A New Kind of Voter Fraud Discovered in Long County, Georgia Where People Voted Twice in June Primary Election
Evidence has been uncovered that shows voters in Long County Georgia voted twice in the June 9th primary election.
Mark Davis, a Georgia Republican political consultant, has been compiling an enhanced version of the Georgia voter database for three decades. Political organizations and candidates running for office in the great state of Georgia use the data Davis compiles to reach and communicate with Georgia voters.
Davis has been certified as an “expert witness” four times in Georgia court cases that concern election disputes, because of his years of experience working with the data.
“The attorney I work with on the most recent of these cases is Jake Evans, who many of you who live here in Georgia know.,” Davis said in a statement. He added, “In addition to specializing in election law, he is also the chairman of our State Ethics Commission. Thankfully, he cares about the integrity of the process as much as I do.”
Now a fifth case has come along thanks to newly discovered evidence, and it’s a real mind blower. This case involves a disputed primary election back in early June for a probate judge in Long County, which is located in South Georgia. The incumbent judge lost by only 9 votes. The judge was advised of some irregularities found in the election, and he challenged the results.
Davis was asked to take a look at data certified by the state and the county so he could review the alleged irregularities, and you’re not going to believe what he discovered.
The data showed people voted in the county who don’t live in the county, and people who moved out of the county came back to vote in the county where they no longer live.
But the biggest YIKES discovered in the data was that people voted more than once in the election.
“We received reports of a voter down there who had been telling people he voted twice in the election,” Davis said of the voter fraud. “When we spoke with him, he actually admitted it. In fact he said he did it ‘Just to see if he could,’ and after he cast his vote, he walked outside, saw the county Sheriff, and walked right up to him and told him what he’d just done.” Of course, there’s no way to corroborate that he told the Sheriff, but he did admit to voter fraud.
Here’s where it gets good. After the conversation with the double voter, Davis went back to the data and compared the early and absentee voters to the sign in data from election day. This would be people who already voted by early or absentee ballot and then signed in to vote on Election Day.
His query returned 14 matches. He discovered that seven of those had their previous votes canceled, exactly as they should have been, but the remaining 7 were not.
“In other words, the data shows they voted twice in the election,” Davis explained. “The list is bipartisan – 3 Democrat votes and 4 Republican votes. Of those voters, 3 voted early in person, also known as “In person absentee”, and 4 mailed in absentee ballots.”
As it stands, the compiled evidence consists of copies of absentee ballot requests for people who voted by mail, along with data showing the early absentee ballots were received and accepted by the county. On the flip side, they also have copies of the sign-in sheets from Election Day, along with the sign-in data from the day of the election showing they were they were placed on the numbered list of voters and allowed to vote again.
“Before this case, I honestly didn’t even think that was possible,” Davis said.
And that’s not all. They also found numerous irregularities with absentee voting, things like unsigned absentee ballots that should not have been counted, and ballots that were improperly requested by a third party, and then absentee ballots that were approved without legally acceptable identification. Information has also come to light that absentee ballots were counted the day before the election without issuing the proper proper 7 day notice to the Secretary of State, and there were no official observers present. Long County is tiny in the scheme of things, but this has opened up a huge can of worms.
Unless the county concedes the election, the case will go to trial. A court date is already set for September 8th.
Davis said he is eager to do the same type of analysis in other counties throughout the state, particularly the larger ones, to find out if the same irregularities materialize, intentionally or unintentionally, and he vows that when this court case is over he will do exactly that.
One note: In the state of Georgia, elections are conducted and certified by each individual county. Once certified, the results are then reported to the Georgia Secretary of State.