Since my last installment about the 21 "phantom ballots" that appeared in a state Senate recount, we've been waiting for the Senate Committee to investigate what had appeared on its face to be a case of ballot box stuffing. That investigation was held - and concluded - yesterday. The result: the Committee found that the recount team (composed on one Dem counter, one GOP counter and an SoS overseer) screwed up the the incredibly simple process of counting 171 hand marked balltots by taking 21 ballots for the GOP candidate (Manchester) out of one 50-ballot bundle and placing it, then double counting it, in another, smaller bundle, thus adding 21 votes to the count that was made on election night. And then,on top of such an elementary, fundamental mistake, no one in the recount team (including the Dem representative whose business it was to protect the interests of the Democratic candidate) noticed that an obvious mistake had occurred which left one 50 ballot bundle only half as big as it should have been.
Here's one of the local reports on the story. As those who've followed this story in my blog posts know, I've been convinced all along that this was a case of fraud. There are first hand accounts that the 50 ballot bundles were all full and the "short-lot" bundle of 21 ballots was double it's original size when the ballot box was opened (read the paragraph on page 1 below the Town of Long Island heading). And it never occurred to me that the Long Island recount team would have been so utterly incompetent that they couldn't pull off the counting of a mere 171 ballots which was perhaps the simplest process in any recount event in any state in the country, ever.
Color me jaded but I don't buy it. The state Democratic Party buys it because it gives them the seat they actually deserved to get and, more importantly, keeps things from getting too contentious which is something Dems everywhere like to avoid. Except, of course, it doesn't do that at all. It took Gov LePage about 3 hours to figure out a way to blame the Democratic SoS for letting his Deputy, Julie Flynn, accede to the demands of the GOP lawyer in the Dist 25 recount, shutting it down at his insistence.
Top Republicans, including Thibodeau and and Gov. Paul LePage, accepted the results of Tuesday’s investigation but criticized Dunlap, a Democrat, for the recount mix-up.
“President Thibodeau followed the proper procedure to ensure the electoral process was upheld while awaiting the final decision from the Senate committee,” LePage said in a news release. “It is unfortunate that Cathy Manchester had to endure a situation that was created entirely by the secretary of state’s office during the recount. We thank her for her service.”
Thibodeau said he wants Dunlap to review the oversight protocols in place for recounts.
“The candidates and the people of Senate District 25 – Long Island, especially – were put through weeks of uncertainty and media scrutiny following the recount. No one else should be put through that,” he said. “It is now time to move forward and get to work for the people of Maine.”
HAHAHAHA! The GOP Lawyer (a guy named Logan who actually ran against the Dem SoS candidate in the recent legislative election whose name happens to be "Dunlap") "forces" the Deputy SoS Flynn to shut down the recount, and her boss (Dunlap) who was then boxed in by Flynn's idiot decision to let Logan dictate how she conducted her recount, is the fall guy! This was the GOP plan and it worked. Now let's blame the Dems!
As I mentioned in an email about this late last night, the GOP brings out the brass knuckles and the Dems delicately don their kid gloves.
Jump over the pile of orange dog doo with me and I'll wrap this up.
So that email exchange I just mentioned from last night was a bit of a doozy. I'm going to copy it here because it lays out why I'm not convinced this is what the Committee concluded it was. Of course, I've got a dog in this hunt myself in the fact that I've blogged this story with the assumption that fraud has occurred, so take this all with that particular grain of salt included. But the exchange below describes why I'm of the opinion that this just doesn't make sense. The first entry is my response to someone sending the news story linked above:
thanks for the link, __. Something still doesn’t add up, though, although according to the article, Mills’ deputy has signed off on it. I’m glad Breen got the seat she is entitled to, but three things, right off the top, don’t comport:
1) Flynn’s narrative of the recount, posted in the Senate Advance Journal that was handed out on swearing-in day, states very clearly that upon opening the box for the recount, 4 bundles were unpacked, 3 of 50 each (all of which were verified as to the count) and 1 bundle that was labeled as 21 ballots but that had 42 ballots in that lot. In other words, the recount team counted all the ballots in long Island and came up with the 192 total ballots including the phantom ballots. Now Flynn is saying that during the recount, 21 Manchester ballots were inadvertantly placed in the smaller bundle, but that would have required the recounters to have removed those ballots from one of the 50-count bundles and move them, inexplicably, to the short bundle where they remained following the recount. If that had happened, then, in putting the bundles back together after the recount was declared over, one of the full-size bundles would have been almost half the size of the other two 50-count lots. This defies credulity, to me. These things are done with great attention to process and very carefully. For the entire recount crew and all the observers to have failed to notice both the very thin bundle that should have had 50 ballots in it, and also to have completely bolloxed up the count of a mere 171 ballots – and not to have immediately caught such an egregious and obvious error – doesn’t pass the smell test. After all, the pile of paper involved was probably less than most of you have on your desk at any given moment.
2)Also, there’s Breen’s statement, also included in the Advance Journal, that made the clear allegation that the 21 ballots were marked only for Manchester, not for anyone else. If that were the case (and Breen would have to be stark raving crazy to make something like that up knowing that the Senate Committee was going to reopen the Long Island box), then the disappearance of the 21 phantom ballots makes perfect sense – if someone’s trying to cover their tracks.
3) Notice I used the word “box” in the sentence directly above. That’s because Julie Flynn, in her statement to the Senate, talks about the ballots being in one tamper proof container. Notice in the photo in the link that Susan sent us that the State Police are delivering what appear to be two lock boxes, neither of which appear to have perimeter seals on them, plus some other cardboard boxes. What’s up with that?
I know the Dems are glad to have this settled in Breen’s favor and I’m sure Flynn is glad to have what she would like us to believe is a logical explanation for this, but this isn’t logical. I think there’s enough sketchiness in this explanation, what with these critical questions left unanswered, that a further inquiry by the AG is well warranted.
When my Senator, __, originally posed some of my questions to the party leadership last week, before the unorthodox seating of Manchester was accomplished, the response he got from his colleagues was that whichever candidate is determined the winner of that recount will not affect who controls the Senate. My response was, and is, that this wasn’t about that at all, it was about the Constitutional Officers vote: thus Thibodeau’s original statement that he was planning on getting the Committee to do its work the same day as the swearing-in so as to get Manchester seated for the CO vote - and then after the light dawned on him that that was impossible (duh) they decide to get Manchester seated via an Order of the Senate, Dunlap’s ruling that Breen be seated be damned. The article points out that there’s no redo on that CO vote now, even though it’s likely that the GOP got their Treasurer candidate via the 2 vote swing that seating Manchester represented. Cathy M has done what she was brought in to do. Put more succinctly: there’s your motive.
I’d love for someone to ask Breen why she stated in that official letter that those 21 ballots were marked only for Manchester. Was she hallucinating? And I’d also love for someone (with the initials J.M.) to ask the recount team how they could have possibly been so utterly incompetent doing something so straightforward and simple. And why did Flynn not catch this boneheaded error before she halted the recount and palmed it off to the Senate?
Color me unconvinced by this “good news,” but still glad the right person got the seat. The District 25 Senate seat, that is.
Not sanguine enough?
bc
Then, one of the folks on the send list, who has deep ties into the Maine political scene, responded:
From someone in the know in the state house:
There were 3 batches of 50 ballots plus a batch of 21. That equals 171. One batch of 50 was supposed to be split 21/29 for Breen. That pile of 21 was accidentally returned to the wrong "short pile". Then someone grabbed the pile marked 21, now With 42, and they started counting. Human error. When they opened the batches today they saw that. The batch supposed to have 21 plus 29 was 0 plus 29 and the batch that was supposed to have 21 was 21 plus 21.
As far as what was reported to the senate after the recount, obviously it was all based on an error at the recount. When they opened the box everything was ok, a mistake was made midstream. I can't imagine how someone could stuff the box and then unstuff it. Only lt. Ireland had access to the ballots after the recount. They were in a room at state police HQ in a room with a new lock only he had the key to. That is pretty far fetched to say he was messing around with the ballots or that anyone else could have.
That all 21 were marked for Manchester makes perfect sense once you realize that they had just been sorted and counted and put back on the wrong pile.
The several boxes in the photo is because the entire senate district was in question, though the committee only concerned itself with Long Island.
Now, there is a question about why it took weeks to open that ballot box. A very good argument for the open and orderly process witnessed today, but Kate Knox wanted to recount Long Island again the night of the recount and the republicans objected. Maybe the SOS will revisit their rules, among other things.
I'd also say that from what I've been told about the secret ballots for the constitutional officers, Breens vote would not have mattered in the outcome of any of the races.
To which I responded about 1 am last night:
Thanks for the inside info, __. Too bad only a few of us know what the tally was for the Constitutional Officers. Or should I say, only a few of us know what someone told you the rough tally was. Is this how a democracy works, important votes being tallied in secret and then the “results” leaked when needed to quell a controversy? Maybe there should be an official “leaker of the vote” so the public at large can be apprised, not of how their elected representatives voted for the AG, SoS and State Treasurer because the joint session is allowed use secret ballots, but just what someone says the vote tallies were. Maybe it could be published in an Agree to Disagree Column or something.
Sorry to sound pissed, but that part of it in itself pisses me off. Please don’t patronize me with inside information that is as verifiable as any guess I might make about the CO votes. I’m sure you trust the person who gave you that info but a statement passed in a private conversation and then passed on carries no water in a democracy. Show me the actual votes. After all, that’s what the underlying story is in Dist 25 as well.
One thing that cannot be countered with an insiders special knowledge, though, is the fact that the GOP used this obviously flawed recount to insert Manchester into the Senate in time for the CO votes. Their intent was clear, Thibodeau made sure of that. In that sense, even if none of those CO votes were closer than 3 votes apart, they still achieved their tactical objective at the expense of the “sanctity of the vote” as Nemitz put it.
As to the ballot boxes, one of the pics in the BDN article has Flynn showing the committee a sample box for demonstration purposes so that explains the second box. My bad.
As for the official explanation making “perfect sense”, as I stated below, there’s nothing remotely perfect about this explanation. Flynn’s “rules” for recounts apparently don’t include making sure the manifests numbers match the ballot counts. I wonder what manifests are for? Wallpaper? Again, for this recount of 171 ballots to have been so thoroughly botched and then for them to have failed to immediately catch it as a simple matter of process is beyond incredible. The recount team was composed of one Dem, one Republican and an SoS rep. They only had 171 ballots to count. The drill is they all verify each others’ tallies. That’s three people making the same rudimentary mistake that flew in the face of the manifests that were right in front of them. No one said, “Hold on, there’s only 171 ballots in the manifest and we’ve got 192! Say, doesn’t that 50 ballot lot look thin?” I wonder if any of them testified as to how they could have failed on such an elementary, fundamental level? Or did Flynn’s pronouncement preclude them being interviewed?
As to your comment that it’s far fetched to say anyone stuffed the ballots and then got back into the box to take them out for the investigation, you’re absolutely right. What I’m saying is that the official explanation is also far fetched, as I explain above, although much more palatable, to be sure (as evidenced by everyone’s great relief that criminality apparently wasn’t involved) - but no less far fetched. 171 ballots counted as 192 by three people. That’s far fetched. That’s why I think this smells bad - and the ham-handed insertion by the GOP of Manchester into the CO vote adds more credence to an explanation that favors cheating, because that was what Manchester’s seating amounted to, even if parliamentary rules were followed. Add Logan’s AG candidacy against Mills last week (he was GOP counsel in the Dist 25 recount who demanded it be shut down) and “far fetched” begins to look like a relative term, I guess. I also note, in reading the latest update of that BDN article linked below, that LePage is actually blaming Dunlap for acceding to GOP Atty Logan’s demand that the recount be shut down and sent to the Senate. Un fucking believable. If the tables were turned, I guarantee that a Dem Gov would be making nice and saying how we should all get along, and the GOP AG would be dusting the box for fingerprints. The same can be said of the Dem’s decision to have Breen not take her seat and make the GOP eject her in favor of Manchester before the swearing in last week. Basic optics. Show them for what they are, don’t play patty cakes with them. Those folks use brass knuckles while the Dems use kid gloves.
The minimum that should happen from this is that Flynn should lose her job if she doesn’t resign - not just eat her non-existent hat. She oversaw this process and her name, among election officials nation-wide right now, must be worse than mud. There will be papers written about this in the professional journals with titles like “Incredibly Simple Steps To Avoid Maine’s Recount Pitfalls.” And the plural will be used with that last noun.
And there should be statutes passed right away that require the reconciliation of voter manifests and ballot counts to be a prerequisite for any voting district’s certification of the vote, or of any recount. How can that not already be a law? And yes, as well, the final determination of when a recount is shut down must be made by the election officials, not by partisan mouthpieces, as you point out. How was that even considered as a rule?
And whatever it takes for the CO vote to be transparent should be enacted, since knowing how your elected members vote on such important appointments is absolutely basic to representative government. And not just that, what if Mills won by, say, 20 votes instead of two because a number of GOP members were sick of the slimeball game Logan played in Dist 25? That’s a message that no one would hear in the current CO voting system.
I’m sorry for being so exercised about this, __. I guess I’m at my breaking point, what with the Senate torture report just coming out today and knowing that the war criminals in our midst, whom Collins is actively shielding through all this, will never be brought to justice. Hell, go back to that BDN article and that is highlighted at the top of the page. No one is accountable if they’re properly ensconced. And cops are gunning down unarmed people of color for jaywalking and getting a pass from the prosecutor...but if there’s belligerent white guys waving loaded AK47s at pedestrians, well a polite talking to is how they handle that.
I could never be a politician.
So there you have it, in all its gory glory. I've undoubtedly burned some political bridges but I don't give a shit. And I might myself be a laughingstock for not buying the Committee's findings even though the ballots inside the locked box showed that as a result. There's just too much attendant chicanery involved, that's what keeps me from drinking the koolaid.
But the good news? As I stated in one of my emails above, the rightful winner of the Dist 25 race will be seated. That's great, even though the GOP got their ringer, Manchester, seated for the critical CO vote and, perhaps as a result the State Treasurer's office flipped to the GOP candidate. But most important, in my mind, is the spotlight being shone right now on Maine's incredibly inept administration of recounts, and Julie Flynn as the Deputy SoS in charge of that process is the butt of a thousand jokes today in the offices of election managers across the country and, likely, the world.
____________
(UPDATE): Just got a very measured and thoughtful reply from the person I had the email exchange with above. Thought I should post it to balance things a bit:
I wasn’t trying to patronize you, Bruce. I was actually interested in what happened and the concerns you raised. Everything I passed along was from someone who was observing the recount process yesterday. None of those were my comments. I emailed that person after you raised those concerns because I was interested to actually understand what happened. I don’t disagree with you that the vote for constitutional officers should be public. They should be. I can see keeping partisan caucuses private but not constitutional votes. I had forgotten that was even the case. And clearly there are issues with the way the recount was conducted because attorney Kate Knox suggested they count again but it wasn’t allowed after the GOP objected{...}I don’t disagree with your frustration about the state of the world and politics and the state, but I have been convinced that there likely wasn’t fraud that occurred in this case.