File Under That Never Happens

That being vote fraud, which the jackasses assure us is not a problem while working to hinder the Presidential Comission on Election Integrity. Now we see why California is among the states not participating.

LA County Admits Number Of Registered Voters At 144% Of Resident Citizens Of Voting Age

By Mike Shedlock,, via ZeroHedge

The Election Integrity Project California provides a list of 11 California counties that have more registered voters than voting-age citizens.

In addition, Los Angeles County officials informed the project that “the number of registered voters now stands at a number that is a whopping 144% of the total number of resident citizens of voting age.”

The Election Integrity Project California, Inc. has joined Judicial Watch, Inc., a non-partisan organization in Washington, D.C., in sending a National Voter Registration Act (“NVRA”) Section 8 notice of violation letter to California Secretary of State, Alex Padilla.

NVRA Complaint Excerpts

Dear Secretary Padilla:

From public records obtained on the Election Assistance Commission (“EAC”) 2016 Election Administration Voting Survey (“EAVS”), and through verbal accounts from various county agencies, eleven (11) counties in California have more total registered voters than citizen voting age population (CVAP) calculated by the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2011-2015 American Community Survey. This is strong circumstantial evidence that California municipalities are not conducting reasonable voter registration list maintenance as mandated under the NVRA.

This letter serves as statutory notice that Election Integrity Project California, Inc., a registered non-profit corporation in California, and Judicial Watch, Inc., will bring a lawsuit against you and, if appropriate, against the counties named in this letter, if you do not take specific actions to correct these violations of Section 8 within 90 days.

The following information explains how we determined that your state and the counties named are in violation of NVRA Section 8 and the remedial steps that must be taken to comply with the law.

1. Eleven California Counties Have More Total Registered Voters Than Citizen Voting Age Population
Based on our review of 2016 EAC EAVS report, the 2011-2015 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, and the most recent California total active and total inactive voter registration records, California is failing to comply with the voter registration list maintenance requirements of Section 8 of the NVRA. For example, a comparison of the 2011-2015 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, and the most recent California active and inactive voter registration records shows there were more total registered voters than there were adults over the age of 18 living in each of the following eleven (11) counties: Imperial (102%), Lassen (102%), Los Angeles (112%), Monterey (104%), San Diego (138%), San Francisco (114%), San Mateo (111%), Santa Cruz (109%), Solano (111%), Stanislaus (102%), and Yolo (110%). Our own research shows that the situation in these counties is, if anything, worse than the foregoing data suggest. For example, we contacted Los Angeles County directly this past June. At that time, county officials informed us that the total number of registered voters now stands at a number that is a whopping 144% of the total number of resident citizens of voting age.

2. The NVRA Requires You to Undertake Reasonable Efforts to Maintain Accurate Lists of Eligible Registered Voters

3. Failure to Comply with NVRA Subjects You to Lawsuits and Financial Costs
In passing the NVRA, Congress authorized a private right of action to enforce the provisions of the NVRA, including Section 8. Accordingly, private persons may bring a lawsuit under the NVRA if the violations identified herein are not corrected within 90 days of receipt of this letter.

4. Avoiding Litigation
We hope you will promptly initiate efforts to comply with Section 8 so that no lawsuit will be necessary. We ask you and, to the extent that they wish to respond separately, each county identified in this letter, to please respond to this letter in writing no later than 30 days from today informing us of the compliance steps you are taking. Specifically, we ask you to: (1) conduct or implement a systematic, uniform, nondiscriminatory program to remove from the list of eligible voters the names of persons who have become ineligible to vote by reason of a change in residence; and (2) conduct or implement additional routine measures to remove from the list of eligible voters the names of persons who have become ineligible to vote by reason of death, change in residence, or a disqualifying criminal conviction, and to remove noncitizens who have registered to vote unlawfully.

5. Production of Records
Finally, pursuant to your obligations under the NVRA,15 your office and, to the extent that they keep records separately from your office, each county named in this letter, should make available to us all pertinent records concerning “the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency” of California’s official eligible voter lists during the past 2 years. Please include these records with your response to this letter.

I hope that the concerns identified in this letter can be resolved amicably. However, if we believe you do not intend to correct the above-identified problems, a federal lawsuit seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against you may be necessary. We look forward to receiving your prompt response.

s/ Robert D. Popper
Robert D. Popper
Attorney, Judicial Watch, Inc.

I note for the record that [edit] 10 of the 11 counties named are dominated by the Jackass party as is the State Government here in California.

Weekend Caption Contest™ Winners Week of August 4, 2017
Wizbang Weekend Caption Contest™
  • Scalia

    As if anybody is surprised by the liberal disdain for the law. The law, according to liberal logic, is used to punish conservatives. It doesn’t apply to liberals. How does one clean up a society that embraces the-end-justifies-the-means philosophy?

  • yetanotherjohn

    I did a quick bit of calculation using Leip’s political atlas. In all of those counties named, Clinton won except Lassen (which had less than 10,000 total votes cast for Clinton and Trump).
    Combined the counties provided 2,668,903 more votes for Clinton than Trump. If you assume that the “excess registrations” all went to Clinton, that is 979,433 votes for Clinton. Clinton received 2,868,518 more popular votes than Trump. So all but 199,615 of that popular vote advantage can be traced to these 11 California counties. Of course California as a whole had Clinton win by over 4 million.
    Further, remember this is just where the system has become egregious, more voters registered than US citizens. According to, in 2016, 66.8% of eligible voters were registered. So while getting to 100+% without cheating is clearly out of bounds, counties that have a much higher than 66.8% can also be looked at with a skeptical eye.
    If you take these counties that went for Clinton and assume that all the votes over 66.8% went for Clinton, that totals 1,926, 551 or nearly half the extra votes Clinton got in California. In short, maybe the entire democratic dominance in California is based on voter fraud?

    • It does start to smell that way.

    • Wouldn’t be at all surprised. That and gerrymandering.

      • Brett Buck

        There’s no point in gerrymandering it when you are signing up hordes of illegal aliens,

    • jim_m

      If only 66.8% of eligible voters are registered and voter rolls show 144% registered that would indicates that half the vote in those counties(Or more depending on turn out) is fraudulent.

      • yetanotherjohn

        The 66.8% is a national average, so you would expect some counties to be above that and some below. The 144% is the most latest numbers with earlier in the decade being lower. This is just 11 counties that are so bad you can’t ignore what is going on. I suspect there are more “99%” where only a third of the votes are suspect.
        The real question becomes who or what are these extra voters. Are they “honest” but poorly maintained voters roles where the dead and the moved remain? Or are they illegal aliens who shouldn’t be allowed to vote? Or are the extra registered voters the most reliable voters (showing up every election and voting straight democratic because they don’t exist)?
        If it is the first case, then nothing really changes, its just bureaucratic incompetence. The lawsuit can force them to clean up their rolls. If it is the second case, I hope the left fights this nationally (sorry Californians). I would love to see the left take there screed to the next level and demand that illegal aliens should have the same voting rights as US citizens. If it is the last case, then think about 2016. Clinton won California by 30 points. If 33% of the voters are fraudulent voters voting based on the democratic machine, then absent that fraud, Trump would have won California. If that fraud gets exposed and broken, then the dems are really in trouble. If they didn’t start with 55 EV from CA, imagine what a dem national campaign would look like. If it is this bad in California, then imagine what NY and IL would be like. If all three states were fraudulent and the dems didn’t get to bank their 104 EV at the start of every presidential campaign, could the dems ever hope to win again?

      • yetanotherjohn

        FYI, Politco has incomplete numbers for the election. As an example, they show Los Angeles county (one of the offenders) as 1,893,770 for Clinton, 620,285 for Trump. (aka Dave Leips atlas) has more complete numbers of 2,464,364 for Clinton, 769,743 for Trump.
        The essence stays the same, but the total for the 11 counties is 4,240,793 for Clinton, 1,571,890 for Trump. The difference is probably because Politico reports the numbers and then moves on. Leip reports the numbers and sells them as data sets. If you are selling a product, you are more likely to try and maintain quality control vs just being democratic operative with a by line and worrying more about maintaining the narrative.

  • Same thing happened in Texas a few years back, but I think it was closer to 20 counties with more registered voters than eligible voters.

    • I believe that was more than a few decades ago.

      • yetanotherjohn

        Actually, this was only a couple of years ago. There were 8 counties with about 50,000 total voters out of the 15 million registered voters in Texas. Not enough to swing an election, but still something that had to be addressed. The counties tended to be smaller counties (especially given they averaged about 6,000 per county) and declining. The issue was more people moved/died than the clerks could track.

        • I was referring to the 1960 election.

          • yetanotherjohn

            That is a whole other story and reflects the state when dems ran things.

            LBJ: “How many votes did we get?”
            Clerk: “How many do you need?”

          • Exactly.

      • Could have happened more than once. I read this instance, which had happened recently at the time, online, and I wasn’t online three decades ago.

        • yetanotherjohn

          Likely the 2015 instance of 8 counties I posted below.

          • Awfully big coincidence if it wasn’t!

  • Wild_Willie

    One on the biggest mistakes some people make is underestimating President Trump. When he makes a statement, he usually has the data to prove it. He stated there were 3m illegal votes in the election and he is of course right. Time will tell. California is being found out to be the biggest fraud state in the union. I encourage President Trump to encourage the state from seceding as it wants to do. The states government is out of control and disregarding the constitution when it doesn’t fit their notion of social construct.

    It is way over time to call their bluff.

  • pennywit

    Is there evidence this is due to intent or to negligence?

    • Given Motor Voter I’d say intent is well established.

    • yetanotherjohn

      The instances in Texas turned out to be negligence. One official gave a deposition wherein he stated he didn’t even realize that was part of his job (sigh). Nothing yet known about CA, but given that we are talking Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, etc. we aren’t talking small podunk counties (with the exception of Lassen which seems to have less than 10 residents/voter registrations).

      • pennywit

        I would really like to find out what’s going on here.

        • yetanotherjohn

          In Texas the pattern tends to be send the demand letter, if it is just “busy”/”incompetent”/”I’m supposed to do that?” then they quickly settle, taking steps to clear the dead wood out, remove felons, illegals, etc. If the county decides to fight, there tends to be more of the nefarious going on.
          My prediction, Lassen county will quickly settle. They will spend a lot less doing their job rather than fighting the suit.
          Imperial, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco will fight the suit. I suspect we will find a large number of illegals voting. The counties will likely lose and then they will see court ordered reforms. I don’t know what will happen with the other counties.
          The stuff that they want them to do is real simple and straightforward. For example, usually down the hall is an office that handles jury selection. They send out notices for jury duty and get back people saying they aren’t a citizen, they are a felon or whatever excusing them from jury duty. The jury selection people put those people in a data base so they don’t send another jury selection request. The voter people have to go through the list and see if there are any registered voters saying they aren’t a US citizen or are a felon. Most of it is just comparing one list to another. Most of that can be done by software. Send a letter if there is a problem flagged so the voter can address the issue if needed. It really ought to be the law for all to do that and presumptive that there is a problem if they aren’t doing it.

          • Santa Cruz county will go full retard, Monterey will be a crapshoot. Both have significant student transient populations.

          • yetanotherjohn

            Will they fight it because they will fight anything not from the left, because they see it as a huge job (e.g. students moving in and out constantly) or because they really have something to hide. That is the real question.

      • pennywit

        Incidentally, the “oh was that my job?” guy reminds me of a story I read back in the 90s. A Libertarian was running for the elected post of Lubbock County Weigher. The job called for weighing oranges grown in the county …. of which there were none. The Libertarian was running to get the job shut down. Nobody was sure where it had come from, but most likely it had been conceived as a sinecure back when machine politics were much stronger.

        • yetanotherjohn

          The “I’m supposed to do that” didn’t know that the NVRA existed requiring him to clear out the rolls. He new he was supposed to maintain the list, but not that he was supposed to periodically figure out if the list was valid.

          • pennywit

            Ah, municipal politics …

          • yetanotherjohn

            Actually this is more rural politics. The positions are county positions and with 254 counties, they won’t all be the same.

          • pennywit

            I should have said “Ah, local politics.” Local politics is a … colorful … milieu.

          • yetanotherjohn

            All politics is local – Tip O’Neill
            Of course that was back when the dems were more diverse and didn’t have such a fetish for conformity. Funny, when the dems were willing to have a conversation with those who didn’t believe exactly what they believed, they had the majority in house and senate. Now that the dems are dominated by the left and the slightest non-conformity is grounds for shunning and shaming, they don’t seem to be doing as well. Oh well, I’m sure if they just double down, stick their fingers in their ears and shout “racist” ever louder at anyone who says something that challenges their preconceptions and bigotry, they will soon return to majorities in both chambers.

          • pennywit

            I remember Tip O’Neill’s maxim. I think things have gone the other way these days, with politics turning national. The right wing did a pretty good job building that up — media like talk radio and Fox News helped conservatives build a broad national identity. (And I’m not saying that pejoratively. Even if I disagree with somebody politically, I know a successful political operation when I see it).

            That said, I think it’s a little annoying that the national politics have seeped into local government. I truly don’t care about my mayor’s opinion of abortion, for example. When I vote for my city council, I’m interested in sewers, streets, schools, and property taxes. Everything else is irrelevant.

            As far as the national politics go … I’ve felt for some time that the Republicans were unhealthily dedicated to ideological homogeneity, with folks being shown the door if they didn’t toe the party’s line on abortion and gun rights.

            I’m not happy that I’m seeing similar behavior on the Democratic side now. Democratic grassroots recently got in a tizzy when the national leadership said something to the effect of “We might need to bring in some candidates who oppose abortion if we want to win this thing.”

          • yetanotherjohn

            Actually, the national bleeding into the local makes more sense than you seem to give credit. On the right, limited government means limited at every level. Low taxes can be low taxes at every level. Not harboring criminals because they previously broke the law on immigration is very much a local issue. I have a hard time thinking of any national issue on the right that doesn’t have a local aspect. Even national defense is about an attitude on community that may not impact local directly, but those who support defending the nation tend to support a strong community in my experience.
            On the left, what flavor of victim status you can claim (gender, race, sex, etc) very much bleeds down into local politics.
            Those basic blocking and tackling government issues (sewers, roads, etc) are perfectly at home on the right. Those are the limited government functions. But on the left, worrying about who goes into which bathroom doesn’t get the sewage lines laid.
            I think the rise in republicans at all levels reflects this. The problems in urban cities dominated by the left (e.g. Detroit, NY, Baltimore, etc) reflect what happens when the left’s mindset filters into the local politics.
            I don’t think there is as much uniformity on abortion in the GOP as you seem to think. It is more one of those issues that a lot of republicans agree to disagree. Is it protecting a human life (a limited government function) or is it a personal choice about a blob of cells (not a limited government function)? That is a fundamental question that those on the right can disagree on the underlying question (life vs just cells) but acknowledge the other sides results from that question (if it is a life, it should be protected; if it is just cells the government should keep its nose out). At the same time, we recognize that the decision has been made by the supremes and what ever our opinion, isn’t going to change any time soon.
            Gun control is a simple constitutional right. Should blacks be allowed to vote? Not a lot of controversy on the issue on the left or the right. The dems tried really hard to keep them from voting for a long time, but those days are past. They have a constitutional right. The second amendment is also a constitutional right. You don’t like it, change the constitution. Again, on the right I think the uniformity has more to do with the underlying issue. 1) its a constitutional right, 2) even if you don’t own a gun it is comfortable under limited government not to feel the need to impose your views on others and 3) there is the practical aspect that when life or death crime decisions are seconds away, the police are only minutes away.
            The recent google firing of someone who dared to question the lefts orthodoxy is a prime example of the lefts monoculture. The issue isn’t how to fulfill the functions of a company (i.e. making a product that makes a profit), but conformity. The women’s march rejecting lesbian jews is another example of conformity uber alles on the left.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            “The recent google firing of someone who dared to question the lefts orthodoxy is a prime example of the lefts monoculture.”

            You mean when a memo from an employee who espoused that women are less successful in tech because of their biology went public, they fired him? That is just good business.

          • Guess who’s spewing the Progtard orthodoxy without actually reading the source document?


            We’ll wait.

          • WHO’S THE BUSTER

            I know, I was supposed to concentrate on his criticism of their liberal ways. Perhaps that would have worked if he did not include the component that was blatantly sexist.

          • You are off topic and clearly have not read the source document.

          • yetanotherjohn

            If you don’t know that women and men are different, I feel very sorry for you. Does the difference explain their different participation rates in programming? I don’t know. But your not even being willing to entertain the question as anything but “blatantly sexist” is an example of the total lack of reasoning ability and tolerance on the left.

          • Scalia

            I echo Rodney’s sentiments and am waiting for a reply from you on this thread’s topic.

          • You will wait in vain.

          • Rdm42

            Facts are neither sexist nor egalitarian, they are just facts.

          • pennywit

            Incidentally, my own experience with local governments is that while some of the professional folks — city managers, police chiefs, and such — seem to be reasonably competent, the elected leaders like mayors and city council members (and county board members) are something of a mixed bag. There seem to be a LOT of people in local politics who take everything personally.