Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    VIDEO: O’Keefe Jabs Left on Voter Fraud Issue

    VIDEO: O’Keefe Jabs Left on Voter Fraud Issue

    ‘I just sign this and then I can vote?’ he asked one poll worker. ‘Yep,’ came the reply.

    The battle over voter ID has been thrust into the forefront of this election cycle’s news coverage, and advocates on both sides of the issue have been working hard to win the hearts and minds of voters, even as most politicos are focused on getting whatever votes they can to win on Tuesday.

    North Carolina is one of many states in the U.S. where no documentation is required to vote; and in this last ambush video from James O’Keefe, a series of encounters with North Carolina election officials shows just how easy it can be for an imposter to cast multiple votes.

    Project Veritas Action released the video exclusively to MailOnline:

    By this time in 2016, the state government hopes, naysayers who see the voter ID law as a barrier to minorities and the poor will see hundreds of thousands of new, zero-cost IDs coming out of voters’ wallets and purses.

    For now, though, O’Keefe is using North Carolina as a proxy for the other 42 states – and the District of Columbia – which don’t require voters to show a photo ID.

    His crew used publicly available election rolls to identify ‘inactive’ voters and then chose 30-year-old men for him to impersonate.

    The final footage shows election officials, over and over, accepting O’Keefe’s claim that he was one of those people.

    ‘With almost three-quarters-of-a-million inactive voters and no voter ID law in place, we could have turned the election results for most major candidates in the state,’ he claimed Monday.

    ‘What we uncovered in this video illustrates how easy it would be for a well-orchestrated campaign with no regard for the law to change the outcome of a major election. Voter laws across the country need to be changed immediately to prevent this sort of potential voter fraud.’


    As you can see, it took encounters at several different polling places before elections judges smelled a rat—but they had no real legal mechanism they could use to justify witholding a ballot:

    This time he strolled into polling places in Raleigh, Durham and Greensboro to see how easy it would be to vote fraudulently in the name of another person. He was offered twenty ballots at a variety of polling places before a pair of officials finally challenged him.

    ‘They wanted to protect the system,’ O’Keefe says in the video, released exclusively to MailOnline. ‘They had to break the rules to do it.’

    ‘Of all of the undercover investigations I’ve conducted, this was by far the easiest,’he said Monday.

    ‘They were willing to pass out fraudulently obtained ballots like it was Halloween candy.’

    This video may not be the decisive conversation-ender in the debate over voter ID—after all, no ID is required in North Carolina, which puts election judges in a terrible place even when they do suspect fraud—but it does throw a wrench into the works of a liberal machine that consistently insists that voter fraud couldn’t possibly cause enough problems justifying what they believe to be restrictive voter ID laws.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    arnonerik | November 3, 2014 at 8:40 pm

    Democrats have been working for years to make vote fraud easier. In communities where they dominate (like King County WA) they start with a 15 to 20% edge and if thats not enough they will find boxes of ballots that were accidentally mis-laid just when the Republican thinks he has won. Since they own the judges and the other officials they get away with it every time.
    Reform? We don’t need no stinking reform!

    NC Mountain Girl | November 3, 2014 at 9:35 pm

    Until the early 1990s even the Cook County Board of Elections BofE]conducted a canvass six weeks before each general election. One Democrat and one Republican election judge would go door to door checking if the voters still lived where they were registered. If a residence looked vacant they could remove the name from the rolls subject to them showing up at the BofE with ID. Then it changed to mailing out new voter registration cards before each election with the instructions to the USPS not to forward them if the addressee had moved.

    Where I currently live in North Carolina not only is their no canvass, but it is hard to remove someone from the voter rolls unless the BofE catches it when the person moves to a different precinct in the same county. A friend’s wife deserted him and moved out of state ten years ago. She died more than five years ago. She is still on the voter rolls because only a current husband, parent, sibling or offspring has the right to notify the BofE of the voter’s demise. I believe if the same county issues the death certificate that information is shared with the BofE. But as the regional hospital is in a different county, I suspect the county BofE is seldom, if ever, informed.

    The head of the BofE complains that she is not allowed to removed a name even if she went to that person’s funeral!

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend