Fighting for election integrity and transparency

Post Primaries…Now What?

Posted by |

With the Primaries in the rear view mirror, Direct Action Texas’ work has kicked into high gear. As Texas’ only organization with proven results in finding election fraud, our phones and email have been busy with tips and information about election discrepancies and nefarious activity.

It might surprise you to learn a good number of the leads we’ve received have come from two state agencies. These two agencies have gotten information and/or seen evidence they believe points to election fraud. To whom do they turn to handle such serious allegations? Direct Action Texas. We are the only ones these agencies can rely on to actually investigate and file formal complaints. One of the biggest misconceptions the public has regarding elections is believing that there is some government agency which ensures they’re conducted fairly.

There simply is no one with that job. The state has turned to us for help. We’re honored and happy to oblige.

The sheer number of tips we received forces us to work through them quickly and prioritize those where fraud is verifiable and prosecution is possible. Currently we are looking at primaries in just over 30 counties. Here are two examples of types of investigations we’re pursuing:

  • Once again we found ourselves in East Texas, this time in Gregg County, where mail-in ballots appear to have been compromised. We’ve found major red flags in the Commissioner Precinct 4 race, findings law enforcement is going to be extremely interested in learning about. We will be making our criminal complaint public in the coming weeks.
  • Last week we published a video of a harvester working a nursing home in Harris County. If you have not watched that video, you need to see what harvesting in action looks like – SEE IT HERE. State Rep. Harold Dutton is already out denying the video…oddly enough before anyone publicly blamed him.  DAT has more videos and is investigating this case as well, stay tuned for updates soon.

From the Texas Panhandle to the border, we have counties with voting irregularities, each distinct in nature. Digging into these elections is long and tedious as there’s significant delay in simply getting the information from each county. After the election, by statute, it can take up to 30 days for counties to provide certain election information. We can not begin analyzing the results until we have received all the information. With over 30 counties we are tracking, just getting the election data in-house is chore. Then the real work on sifting through the begins.

We expect to have as many as a half a dozen criminal complaints from this primary. It could be more, depending on what we find. Mail-in ballot fraud is a real, as is vote harvesting, both of which are wide-spread problems in Texas. One would think the legislature would allocate the resources necessary to  ensure the integrity of our elections.

Until they do, you’ll find DAT digging through the evidence. Stay tuned for updates.

 

Election Fraud – See the Video!

Posted by |

The media and others will tell you constantly, “There is no election fraud”. However to anyone paying attention, it is more like a headline a day of voter fraud investigations.

Today we learned from an article in the Dallas Morning News that the Dallas District Attorney is investigating 1,200 applications for ballot by mail for this month’s primary, but the applications, in many cases, were filled out last year. This is the same area where there is an ongoing criminal investigation into vote harvesting.

Now comes this: Direct Action Texas received a video of a worker harvesting a ballot for Harold Dutton in last week’s Democrat primary. The video (below) shows a worker approaching a voter with that voter’s ballot in hand. The worker appears to have a stack of ballots in her hand. She clearly identifies herself with the Harold Dutton campaign, and proceeds to instruct the voter to check the box for Dutton and sign, and then she leaves with the ballot.

Read More

Indictments for Voter Fraud in Nueces County

Posted by |

In a press release, Attorney General Ken Paxton announced his office’s participation in the prosecution of three Robstown residents indicted for voter fraud committed in the 2016 election cycle. Direct Action Texas (DAT) first reported on the Office of the Attorney General’s (OAG) active investigations into voter fraud in Robstown last August.  A few months later, after the November election, DAT began to research voter fraud in Robstown that took place in the 2017 municipal election. That research resulting in DAT filing 30 Election Fraud complaints. It was clear that Election Fraud was alive and well in Robstown, Texas and it continued through the Runoff Election in December of 2017. Now the harvesters may finally be brought to justice. Cynthia Kay Gonzalez, Rosita Torres Flores, and Robert Gonzalez have been indicted for nine counts of voter fraud, collectively.

View the indictment against Cynthia Kay Gonzalez here: http://bit.ly/2FizZtg

View the indictment against Rosita Torres Flores here: http://bit.ly/2FiE40r

View the indictment against Robert Gonzales here: http://bit.ly/2Fk3tTt

Probate Court Candidate Goodman’s Fuzzy Math

Posted by |

Catherine Goodman is using some fuzzy math to manipulate the results of the Tarrant County Bar Association (TCBA) Survey to declare herself the highest rated candidate. Goodman is the candidate for Judge, Probate Court 1 that almost didn’t make it on the ballot. She had to withdraw her application for a place on the ballot and reapply. Inside sources say this was due to problems with her petition signatures. Goodman has also struggled with her campaign finance compliance, as reported by Direct Action Texas. Now it looks like Goodman has chosen to manipulate the results of the TCBA Survey to boost her chances.

The Tarrant County Bar Association asked its members to rate each candidate as well qualified, qualified, or not qualified. If they didn’t know the candidate, they were instructed to answer, “No Opinion.” At first glance, Mark Sullivan has the highest rating with 25% well qualified versus Goodman’s 23.1% well qualified. If you look at the raw number of votes, Sullivan is still ahead with 151 well qualified to Goodman’s 139.

Goodman would like you to throw out the “No Opinion” votes and recalculate the percentages. That would skew the numbers in her favor, giving her 54% for well qualified to Sullivan’s 51%. However, that method is statistically insignificant. Remove the “No Opinion” vote and you are suddenly comparing apples to oranges. The results cannot be compared when there is now a different number of people voting in each candidate’s survey. If you wanted to properly discount the “No Opinion” voters you would have to compare the categories individually, as shown here. Those numbers still put Mark Sullivan on top.

Perhaps the more interesting numbers are not those of Goodman and Sullivan, but those of Patricia Cole. With 117 votes for “Not Qualified,” no matter which way you calculate it, she has the highest number in that category.

Catherine Goodman had difficulties following the law when applying for a position on the ballot, disregarded campaign finance laws, and is now manipulating results to show them in her favor. On the campaign trail she says she writes the law and that she knows the law, but can she follow the law?

Pin It on Pinterest