This documentary on the California primary is very disturbing. It has accounts from numerous poll workers of voters being told that the computer system showed specific voters as having requested to vote by mail, which meant they were supposedly mailed a ballot. Not only did many say they never got a ballot, many said they had never signed up to vote by mail. And this includes voters who said they had never heard of vote by mail.
Those voters who showed up at the polls who were listed as “vote by mail” would only be given provisional ballot. On top of that, if they were registered “no party preference” they would have to ask specifically for a “crossover ballot” in order to vote. In fairness, I was told that many poll workers were more helpful, but this description from Greg Palast makes clear how the intent was to suppress their vote:
This is from the official [California] Election Officer Training Manual page 49:
“A No Party Preference voter will need to request a crossover ballot from the Roster Index Officer. (Do not offer them a crossover ballot if they do not ask).”
They’re not kidding. Poll worker Jeff Lewis filed a description of the training in an official declaration to a federal court:
Someone raised their hand and asked a follow-up question: ‘So, what if someone gets a nonpartisan ballot, notices it doesn’t have the presidential candidates on it, and asks you where they are?’ The answer poll workers are instructed to give: ‘Sorry, NPP ballots don’t have presidential candidates on them.’ That’s correct: even when people ask questions of that nature, obviously intending to vote with a party.
Remember, “no party preference” voters were expected to skew heavily to Sanders. In addition, there are first person accounts of voters who were registered as Democrat listed at the polling station as “no party preference” or Republican, or similarly that their party preference had been switched when they got their mail-in ballot.
Moreover, if someone filed a provisional ballot and there was a ballot mailed in for them, the vote by mail ballot takes precedence. Doesn’t this seem like a prescription for fraud?
Please circulate this post (or the video) widely. And thank Catherine A for making sure I didn’t miss it.