Republican Board of Elections Members Reveal Deceit, Trickery in Run-Up to Collusive Settlement
Republican member reveals Democratic AG Josh Stein’s office withheld key information, falsely claimed judge would rule against Republicans without settlement
Stein’s office did not tell Republican BOE members that a federal judge had already rejected the rewrite to election laws sought in state lawsuit
Raleigh, N.C. — More information came out last night on the corrupt, collusive lawsuit settlement agreed to by the Democratic Party-controlled Board of Elections and national Democrats that undoes state law to protect against absentee ballot fraud.
Though both the Board of Elections and the legislature are co-defendants in the lawsuit, the Board of Elections secretly negotiated with the plaintiffs to rewrite the law to make absentee ballot fraud easier. The legislature knew nothing about the collusive settlement until it was submitted to the judge.
The partisan Board of Elections has tried to claim that the two Republicans on the board also supported the settlement because it was common sense and non-controversial.
But in a shocking development last night, both Republican board members resigned their seats. In his resignation letter, board member Ken Raymond revealed that Democratic Attorney General Josh Stein’s office withheld key information from him when explaining the settlement, including “the fact that a lot of the concessions made in the settlement have already been denied in a prior case by a federal judge and another case by a state court three-judge panel.”
The Republican board members also revealed that Stein’s office falsely claimed that, without a settlement, a judge would rule against the Board of Elections and throw the election into chaos.
Senate Leader Phil Berger (R-Rockingham) said, “According to the Republican board members, Democratic Attorney General Stein withheld key information and deceived them by failing to reveal that state and federal courts had already rejected absentee ballot changes sought by Democratic Plaintiffs and falsely claiming courts would rule for those Plaintiffs. Attorney General Stein now says that this controversy is ‘political theater at its most destructive’ and he’s right. This scheme strikes at the very heart of our elective process. The elimination of absentee ballot fraud protections in the Democrats’ corrupt, collusive settlement is part of a long-term effort already rejected by a near-unanimous legislature, a federal judge and a three-judge state court panel. Why did the Democrats concoct this performance in secret?”
Berger continued, “Board of Elections Democrats have repeatedly tried to enact these policies for months. They lost when the legislature rejected them almost unanimously; they lost when a federal judge rejected them; they lost when a state court rejected them. Now they’ve resorted to deceit and trickery by withholding key information from Republicans and secretly negotiating with Democratic plaintiffs to produce a collusive settlement that enables a repeat of absentee ballot fraud such as occurred in the 9th Congressional District in 2018.”
A Timeline of Deceit and Collusion
On March 12, 2020, Democratic activist Board of Elections Executive Director Karen Brinson Bell brazenly sought to expand her own power to change elections rules by changing the definition of her emergency authority. The Rules Review Commission unanimously rejected Brinson Bell’s illegal power grab on May 21, 2020.
On March 26, 2020, Brinson Bell asked the legislature to eliminate the witness signature requirements for absentee ballots. In a near-unanimous vote, the legislature changed election laws in light of the pandemic but rejected Brinson Bell’s request.
On August 4, 2020, a federal judge rejected national Democrats’ attempt to change election laws in the way Brinson Bell advocated.
On August 18, national Democrats filed a different lawsuit to change election laws in the way Brinson Bell advocated.
On August 28, 2020, Gov. Roy Cooper filed suit to change the composition of the Rules Review Commission to give himself power.
On September 3, a three-judge panel of state judges rejected national Democrats’ attempt to change election laws in the way Brinson Bell advocated.
On September 22, in an apparent move of last resort, Brinson Bell and the partisan Board of Elections agreed to a collusive settlement they’d secretly negotiated with national Democrats to change election laws in the way Brinson Bell had long advocated.