When the Florida, Colorado, and California (and no doubt other states) election fraud by the RNC and its consultant, Nathan Sproul and his Strategic Allied Consulting, came to light, I wondered where Pete “Taliban” Sessions fit in. Pete occupies an important position in the GOP House leadership as Chair of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. Knowing how often Republicans preemptively accuse others of doing what they themselves are doing or have done, this becomes a bit interesting.
So, if the RNC election fraud, for example in Florida, covers several counties that are close in the Presidential election, it stands to reason that the local Congressional seats are also close. I imagine this would be generally true in other locations where the election fraud has been identified.
In his role as Chair of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee, Pete Sessions, TX-32, goes around the country raising money and dispensing it to GOP Congressional candidates or incumbents, trying to beat Democrats. That’s the job description, and Pete takes it seriously, while essentially ignoring his own constituents here in the TX-32nd district.
So, I asked myself, what would Pete’s possible role in the election scandal be? Dive below the orange cloudbank of smelly election fraud to see more.
I web-searched “Pete Sessions – Election fraud” last Friday the 28th, and found no web nor news items, except this one from earlier last week:
It seems Pete had been at a forum on voter ID and other election laws sat the University of Maryland’s Center for American Politics and Citizenship, including the DNC’s general counsel, Robert F. Bauer. Sessions rather oddly brought up a story from a 1994 election, his first bid for Congress, against John Bryant, the incumbent in the old TX-5th district, which Sessions lost.
About 7,000 votes, all notarized by the same person and dated that day suddenly surfaced at an election office at 7 p.m., Mr. Sessions said. He lost the election by about 2,300 votes.Now, the Washington Times being the reliable source that it is, we take this news item with a large appropriate measure of skepticism, and ask ourselves if the story has any slant to it, as the newspaper has shown it is wont to do from time to time. But beneath Pete’s prevarication, let us look at the “plant” of information purporting to claim Democratic election fraud. This is the “accuse the other side of doing what you do, or at least try to divert attention from yourself” strategy we often see.
“I don’t think it was discrimination,” he continued. “I think it was a violation of the law.”
According to Pete’s quote from the article:”It was legal, but it wasn’t fair. (…) I don’t think it was discrimination, I think it was a violation of the law.”
In barely two sentences, Pete has planted the seeds that “everyone (Democrats) does it, it isn’t illegal, I lost, but it wasn’t legal.” Or, the WT has managed to make Pete seem to say that in the quotes it gives. I suppose they report, you decide (if you can figure it out).
Next, the DAMN (Dallas Morning News, our local rag, for the non-Texans) picked up this story on the weekend, essentially sourcing the WT, but now giving it a bit of local reporting effort here in Dallas County. The TX-32nd district lies entirely within Dallas County. The DaMN reporters checked the history of this alleged “7,000 votes dumped in the box” story from original sources going back to 1994, and found little evidence to support Sessions’ claim.
September 29, 2012The GOP County Chair at the time, Bob Driegert, has no recollection, but says Pete “may be right”. The former Elections Administrator, Bruce Sherbet, “has no recollection of any complaints coming nito the Elections Department’ in 1994.
WASHINGTON — Dallas Rep. Pete Sessions asserted this month that 7,000 potentially improper ballots may have cost him his 1994 bid for Congress. But election officials say they have no recollection of any such incident, and Democratic opponents say he is making it up [diarist’s bold].
Sessions, who has overseen House Republicans’ national campaign effort for the last four years, made the claim at a forum on voting rights at the University of Maryland.
He lost the 1994 race to incumbent Rep. John Bryant, D-Dallas, by 3,356 votes out of 123,616 cast, or 50.1 percent to 47.3 percent.
At the forum, Sessions said that just as polls closed, about 7,000 ballots, all notarized by the same person and dated Election Day, appeared suddenly at an election office. The Washington Times reported the comments, and Sessions does not dispute the paper’s account.
That was apparently the first time he has publicly made the allegation, though he did apparently voice it at least once to journalists. There is no record that he or any aides sought an investigation or recount, or lodged any sort of complaint with law enforcement or election officials.
Bryant, who served in Congress from 1983 to 1997, disputed Sessions’ account. He said he had never heard of any such incident in the 1994 election for what was then the 5th Congressional District. Sessions went on to win the seat in 1996, when Bryant lost a Senate race.(…) “My campaign did not have any absentee ballot program,” he added.
There may well be a local angle on this, since we see that Ken Molberg, as former Dallas County Democratic Party chair, now a judge, was involved in the campaign in that 1994 election that Sessions lost. Molberg says this is “made-up stuff” from Pete. The current Dallas County Elections Administrator, Toni Pippins-Poole, says absentee ballots, then and today, do not require notarization.
So what is this about, from the National GOP Chair of the RCCC? Why float this story now?
It seems last week, for the National Voter Registration Day efforts, that Ms. Pippins-Poole was involved in a local effort to support volunteer groups registering eligible high school seniors in local Dallas-area schools. Oh, the horror! Those volunteer groups apparently included the League of Women Voters and the Richardson PTA! And we all know how those pesky high school and other young voters vote overwhelmingly Democratic! It was a conspiracy, some said!
I diaried this story last week of the two GOP County Commissioners who were indignant about this effort to register first-time voters, and the County Election Administrator’s (and thus, the County Commissioners’) role in this insidious conspiracy:
The Democratic County Judge (not a judicial position, but the elected Administrator for the County) and the other two Democratic Commissioners dismissed the GOP Commissioners' allegations of partisanship.
Something here does not add up, unless Pete is trying to distance himself from some shenanigans in election fraud that may have been, are, or will go on in Dallas County. Or perhaps its something Pete imagines might happen? Why should he say such a thing about his first election that he lost, 18 years ago, and where he has kept his seat the remaining 16 years since, and looks to keep it again for the next two years, unless something is done.
So, I ask the question: Doth Rep. Sessions protest too much? There appears to be little evidence to back up his claim of 7,000 “notarized” ballots, all notarized by the same person, showing up in the ballot boxes at the last minute. He is the only one telling this story. The current Elections Administrator says there is no provision now nor was there then for "notarized ballots". The former County Elections Administrator, Bruce Sherbet, had no such recollection, and stated there had been no complaint or question lodged at the time.
Pete himself says: “You never heard a peep out of me.”.
“It was legal, but it wasn’t fair, and it wasn’t right,” he said. “Did I lose because of that? I can’t say that. You never heard a peep out of me. Never heard a peep out of me.”So, why now, Pete? What is the relevance in 2012, except obfuscation, “everyone does it” aspersion-casting or sour grapes? Or are you setting the stage for a possible loss, and the "grounds" to make a stink after the election? Sounds strange from someone in a carefully gerrymandered district (courtesy of the Texas GOP-controlled Lege) made for you to win.
Katherine Sayers McGovern is running against Pete, but with no help from the DNC or the DCCC, to my knowledge. Pete is barely being made to campaign, spend money, or make an effort. He holds a great deal of say-so in YOUR democratic Representative’s or YOUR Democratic Congressional candidate’s fate, given the money that the GOP CCC hands out. Pete Sessions is the guy in charge of that.
You can give our Democratic candidate for the TX-32nd district some love, here:
Is there some connection to the RNC election fraud scandal involving Nathan Sproul and Strategic Allied Consulting in several states?
Anyone with more insight, reasonable conjecture, or knowledge which would shed light on Pete Sessions’ motivations, I’m all ears.
Add tags if you know of or see other connections.
--* --* --*
UPDATE: Edited title to reflect my questions about Sproul / Strategic Allied Consulting.
I'm reading hungrycoyote's diary:
Finding a general Dallas connectiion to W. Bush and some of the Sproul-related folks at Voyager Learning, one of the cronies that Bush's NCLB benefitted. No doubt with as long as Sessions has been in Congress (since 1996), and with his connections to W, there may be more. Anyone?