Wisconsin

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Allies Are Still Feeding the False 2020 Election Narrative

      by

      Fifteen months after they tried and failed to overturn the 2020 election, the same group of lawyers and associates is continuing efforts to “decertify” the vote, feeding a false narrative.A group of President Donald J. Trump’s allies and associates spent months trying to overturn the 2020 election based on his lie that he was the true winner.Now, some of the same confidants who tried and failed to invalidate the results based on a set of bogus legal theories are pushing an even wilder sequel: that by “decertifying” the 2020 vote in key states, the outcome can still be reversed.In statehouses and courtrooms across the country, as well as on right-wing news outlets, allies of Mr. Trump — including the lawyer John Eastman — are pressing for states to pass resolutions rescinding Electoral College votes for President Biden and to bring lawsuits that seek to prove baseless claims of large-scale voter fraud. Some of those allies are casting their work as a precursor to reinstating the former president.The efforts have failed to change any statewide outcomes or uncover mass election fraud. Legal experts dismiss them as preposterous, noting that there is no plausible scenario under the Constitution for returning Mr. Trump to office.But just as Mr. Eastman’s original plan to use Congress’s final count of electoral votes on Jan. 6, 2021, to overturn the election was seen as far-fetched in the run-up to the deadly Capitol riot, the continued efforts are fueling a false narrative that has resonated with Mr. Trump’s supporters and stoked their grievances. They are keeping alive the same combustible stew of conspiracy theory and misinformation that threatens to undermine faith in democracy by nurturing the lie that the election was corrupt.The efforts have fed a cottage industry of podcasts and television appearances centered around not only false claims of widespread election fraud in 2020, but the notion that the results can still be altered after the fact — and Mr. Trump returned to power, an idea that he continues to push privately as he looks toward a probable re-election run in 2024.Democrats and some Republicans have raised deep concerns about the impact of the decertification efforts. They warn of unintended consequences, including the potential to incite violence of the sort that erupted on Jan. 6, when a mob of Mr. Trump’s supporters — convinced that he could still be declared the winner of the 2020 election — stormed the Capitol. Legal experts worry that the focus on decertifying the last election could pave the way for more aggressive — and earlier — legislative intervention the next time around.“At the moment, there is no other way to say it: This is the clearest and most present danger to our democracy,” said J. Michael Luttig, a leading conservative lawyer and former appeals court judge, for whom Mr. Eastman clerked and whom President George W. Bush considered as a nominee to be the chief justice of the United States. “Trump and his supporters in Congress and in the states are preparing now to lay the groundwork to overturn the election in 2024 were Trump, or his designee, to lose the vote for the presidency.”Most of Mr. Trump’s aides would like him to stop talking about 2020 — or, if he must, to focus on changes to voting laws across the country rather than his own fate. But like he did in 2020, when many officials declined to help him upend the election results, Mr. Trump has found a group of outside allies willing to take up an outlandish argument they know he wants to see made.The efforts have been led or loudly championed by Mike Lindell, the chief executive of MyPillow; Michael T. Flynn, Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser; Stephen K. Bannon, the former White House chief strategist; and Boris Epshteyn, an aide and associate of Mr. Trump’s.Another key player has been Mr. Eastman, the right-wing lawyer who persuaded Mr. Trump shortly after the election that Vice President Mike Pence could reject certified electoral votes for Mr. Biden when he presided over the congressional count and declare Mr. Trump the victor instead.Mr. Eastman wrote a memo and Mr. Epshteyn sent an email late last year to the main legislator pushing a decertification bill in Wisconsin, laying out a legal theory to justify the action. Mr. Eastman met last month with Robin Vos, the speaker of the State Assembly, and activists working across the country, a meeting that was reported earlier by The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.Jefferson Davis, an activist from Wisconsin, said he had asked Mr. Eastman to join the meeting after hearing about his work on behalf of Mr. Trump following the election.“If it was good enough for the president of the United States,” Mr. Davis said in an interview, “then his expertise was good enough to meet with Speaker Vos in Wisconsin on election fraud and what do we do to fix it.”Mr. Vos has maintained that the Legislature has no pathway to decertification, in line with the guidance of its own lawyers.John Eastman, left, has made clear that he has no intention of dropping his fight to show that the election was stolen.Jim Bourg/Reuters“There is no mechanism in state or federal law for the Legislature to reverse certified votes cast by the Electoral College and counted by Congress,” the lawyers wrote, adding that impeachment was the only way to remove a sitting president other than in the case of incapacity.But Mr. Eastman has made clear that he has no intention of dropping his fight to prove that the election was stolen. The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack has said his legal efforts to invalidate the results most likely violated the law by trying to defraud the American people. A federal judge recently agreed, calling Mr. Eastman’s actions “a coup in search of a legal theory.”Legal experts say his continued efforts could increase his criminal exposure; but if Mr. Eastman were ever to be charged with fraud, he could also point to his recent work as evidence that he truly believed the election was stolen.“There are a lot of things still percolating,” Mr. Eastman said in an interview with The New York Times last fall. He claimed that states had illegally given people the ability to cast votes in ways that should have been forbidden, corrupting the results. And he pointed to a widely debunked video from State Farm Arena in Atlanta, which he claimed showed that tabulation ballots were run through counting machines multiple times during the election.Charles Burnham, Mr. Eastman’s lawyer, said in a statement that he “was recently invited to lend his expertise to legislators and citizens in Wisconsin confronting significant evidence of election fraud and illegality. He did so in his role as a constitutional scholar and not on behalf of any client.”The fringe legal theory that Mr. Eastman and Mr. Epshteyn are promoting — which has been widely dismissed — holds that state lawmakers have the power to choose how electors are selected, and they can change them long after the Electoral College has certified votes if they find fraud and illegality sufficiently altered the outcome. The theory has surfaced in multiple states, including several that are political battlegrounds.As in Wisconsin, state legislators in Arizona drafted resolutions calling for the decertification of the 2020 election. In Georgia, a lawsuit sought to decertify the victories of the Democratic senators Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. And Robert Regan, a Republican favored to win a seat in the Michigan House, has said he wants to decertify the 2020 election either through a ballot petition or the courts.Mr. Bannon, Mr. Lindell and Mr. Epshteyn have repeatedly promoted decertification at the state level on Mr. Bannon’s podcast, “War Room,” since last summer, pushing it as a steady drumbeat and at times claiming that it could lead to Mr. Trump being put back into office. They have described the so-called audit movement that began in Arizona and spread to other states as part of a larger effort to decertify electoral votes.“We are on a full, full freight train to decertify,” Mr. Epshteyn said on the program in January. “That’s what we’re going to get. Everyone knows. Everyone knows this election was stolen.”Capitol Riot’s Aftermath: Key DevelopmentsCard 1 of 3Debating a criminal referral. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Supreme court ruling on Wisconsin maps highlights its hostility to voting rights

      by

      Supreme court ruling on Wisconsin maps highlights its hostility to voting rightsIt’s no secret the court has been hostile to voting rights recently – but what has changed is the ‘velocity’ that it is acting with Hello, and Happy Thursday,In the fall of 2017, I was sitting in the cramped press area at the supreme court as a lawyer named Paul Smith urged the justices to strike down the districts for the Wisconsin state assembly. They were so distorted in favor of Republicans, he argued, that they violated the US constitution. As Smith started to lay out his case, Chief Justice John Roberts cut in and laid out what he feared would happen if the supreme court were to step in and start policing electoral maps based on partisanship.Get the latest updates on voting rights in the Guardian’s Fight to vote newsletter“We will have to decide in every case whether the Democrats win or the Republicans win. So it’s going to be a problem here across the board. And if you’re the intelligent man on the street and the court issues a decision, and let’s say the Democrats win, and that person will say: ‘Well, why did the Democrats win?” Roberts said. “It must be because the supreme court preferred the Democrats over the Republicans. And that’s going to come out one case after another as these cases are brought in every state. And that is going to cause very serious harm to the status and integrity of the decisions of this court in the eyes of the country.”The supreme court eventually upheld the Wisconsin districts on technical grounds. But in 2019, the court removed itself and the entire federal judiciary from policing partisan gerrymandering. “Partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts,” Roberts wrote. He pointed to state courts as one potential forum where litigants could bring claims. Together, those two moments underscore how wary Roberts was of getting the court entangled in redistricting cases, highly politically charged disputes that could pose a serious threat to the court’s apolitical reputation.That’s why it was so stunning to see the supreme court intervene last week over Wisconsin’s new legislative maps. Instead of staying out of a redistricting dispute, the supreme court went out of its way to insert itself into the center of a dispute in one of America’s most politically competitive states.The Wisconsin case that arrived at the supreme court this year was a bit different from the one it considered in 2017. This time around, the state’s Republican legislature was challenging the state legislative districts that the Wisconsin supreme court picked for the state. Even though Republicans would still hold their majority under the new map, lawmakers took issue with the creation of an additional Black-majority district near Milwaukee. They said there wasn’t adequate justification for creating it, and made an emergency request to the supreme court to block the maps.In a seven-page unsigned opinion, the supreme court accepted that request last week. But it went further, using the case as an opportunity to interpret the Voting Rights Act in a narrow way without full briefing or oral argument in the case. Even longtime court observers were baffled.It’s no secret that the supreme court has been extremely hostile to voting rights recently. But what has changed is the “velocity” that the court is acting with, Richard Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Irvine, told me.“The supermajority of the conservative justices on the supreme court has become pretty emboldened. They’ve got a narrow vision of the scope of the Voting Rights Act. And they are not being shy about enforcing that as quickly as they can,” he told me. “What’s changed is how much more aggressive they’re willing to be.”That increased aggressiveness may in part be a function of the supreme court’s increased conservative majority. Back in 2017, when the court heard the first Wisconsin case, Anthony Kennedy was the swing justice on a court divided 5-4 between liberals and conservatives. Now, Kennedy is gone and conservatives have increased their majority to 6-3.Experts aren’t just alarmed by what the supreme court has been saying about voting rights, but also the way they have been going about it. The court had embraced an idea recently, called the Purcell principle, that courts should not upset the status quo when an election is near. But the justices have been inconsistent in how exactly it has applied that rule and have not really said how close an election must be before courts can’t intervene.In early February, for example, Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito said it was too close to Alabama’s 24 May primary to impose a new congressional map that would have increased Black representation. But in early March, when Kavanaugh made the same argument for upholding North Carolina’s congressional districts ahead of its 17 May primary, Alito, joined by Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, said it was not too close.And in the Wisconsin case, state election officials said any ruling that came after 15 March would “increase the risk of errors” as it prepared for its primary election in August. The supreme court intervened nine days after that deadline.“It is a sign that many of the brakes have come off,” Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas told me. “It’s a sign that the court is increasingly willing to do whatever the court wants to do, procedural constraints and sort of awkward timing nonwithstanding.”Also worth watching …
      Anyone who isn’t in jail or prison for a felony can vote, a three-judge panel in North Carolina ruled on Monday. The decision could affect up to 56,000 people in the state, though election officials aren’t letting people with felonies register just yet.
      Arizona Republicans passed a law requiring new voters to prove their citizenship to vote in a presidential election, which is probably illegal.
      Ohio voting rights groups are fuming after Republicans did a bait-and-switch to try again and get the state supreme court to approve gerrymandered maps.
      A committee of Georgia lawmakers stopped a proposal, for now, that would have expanded the Georgia bureau of investigation’s ability to investigate voter fraud, among other measures.
      TopicsUS supreme courtFight to voteUS politicsWisconsinRepublicansfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US state legislatures threaten citizens’ rights. We ignore them at our peril

      by

      US state legislatures threaten citizens’ rights. We ignore them at our perilThe bodies have become the engines of policymaking, behind Georgia’s voting restrictions and Florida’s ‘don’t say gay’ bill Hello, and happy Thursday,Since late last year, I have been intensely focused on the frantic efforts by both major parties to put themselves in the best position to win US House races this fall.State-by-state, lawmakers are undertaking the once-a-decade task of redrawing all 435 districts in the US House. In most states, legislatures are responsible for drawing the new lines, and to no one’s surprise, both parties have jostled to draw as many districts in their favor as possible. While many, including me, expected Republicans to dominate the process, because they have control of more legislatures, Democrats have been boosted as a result of anti-gerrymandering reforms and an aggressive legal strategy.Reading lots of analysis about what’s happening at the congressional level, I started thinking that there was a much more significant redistricting story that was being largely overlooked. As they’ve been drawing congressional districts, state lawmakers have also been redrawing districts for their state legislatures (yes, they are setting the boundaries for the districts they run in).US supreme court blocks new Wisconsin voting maps in boost for RepublicansRead moreThis lack of attention is significant because state legislatures have become the engines of policymaking in the US. Take a second and think about the most controversial pieces of legislation you’ve heard about recently. Maybe it’s the sweeping new voting restrictions in Georgia. The “don’t say gay” bill in Florida. Anti-abortion bills in Texas and Oklahoma. All of these measures were passed in state legislatures, not Congress. With the federal government bogged down in gridlock, state legislatures, where one party often has control, have become the forums to pass legislation on issues such as school funding and public health that directly affect people’s lives.“The gerrymandering of the state legislative maps, it’s actually more important than even the congressional gerrymandering,” David Pepper, a former chairman of the Ohio Democratic party, told me. “We have this repeat cycle where every few weeks an outrage of some state law that passed somewhere and then we all cover the court case. But very rarely do people go back and look at: ‘What’s the cause of all this craziness in states?’”Republicans currently control 62 legislative chambers, while Democrats control 36. There are 23 states where Republicans have complete control over state government, and 14 where Democrats do.While things are slightly better for Democrats than they were a decade ago, control of state legislatures is unlikely to change over the next decade. Just 17.5% of districts are estimated to be competitive, a slight decrease from a decade ago, according to Chris Warshaw, a political science professor at George Washington University.“Most of the plans are pretty uncompetitive and most are biased in favor of one of the two parties. So I don’t think we’re likely to see many state legislatures flip control over the next decade,” he said.Letting Republicans depress the vote is ‘not in the cards’: a US governor on a race that may shape democracyRead morePerhaps no state better embodies the consequences of state legislative gerrymandering than Wisconsin. The Wisconsin state assembly, the legislature’s lower chamber, is widely understood to be one of the most gerrymandered bodies in the US. It’s so distorted that it’s virtually impossible for Republicans to lose a majority in it – even if they got a minority of the vote, they would still be able to hold a majority of the seats.Republicans have used that advantage recently to press a slew of anti-democratic policies, including a partisan review of the 2020 election that made the impossible case for how the lawmakers could “decertify” the results of the 2020 race.Earlier this month, Democrats had hoped they would get a slight boost in the legislative maps. After looking at a range of proposals, the state supreme court picked a new legislative map submitted by Tony Evers, Wisconsin’s Democratic governor, saying it best complied with an earlier court order to make as little change as possible to the current maps.But on Wednesday, the US supreme court stepped in and threw out those maps, taking issue with the creation of additional Black-majority district in the Milwaukee area. It sent the case back to the state court for further consideration.“The will of the people is traditionally the law of the land. That is not the case at this point in time,” Tony Evers, Wisconsin’s Democratic governor, told me last week.Also worth watching…
      I spoke with Evers about the stakes for his re-election bid and democracy.
      Listen to Pamela Moses, the Black Memphis woman sentenced to six years in prison for trying to register to vote, speak about her case.
      This redistricting cycle has blunted the political power of voters of color.
      Arizona Republicans are advancing a measure that would do away with no-excuse mail-in and early voting, which is widely used in the state.
      Ohio Republicans remain engaged in a high-stakes standoff with the state supreme court, which has refused to let GOP lawmakers enact gerrymandered electoral districts.
      TopicsUS newsFight to voteUS voting rightsUS politicsRepublicansDemocratsWisconsinfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Widely criticized Wisconsin report repeats falsehoods in argument to ‘decertify’ 2020 election

      by

      Widely criticized Wisconsin report repeats falsehoods in argument to ‘decertify’ 2020 electionDocument offers clear example of how Republicans are embracing efforts to overturn results of validly executed elections Get the latest updates on voting rights in the Guardian’s Fight to vote newsletter.A long anticipated and widely criticized review of Wisconsin’s 2020 election has embraced fringe conspiracy theories and argued there were grounds for the legislature to “decertify” the results of the 2020 election, something legal experts have said is impossible.A report released on Tuesday was the result of months of work by Michael Gableman, a former state supreme court justice hired by the state assembly to review the election. Gableman’s efforts, backed by $676,000 in public funds, have been widely criticized as partisan, sloppy and unnecessary.Recounts in two of Wisconsin’s largest counties affirmed Joe Biden’s victory there in 2020 and an inquiry by the non-partisan legislative audit bureau also found no evidence of widespread fraud.Nonetheless, Gableman’s 136-page report offered a litany of accusations that culminated in an argument that the legislature should consider rescinding the election results.“I believe the legislature ought to take a very hard look at the option of decertification,” Gableman said in a presentation on Tuesday morning to the state assembly. Just before Gableman began speaking, Trump encouraged supporters to tune in to Gableman’s presentation.“It is clear that the Wisconsin legislature (acting without the concurrence of the governor), could decertify the certified electors in the 2020 presidential ​​election,” he wrote in his report. “This action would not, on its own, have any other legal consequence under state or federal law. It would not, for example, change who the current president is.”The document offers one of the clearest examples to date of how Republicans across the US are embracing efforts to overturn the results of validly executed elections – a new phenomenon experts call election subversion.In addition to legislation, Republicans who have embraced the idea of a stolen election are trying to take control of key election posts that would allow them to block validly cast votes from being certified in future elections.Gableman’s report, which cycled through numerous falsehoods that have already been debunked, appears to be a clear effort to offer the legislature justification for overturning the results of the 2020 race.Wisconsin Republicans have split on the idea of decertifying the election, which is a fringe legal theory. Jim Steineke, the majority leader in the GOP-controlled state assembly, tweeted on Tuesday that decertification was a “fool’s errand” and he would do everything he could during his time in office to block such an effort from moving forward.I have ten months remaining in my last term. In my remaining time, I can guarantee that I will not be part of any effort, and will do everything possible to stop any effort, to put politicians in charge of deciding who wins or loses elections. 1/— Jim Steineke 🇺🇦 (@jimsteineke) March 1, 2022
      Gableman zeroed in on a number of election-related issues in Wisconsin that have already been scrutinized. He focused on grants given to election officials in the state from the Center for Tech and Civic Life to facilitate voting. The grants were funded by money from a donation from the Meta CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, and his wife Priscilla Chan. Three courts and the state elections commission have rejected arguments that the grants, which were received in 39 of the state’s 72 counties, were unlawful.Gableman also attacked the state elections commission’s decision to suspend a special voting procedure in nursing homes amid the pandemic in 2020. State law requires local clerks to send special voting deputies to nursing homes to assist people with filling out their ballots.With the Covid-19 pandemic raging in 2020, the state elections commission voted on a bipartisan basis to suspend that requirement and send absentee ballots instead. A local sheriff in Racine county released an investigation last year in which family members claimed their relatives had cast votes but did not have the mental capacity to do so.During Tuesday’s hearing, Gableman played several videos of nursing home residents who were recorded as having cast ballots in 2020. Several of the people were incapacitated or appeared confused about voting. In Wisconsin, a mentally incapacitated person only loses the right to vote if a judge explicitly orders that. Gableman’s review did not make clear whether those voters were legally barred from voting by a judge.Ann Jacobs, a Democrat who chairs the state elections commission, criticized the report and factchecked it in real time.It appears that there is some confusion between a determination of a primary care MD that a person is not competent so that a POA kicks in (very common) as opposed to a full-on guardianship that removes the right to vote (rather uncommon).— Ann Jacobs (@AnnJacobsMKE) March 1, 2022
      Judges frequently allow people to retain their right to vote during a guardianship.— Ann Jacobs (@AnnJacobsMKE) March 1, 2022
      Wisconsin’s governor, Tony Evers, a Democrat, also criticized the review.“This circus has long surpassed being a mere embarrassment for our state. From the beginning, it has never been a serious or functioning effort, it has lacked public accountability and transparency, and it has been a colossal waste of taxpayer dollars,” he said in a statement.“Enough is enough. Republicans in the legislature have always had the ability to end this effort, and I call on them to do so today.”Gableman said he would continue his work, though it is unclear if the assembly will back him. While Gableman’s initial contract expired in December, he said he believed its authority extended into 2022 and that he was negotiating new terms with the legislature.TopicsUS newsThe fight to voteWisconsinUS politicsUS elections 2020newsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      Fringe Scheme to Reverse 2020 Election Splits Wisconsin G.O.P.

      by

      False claims that Donald J. Trump can be reinstalled in the White House are picking up steam — and spiraling further from reality as they go.MADISON, Wis. — First, Wisconsin Republicans ordered an audit of the 2020 election. Then they passed a raft of new restrictions on voting. And in June, they authorized the nation’s only special counsel investigation into 2020.Now, more than 15 months after former President Donald J. Trump lost the state by 20,682 votes, an increasingly vocal segment of the Republican Party is getting behind a new scheme: decertifying the results of the 2020 presidential election in hopes of reinstalling Mr. Trump in the White House.Wisconsin is closer to the next federal election than the last, but the Republican effort to overturn the election results here is picking up steam rather than fading away — and spiraling further from reality as it goes. The latest turn, which has been fueled by Mr. Trump, bogus legal theories and a new candidate for governor, is creating chaos in the Republican Party and threatening to undermine its push to win the contests this year for governor and the Senate.The situation in Wisconsin may be the most striking example of the struggle by Republican leaders to hold together their party when many of its most animated voters simply will not accept the reality of Mr. Trump’s loss.In Wisconsin, Robin Vos, the Assembly speaker who has allowed vague theories about fraud to spread unchecked, is now struggling to rein them in. Even Mr. Vos’s careful attempts have turned election deniers sharply against him.“This is a real issue,” said Timothy Ramthun, the Republican state representative who has turned his push to decertify the election into a nascent campaign for governor. Mr. Ramthun has asserted that if the Wisconsin Legislature decertifies the results and rescinds the state’s 10 electoral votes — an action with no basis in state or federal law — it could set off a movement that would oust President Biden from office.“We don’t wear tinfoil hats,” he said. “We’re not fringe.”Although support for the decertification campaign is difficult to measure, it wouldn’t take much to make an impact in a state where elections are regularly decided by narrow margins. Mr. Ramthun is drawing crowds, and his campaign has already revived Republicans’ divisive debate over false claims of fraud in 2020. Nearly two-thirds of Wisconsin Republicans were not confident in the state’s 2020 presidential election results, according to an October poll from the Marquette University Law School in Milwaukee.“This is just not what the Republican Party needs right now,” said Rob Swearingen, a Republican state representative from the conservative Northwoods. “We shouldn’t be fighting among ourselves about what happened, you know, a year and a half ago.”Wisconsin has the nation’s most active decertification effort. In Arizona, a Republican state legislator running for secretary of state along with candidates for Congress have called for recalling the state’s electoral votes. In September, Mr. Trump wrote a letter to Georgia officials asking them to decertify Mr. Biden’s victory there, but no organized effort materialized.In Wisconsin, the decertification push has Republican politics on its head. After more than a decade of Republican leaders marching in lock-step with their base, the party is hobbled by infighting and it’s Democrats who are aligned behind Gov. Tony Evers, who is seeking a second term in November.“Republicans now are arguing over whether we want democracy or not,” Mr. Evers said in an interview on Friday.Mr. Ramthun, a 64-year-old lawmaker who lives in a village of 2,000 people an hour northwest of Milwaukee, has ridden his decertification push to become a sudden folk hero to the party’s Trump wing. Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s former adviser, has hosted Mr. Ramthun on his podcast. At party events, he shows off a 72-page presentation in which he claims, falsely, that legislators have the power to declare Wisconsin’s election results invalid and recall the state’s electoral votes.Mr. Ramthun has received bigger applause at local Republican gatherings than the leading candidates for governor, and last weekend he joined the race himself, announcing his candidacy at a campaign kickoff where he was introduced by Mike Lindell, the MyPillow chief executive who has financed numerous efforts to undermine and overturn the 2020 election.Mr. Trump offered public words of encouragement.“Who in Wisconsin is leading the charge to decertify this fraudulent election?” the former president said in a statement.It did not take long before the state’s top Republicans were responding to Mr. Ramthun’s election conspiracies. Within days, both of his Republican rivals for governor released new plans to strengthen partisan control of Wisconsin’s elections.During a radio appearance on Thursday, former Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, the party establishment’s preferred candidate, refused to admit that Mr. Biden won the 2020 election — something she had already conceded last September. Ms. Kleefisch declined to be interviewed.Kevin Nicholson, a former Marine with backing from the right-wing billionaire Richard Uihlein, declined in an interview to say whether the election was legitimate, but he said there was “no legal path” to decertifying the results.Mr. Vos spent nearly an hour Friday on a Milwaukee conservative talk radio show defending his opposition to decertification from skeptical callers.“It is impossible — it cannot happen,” he said. “I don’t know how many times I can say that.”A Tuesday rally at the Wisconsin State Capitol in Madison drew about 250 people who called for decertifying the 2020 presidential election. Taylor Glascock for The New York TimesYet, Mr. Ramthun claims to have the grass-roots energy on his side. On Tuesday, he drew a crowd of about 250 people for a two-hour rally in the rotunda of the Wisconsin State Capitol.Terry Brand, the Republican Party chairman in rural Langlade County, chartered a bus for two dozen people for the three-hour ride. Mr. Brand in January oversaw the first county G.O.P. condemnation of Mr. Vos, calling for the leader’s resignation for blocking the decertification effort. At the rally, Mr. Brand stood holding a sign that said “Toss Vos.”“People are foaming at the mouth over this issue,” he said, listening intently as speakers offered both conspiracy theories and assurances to members of the crowd that they were of sound mind.“You’re not crazy,” Janel Brandtjen, the chairwoman of the Assembly’s elections committee, told the crowd.One speaker tied Mr. Vos, through a college roommate and former House Speaker Paul Ryan, to the false claims circulating in right-wing media that Hillary Clinton’s campaign spied on Mr. Trump. Another was introduced under a pseudonym, then promptly announced herself as a candidate for lieutenant governor.The rally closed with remarks from Harry Wait, an organizer of a conservative group in Racine County called HOT Government, an acronym for honest, open and transparent.“I want to remind everybody,” Mr. Wait said, “that yesterday’s conspiracies may be today’s reality.”Mr. Ramthun says he has questioned the result of every presidential election in Wisconsin since 1996. (He does not make an exception for the one Republican victory in that period: Mr. Trump’s in 2016.) He has pledged to consider ending the use of voting machines and to conduct an “independent full forensic physical cyber audit” of the 2020 election — and also of the 2022 election, regardless of how it turns out.Mr. Ramthun has adopted a biblical slogan — “Let there be light” — a reference to his claim that Mr. Vos is hiding the truth from voters. If Wisconsin pulls back its electoral votes, Mr. Ramthun said, other states may follow.(American presidents can be removed from office only by impeachment or by a vote of the cabinet.)Robin Vos, the speaker of Wisconsin State Assembly, told reporters on Tuesday that Republicans aiming to undo Mr. Trump’s loss were wrong to be angry with him.Andy Manis/Associated PressAll of this has become too much for Mr. Vos, who before the Trump era was a steady Republican foot soldier focused on taxes, spending and labor laws.Mr. Vos has often appeased his party’s election conspiracists, expressing his own doubts about who really won in Wisconsin, calling for felony charges against Wisconsin’s top election administrators and authorizing an investigation into the 2020 election, which is still underway.Now, even as he draws the line on decertification, Mr. Vos has tried to placate his base and plead for patience. He announced this week the Assembly plans to vote on a new package of voting bills. (Mr. Evers said in the interview on Friday that he would veto any new restrictions.)“It’s simply a matter of misdirected anger,” he said, of the criticism he’s facing. “They have already assumed that the Democrats are hopeless, and now they are focused on those of us who are trying to get at the truth, hoping we do more.”Other Republicans in the state are also walking a political tightrope — refusing to accept Mr. Biden’s victory while avoiding taking a position on Mr. Ramthun’s decertification effort.“Evidence might be out there, that is something other people are working on,” said Ron Tusler, who sits on the Assembly’s elections committee. “It’s too early to be sure but it’s possible we try it later.”State Senator Kathy Bernier is the only of Wisconsin’s 82 Republican state legislators who has made a public case that Mr. Trump lost the state fairly, without widespread fraud.Ms. Bernier, the chairwoman of the State Senate’s elections committee, in November asked the Wisconsin Legislature’s attorneys to weigh in on the legality of decertifying an election — it is not possible, they said. In December, she called for an end to the Assembly’s investigation into 2020. Three weeks later, she announced she won’t seek re-election this year.“I have no explanation as to why legislators want to pursue voter-fraud conspiracy theories that have not been proven,” Ms. Bernier said in an interview. “They should not do that. It’s dangerous to our democratic republic. They need to step back and only speak about things that they know and understand and can do. And outside of that, they should button it up.”Kitty Bennett contributed research. More

    • 50 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Opposition Research Goes Hyperlocal

      by

      The liberal group American Bridge is launching a new project to collect information for campaigns against Republicans running for state and local offices.Some of the loudest Stop the Steal voices on the right are actually far removed from the levers of America’s election machinery. When a member of Congress makes false claims about hacked voting machines or stolen ballots, he or she has little authority to do much about it.Across the United States, however, there are tens of thousands of state, county and local officials who do have that power. They will set and enforce the rules on voting, then go about counting and reporting the votes in the elections to come.To the alarm of independent experts, allies of Donald Trump have been targeting these once-anonymous offices, seeking to fill them with hard-core partisans all the way down to the level of precinct captain.Now, the Democratic organization American Bridge, known primarily for its opposition research into Republicans, has launched what it says is a $10 million campaign to influence the races for election administration in a dozen key states. The local elections project is part of a $100 million paid media campaign that American Bridge announced a year ago.The group has hired 22 researchers to scrub the records and public statements of candidates and officials running for statewide offices involved in election administration, along with the sort of races unlikely to garner attention outside of their communities: county boards of supervisors, boards of canvassers, local judges and state legislators. They plan to dig up dirt on officials and candidates to ruin their chances of getting elected or re-elected.“It’s about how do we take what we’ve already been expert at and expose the behavior of Republican candidates and officeholders and take it down ballot to these secretaries of state races, the attorneys general races, as well as on down the ballot to the county level,” said Jessica Floyd, the American Bridge president.The sheer scale of America’s decentralized election system presents a formidable challenge to anyone seeking to influence it. In Wisconsin alone, there are 1,850 municipal clerks who administer voting, with rules set by a bipartisan six-member state commission, whose members are appointed by state legislators and the governor.Rick Hasen, the author of several books about elections and democracy, said the use of such hardball political tactics in local elections was “probably a necessary evil.” He added: “Efforts to subvert elections can happen in lots of places.”The Democrats are starting from behind in this effort. There is plenty of evidence that Republicans — more than half of whom remain convinced of Trump’s lie that the 2020 presidential election was marred by fraud — are more motivated than Democrats by concerns about the voting system. And there has been a Republican financial advantage.In 2021, the Republican State Leadership Committee, which invests in state legislative and secretary of state races, raised $33 million, a record for a year in which most states didn’t hold state elections. The Democratic counterpart, the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, took in $21 million, which it too crowed was the most ever in an off-year, but well behind the Republicans.‘You want to win these elections’Floyd, who worked for a handful of Washington’s major Democratic organizations and was an aide to Representative Gabrielle Giffords, said their tactics will help motivate base Democrats. But she added that the American Bridge researchers are in search of information that they believe voters will use to disqualify Republicans from winning local elections.In some communities, she said, that might be a commissioner who didn’t pay property taxes. Elsewhere, it might mean amplifying an untoward statement from a local radio station that would have otherwise gone unnoticed. For statewide candidates, American Bridge plans to hire “trackers” to follow them with cameras.“We’re not making an assumption that voters are going to be paying attention to how a race impacts the future of American democracy, because that’s not necessarily how people are treating the ballot box,” Floyd said. “You want to win these elections. We’re figuring out what’s the information that we have and how to disseminate that information in order to win as many elections as possible.”Kari Lake, a Republican, campaigning for governor in Florence, Ariz., last month.Adriana Zehbrauskas for The New York TimesSome of what American Bridge finds will be handed to news organizations, sometimes with and sometimes without the organization’s fingerprints attached. Kari Lake, a Trump-endorsed candidate for Arizona governor, called on school districts to install cameras to monitor teachers in classrooms in a local radio interview. The group took credit for the story being reported in the Arizona Republic and other local outlets.But more and more, American Bridge has been pushing its research on its own. One of its more prolific researchers maintains a Twitter account devoted to monitoring every local radio interview and television appearance by Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Republican Senate candidates.“We should be exposing bad behavior,” Floyd said.What to read Jennifer Medina and Lisa Lerer profile Josh Mandel, a Republican Senate candidate of Ohio, and his political journey to the far right.U.S. officials are using creative methods to try to understand the thinking of Vladimir Putin, Russia’s enigmatic leader, report David E. Sanger, Julian E. Barnes and Eric Schmitt.The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol issued a fresh batch of subpoenas, Luke Broadwater reports, including of two top Trump campaign officials and several state legislators.Charlie Savage explains a mysterious filing by John H. Durham, the Trump-era special counsel who has been investigating the federal probe of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.FrameworkJim Lamon, an Arizona Republican, starred in a gunslinging Super Bowl ad.Jim Lamon for U.S. SenatePrimary matchups at the Super BowlIt’s nothing new for politicians to use the Super Bowl to gain exposure. But on Sunday, two ads that went after the president pushed the boundaries of anti-Biden rhetoric. One repeated a phrase that has become code for a slur against President Biden, and the other showed a candidate shooting at him.The two Republicans behind the ads are running for Senate.Dave McCormick, a Pennsylvania Republican, aired an ad that repeated a crowd chanting the “Let’s Go Brandon” anti-Biden phrase for nearly the entire 30-second spot. Jim Lamon, a candidate in Arizona, aired a Wild-West-themed ad in which he shoots at Biden, Nancy Pelosi and Senator Mark Kelly, who is up for re-election this year. In the ad, the three Democrats are armed and prepared to duel, but Lamon shoots down their weapons. In what seems to be an effort at slapstick humor, the trio runs away, unscathed and disarmed. Lamon had previously aired another “Let’s Go Brandon” ad.Robert Robb, a columnist for The Arizona Republic, pointed out what was the dual audience that Lamon was speaking to — Donald Trump’s most fervent supporters and Trump himself. It’s an expensive way, in other words, to get the former president’s attention and his possible endorsement.“The people running for Senate in Arizona are all trying to win the Trump primary, not necessarily the Republican Party primary,” Robb told us.It cost the Lamon campaign $25,000 to place an ad in Tucson, Ariz., during the Super Bowl, according to AdImpact, a firm that tracks television ad spending. McCormick’s campaign spent $70,000 to place the ad in the Pittsburgh media market.Both ads employed rhetoric that appeals to a smaller segment of the electorate, the most fervent Republican primary voters, even though a much more expansive audience actually watched it.There’s a chance that ads like these end up backfiring on the Republican candidates during the general election. Both Lamon and McCormick ran in states that Biden won in 2020. And, in Arizona, the Trump presidency coincided with Republicans losing both U.S. Senate seats and only narrowly preserving their majority in the State Legislature.Trump drove record turnout in Arizona, Robb said, but it wasn’t just his supporters who came out in record numbers. His opponents turned out as well.Lamon tried to show that he’s wealthy enough to afford a Super Bowl ad to “communicate this very narrow reach message,” Robb said. “But it does alienate the majority of the Arizona electorate.”Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More

    • 50 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      What Mattered This Week

      by

      President Biden rebooted. Democrats feuded. And Republicans watched it all with glee.It was another difficult stretch for Democrats. Their voting rights bills ran into a wall in the Senate, provoking angry sniping within their own ranks. Things got so heated that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had to remind her unruly caucus members to “be respectful” of their colleagues.Elsewhere, the contours of the 2022 midterms grew more clearly defined. Candidates in the year’s marquee races for governor flaunted big fund-raising numbers, while Democrats running in primaries for congressional seats edged away from Washington.And, perhaps most importantly, the White House overhauled its political strategy as the president marked his first year in office.Biden hits the reset buttonThere’s a ritual for unpopular presidents that goes something like this: Trudge out in front of the White House press corps and let reporters bat you around for a while. Tell them you’re aware of the discontent throughout the country. That you get it. That you aren’t satisfied with the way things are going either.Maybe you just need to explain your policies better. Maybe you’ve been consulting with outside advisers. Maybe you have a plan to turn things around, to get out of the Washington bubble.This week, President Biden, polling in the low 40s and stymied on Capitol Hill, followed the script more faithfully than most. During a two-hour news conference, he defended his record but also took repeated bites of humble pie:“I know there’s a lot of frustration and fatigue in this country.”“I call it a job not yet finished.”“Look, we’re not there yet, but we will get there.”“I understand the overwhelming frustration, fear and concern with regard to inflation and Covid. I get it.”A Look Ahead to the 2022 U.S. Midterm ElectionsIn the Senate: Democrats have a razor-thin margin that could be upended with a single loss. Here are 10 races to watch.In the House: Republicans are already poised to capture enough seats to take control, thanks to redistricting and gerrymandering alone.Governors’ Races: Georgia’s race will be at the center of the political universe this year, but there are several important contests across the country.Key Issues: Both parties are preparing for abortion rights and voting rights to be defining topics.“I’ve made many mistakes, I’m sure.”Another way to read Biden’s remarks: a plea for patience.“Voters have this false sense of immediacy, and that has created this expectation that things can be solved in a very short period of time,” said Silas Lee, a Democratic pollster who worked on the Biden campaign in 2020. “You have to manage expectations.”As our colleagues noted in a White House memo this week, Biden is also planning another tried-and-true Washington tactic: distancing himself from Congress.And while it might be hard for “President Senator” to let go of a place he served for four decades, Democrats told us it’s a political necessity:“He has vast power in the regulatory, law enforcement and foreign policy realms,” Paul Begala, a Democratic consultant, said. “He can do a lot without Congress.”“Biden needs to grab control of the conversation by utilizing fully the latent powers of the executive branch,” said Jeff Hauser, director of the Revolving Door Project.“He’s a creature of the Senate and he needs to leave the Senate behind,” said John Morgan, a Florida trial lawyer and a top donor to Biden. “He should never go back.”Abortion rights groups shift on the filibusterIn June, Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona published an Op-Ed in The Washington Post arguing that it would be a mistake for Democrats to ditch the filibuster. What if, she asked, Republicans defunded “women’s reproductive health services” — e.g., Planned Parenthood — once they took back the Senate?At the time, Sinema was speaking for many in the abortion rights community, which quietly opposed eliminating a tool that could stop federal laws restricting abortion from passing by 51-vote majorities.This week, in a striking shift, several powerful abortion rights groups loudly rejected Sinema’s argument. To varying degrees, Emily’s List, NARAL, Planned Parenthood and the Center for Reproductive Rights all said they supported changing the filibuster to pass voting rights legislation.Melissa Murray, a law professor at New York University who studies women’s movements, described the change in their stance as a recognition that these groups now see “abortion rights and the scaffolding of democracy to be intertwined.” It was no coincidence, she said, that “the states that have been most aggressive in limiting the right to vote are the very same states that have the most aggressive abortion laws.”Democrats turn on their ownProgressives in the House and Senate have long railed against Sinema and her fellow pro-filibuster Democrat, Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia. What’s new is that Democratic candidates in red states are following suit.A recent fund-raising email from Representative Tim Ryan, a Democrat running for Senate in Ohio, read that “Joe Manchin killed Build Back Better” and blamed Sinema’s vote against filibuster reform for “killing our chance to pass voting rights.” And then it asked for campaign contributions to expand the Democratic majority.“Tim has always been clear that he’ll work with anyone, and stand up to anyone — including members of his own party — to make our government work better for working people here in Ohio,” Ryan’s spokesperson, Izzi Levy, told us.Ryan is the clear front-runner for the Democratic nomination — he doesn’t need to prove his progressive bona fides to win a primary before launching into a more centrist statewide campaign.But it’s not just Ryan. In Iowa, former Representative Abby Finkenauer, a front-runner in the Democratic primary to take on Senator Chuck Grassley, called Sinema a “sellout.” And Stacey Abrams, who’s virtually guaranteed to win the Democratic nomination for governor in Georgia, lumped Manchin and Sinema with the Senate Republican conference: “52 Senators — two Democrats and all Republicans — failed their voters.”A Democratic ad takes on inflationThe subtext of an ad for Alex Lasry, running for a U.S. Senate seat in Wisconsin, seems to be that he can win over voters who have soured on Biden.Lasry for WisconsinAn ad from the crowded Democratic Senate primary in Wisconsin caught our attention this week for showing how candidates might distance themselves from an unpopular president.The spot, by Alex Lasry, a Milwaukee Bucks executive, doesn’t shy away from the economic problems pulling down Biden’s poll numbers: supply-chain shortages and surging inflation. Lasry calls for keeping manufacturing jobs in the United States, a proposal in keeping with the state’s long tradition of populism.“That’s exactly how we built the Bucks Arena,” he says in the ad, “by having 80 percent of the materials come from Wisconsin” and “paying higher wages.” For good measure, he adds that he’d “finally stand up to China,” too.Lasry is one of four Democrats leading the primary field, which also includes Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes.The subtext of his pitch seems to be that he’s the one who can win over voters who have soured on Biden — a bold move since midterms tend to be a referendum on the party in power.What to readIn a first for the Biden administration’s new Election Threats Task Force, the Justice Department charged a Texas man with publicly calling for the assassination of Georgia’s election officials on the day before the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, Reid J. Epstein reports.Joe Biden is no F.D.R., Nate Cohn says. “The decision to prioritize the goals of his party’s activist base over the issues prioritized by voters is more reminiscent of the last half-century of politically unsuccessful Democratic presidents,” he writes.In Opinion, Ezra Klein spoke at length with Ron Klain, the White House chief of staff.At the March for Life in Washington, Kate Zernike and Madeleine Ngo found that the annual anti-abortion rally “took on the tone of a celebration” this year as protesters “anticipated the Supreme Court overturning the decision that established a constitutional right to abortion half a century ago.”The White House chief of staff, Ron Klain, gave interviews to discuss Biden’s first year in office.Doug Mills/The New York TimesKlain steps into the klieg lightsWe’ll regularly feature work by Doug Mills, The Times’s longtime White House photographer and a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner. Here’s what Doug had to say about capturing the shot above:I stuck around last night outside the White House and took photos of Biden’s chief of staff, Ron Klain, as he did a round of interviews on the anniversary of Biden taking office. Klain, a backstage operator so powerful that some aides jokingly refer to him as the “prime minister,” is someone we rarely see. He almost never goes to White House events, and if he does, he’s always wearing a mask.Is there anything you think we’re missing? Anything you want to see more of? We’d love to hear from you. Email us at onpolitics@nytimes.com. More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Ron Johnson Wasn’t Always Like This. The Trump Years Broke Him.

      by

      Freedom lovers, rejoice! After much agonizing, Senator Ron Johnson, the Wisconsin Republican, has decided that he will be deferring the joys of retirement to run for a third term this year.This may not strike some folks as big news. After all, Mr. Johnson is a spring chicken by Senate standards — a spry 66 years old in a chamber that all too often resembles an assisted living facility. But Mr. Johnson, a former plastics executive who rode to power in 2010 on the Tea Party wave of anti-establishment energy, repeatedly pledged to serve only two terms in the swamp.Like so many citizen legislators before him, however, Mr. Johnson says he failed to anticipate just how desperately Wisconsin voters — nay, the entire nation — would need him at this moment.“America is in peril,” he declared in an essay in The Wall Street Journal on Sunday. Out-of-control Democrats, aided by media and tech elites, are luring the nation down the path to “tyranny,” he warned. “Countless” concerned citizens implored him to keep up his “fight for freedom,” he noted, “to be their voice, to speak plain and obvious truths other elected leaders shirk from expressing.” What choice does he have but to soldier on?Claims of national crisis and delusions of indispensability are standard among lawmakers looking to justify abandoning their term-limit pledges. But Mr. Johnson is correct that he has distinguished himself for his willingness to tread where many other officials dare not, at least in the Senate. He has become known as perhaps the chamber’s foremost spreader of absurd yet dangerous conspiracy theories — especially in the areas of anti-vaccine insanity and the election-fraud delusions of a certain former president.So it is worth drilling down on what sort of “truth” and “freedom” Mr. Johnson is fighting for — and why it would be good news, not merely for Democrats but for all Americans, if he could get his butt whooped in November.To clarify, Mr. Johnson’s attraction to conspiracy nonsense predates Donald Trump’s lies about the 2020 vote. In the run-up to the election, he used his position as the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee to investigate (read: amplify) unfounded claims about Ukraine and the Biden family that echoed a Russian disinformation campaign. Even his Republican colleagues expressed concern that the inquiry could wind up helping the Kremlin sow discord. The month before his committee released its report, Mr. Johnson received a “defensive briefing” from the F.B.I. warning that he was the target of Russian disinformation — which he said he dismissed because it was too vague and he suspected it of being a political ploy.Postelection, Mr. Johnson has ardently embraced the Big Lie that the presidency was stolen. Before Democrats assumed control of the Senate, he convened a hearing on the topic. The horrors of Jan. 6 failed to dim his ardor for disinformation. He has both pooh-poohed the seriousness of the attack and indulged wing-nut theories that the violence was the work of “agents provocateurs,” “antifa” and “fake Trump protesters.” He voiced suspicions that the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, was to blame.More recently, Mr. Johnson has claimed that the Democrats cannot be trusted — because, you know, election fraud — and urged Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled Legislature to seize the authority for overseeing voting from the state’s bipartisan elections commission.Pressing a partisan power grab based on partisan lies to rig the electoral system — that is how committed the senator is to truth and freedom.As much of a threat as he is to American democracy, Mr. Johnson may be a bigger one to the health of the American people. Since the arrival of the coronavirus pandemic, he has talked down its seriousness, at one point charging that Dr. Anthony Fauci had “overhyped” Covid-19.On the vaccine front, the senator has been a font of misinformation and scaremongering, misrepresenting data and bungling basic facts. He has conveyed considerably more enthusiasm about unproved treatments like horse de-wormer and mouthwash than for proved vaccines. YouTube twice suspended his account for violating its medical misinformation policy.All told, when it comes to spewing dangerous drivel, Mr. Johnson has displayed a commitment and creativity rarely seen outside of QAnon gatherings or Trump family dinners.RonJon wasn’t always like this. He used to be a relatively straightforward pro-market, small-government, budget-conscious conservative. He seemed to have a more or less solid grip on reality. But the Trump years broke him, as they broke so many in the Republican Party.The people of Wisconsin are not impressed. Polling suggests the senator is about as popular there as Brett Kavanaugh at an Emily’s List happy hour. The editorial board of The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel declared him “the most irresponsible representative of Wisconsin citizens” since Joseph McCarthy.Even so, the senator has the electoral edge. Historical trends are on his side, as is the power of incumbency. Democrats will need a strong nominee, a savvy strategy, piles of cash and a whole lot of luck to unseat Mr. Johnson. A dozen Democratic challengers are vying to make the attempt, led by the state’s lieutenant governor, Mandela Barnes.Mr. Johnson is the lone Republican senator up for re-election this year in a state carried (barely) by Joe Biden in 2020. This alone would make him a mouthwatering Democratic target. As an exemplar of Trumpism, he is downright irresistible — a particularly toxic test case of the former president’s enduring hold on the Republican Party.Do the nation a solid, Wisconsin: Commit to helping Mr. Johnson stick by his original promise to serve only two terms. After everything it has been through lately, America shouldn’t have to suffer through another six years of his twisted take on truth and freedom.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More