week as quickly as I could,” spokesperson Max Bever said in a statement, in part. “I truly regret this error on my part and for the confusion that it has caused the voters of Chicago.”

The 10,659 ballots in question were added to the unofficial vote count on Saturday, increasing the total of ballots cast in Chicago to 368,990. Voter turnout citywide was reported to be 24.44% out of 1,509,554 registered voters.

Recent elections have sparked widespread discussions and debates regarding the integrity of the electoral process. As citizens grapple with various viewpoints and concerns, questions surrounding election integrity have taken center stage in political discourse.

One of the key issues that has emerged is the security and reliability of voting systems. With advancements in technology, concerns have been raised about the susceptibility of electronic voting machines to hacking and manipulation. Critics argue that these vulnerabilities could potentially undermine the integrity of election results and erode public trust in the democratic process.

Furthermore, the handling and counting of ballots have also come under scrutiny. Allegations of irregularities, such as ballot tampering or mishandling, have led to calls for increased transparency and oversight in the electoral process. Some argue that stringent safeguards and protocols are necessary to ensure the accuracy and fairness of vote tabulation.

Another area of contention is voter identification laws. Proponents argue that such laws are essential for preventing voter fraud and maintaining the integrity of elections. They contend that requiring voters to present identification helps verify their eligibility and prevents unauthorized individuals from casting ballots. However, critics argue that these laws disproportionately disenfranchise marginalized communities, such as low-income or minority voters, who may face barriers to obtaining valid identification.

Additionally, concerns have been raised about the role of money in politics and its potential to influence election outcomes. The influx of campaign contributions from special interest groups and wealthy donors has raised questions about the fairness and transparency of the electoral process. Critics argue that the influence of money in politics undermines the principle of equal representation and gives undue advantage to powerful interests.

Amidst these debates, calls for reform and strengthening of election laws and regulations have grown louder. Advocates emphasize the need for comprehensive measures to safeguard the integrity of elections, including increased funding for election security, implementation of robust auditing procedures, and expansion of voter access while ensuring strict enforcement of anti-fraud measures.

Ultimately, the issue of election integrity remains a complex and multifaceted challenge. As citizens and policymakers grapple with these questions, finding common ground and implementing effective solutions will be essential to uphold the integrity and legitimacy of the democratic process.

SOURCE: NBC NEWS

Continue Reading

Censorship

BOMBSHELL: New documents reveal that CISA tried censoring pro-Trump tweets in attempt to hide potential election fraud

Published

on

Today, America First Legal (AFL) released documents obtained from litigation against the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), revealing CISA flagged text messages supporting President Donald J. Trump for potential censorship. 

Documents previously obtained by AFL reveal that CISA was actively working to censor narratives about mail-in voting risks as “disinformation” ahead of the 2020 election. These new documents released today reveal that even after the election took place, CISA continued to be more concerned with securing Director Krebs’s narrative that this was “the most secure in American history,” rather than investigating whether the election was actually secure.

CISA Flagging Pro-Trump Political Text Messages

On November 9, 2020, the day after the 2020 election, Brian Scully, a member of the “DHS Countering Foreign Interference Task Force” of CISA, sent an email with the subject “Text Msgs.” The email contained screenshots of fundraising texts for President Trump and the #StopTheSteal effort.

In his email, Scully noted, “A text message I just received. Fundraising around stop the steal.” 

A colleague at CISA replied “What’s your thoughts on how to handle? Or just for FYSA?” This email suggests that CISA was looking for every opportunity to take action to potentially censor conservative pro-Trump speech. 

Scully replied, “I think FYSA. Not sure we can do anything with something I get on my own.”

CISA’s Post-election “Disinformation Sitrep”

After election day, CISA continued to collect mis- and dis-information reports through “official channels” and “3rd Party fact checkers.” Despite CISA’s understanding that the 2020 election actually presented more risks due to the widespread adoption of mail-in voting, CISA officials automatically assumed all reported suspicions of fraud to be part of a “False Narrative” that required “counter-messaging.”

VIEW DOCUMENTS REVEALED BELOW:

Continue Reading

2024 Race

Supreme Court Signals Potential Reversal of Colorado Trump Ballot Decision

Published

on

In a pivotal session on Thursday, the majority of Supreme Court justices hinted at their inclination to overturn a Colorado ruling that prevented former President Donald Trump from appearing on the state’s Republican presidential primary ballot.

Trump, 77, alongside his legal team, sought an appeal against Colorado’s Supreme Court decision from December 19. The ruling had declared Trump ineligible for the March 5 Republican primary, citing his violation of the Constitution’s “Insurrection Clause” during the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

Trump’s legal representatives put forth multiple arguments during the oral proceedings. They contended that Congress, rather than individual states, held the responsibility to enforce the clause. Moreover, they denied Trump’s involvement in an insurrection, asserting that seeking to remain in office after his 2020 election defeat did not constitute such an act.

Chief Justice John Roberts expressed concerns about the potential ramifications of upholding the Colorado ruling. He apprehensively highlighted the risk of states arbitrarily removing politicians from opposing parties from the ballot, which could significantly impact presidential elections.

Amidst the legal deliberations, liberal Justice Elena Kagan raised the fundamental question of why one state should possess the authority to determine the eligibility of a presidential candidate.

Justice Samuel Alito presented a hypothetical scenario questioning the administration’s decisions regarding foreign policy, emphasizing the complexities surrounding diplomatic relationships, particularly referencing the Obama-Biden era’s policy towards Iran.

The crux of the matter lies in Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which explicitly bars individuals engaged in insurrection or rebellion from holding office under the United States. This clause also grants Congress the power to lift such disqualifications and reinstate violators onto the ballot.

Notably, some of Trump’s congressional allies proposed legislation to formally declare his non-involvement in the Capitol riot, thereby paving the way for his inclusion on the ballot.

Throughout the proceedings, Justice Sonia Sotomayor appeared skeptical of arguments favoring Congress as the primary enforcer of the clause. She underscored the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds majority for disqualification removal, juxtaposing it with Trump’s attorney Jonathan Mitchell’s indication of a simple majority.

In response to inquiries from various justices, Mitchell emphasized Trump’s assertion of presidential immunity and rejected the characterization of the Capitol incident as an insurrection, labeling it a riot instead.

The debate also touched upon whether the presidency falls under the purview of the disqualification clause, with Mitchell arguing against its inclusion.

Attorney Jason Murray, representing Colorado voters seeking Trump’s removal from the ballot, emphasized the absence of a rational basis for creating a special exemption to the clause tailored to Trump.

As the legal discourse unfolds, the Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision holds significant implications, not only for Trump’s candidacy but also for the broader interpretation of constitutional provisions governing presidential eligibility.

Continue Reading

Trending