DNC Sues Georgia Governor Over His Bullshit Claims Democrats Hacked The State's Voter Registration System
from the hope-you've-got-a-20-on-you,-Kempster dept
The never-ending amount of election related litigation keeps on coming. The Trump campaign is still heavily invested in lawsuits -- a practice it started before the election and it hasn't scaled back now that its boy has been handed an L.
Georgia remains a hotly contested state, thanks in part to pressure applied by the outbound President and his many minions. It will recount all five million votes, which Trump appears to believe will reverse Biden's 14,000-vote lead.
Georgia has long been a victim of its Governor, dating back to his days as the Secretary of State. During Brian Kemp's tenure as an elected official, voting in Georgia has been little more than his political plaything. Issues with the state's voting tech were ignored in favor of Kemp's indulgence in wild speculation, culminating with his baseless claims the Democratic National Committee had hacked the state's voter registration system. A Georgia Bureau of Investigation investigation found no evidence supporting Kemp's ridiculous assertions.
Now, as Courthouse News reports, the DNC is suing Kemp over his election related bullshit. This isn't a defamation suit, even though it's possible to see that claim being raised. Instead, the DNC alleges the then Secretary of State violated federal election laws with his claims of DNC hacking and his decision to air his speculation hours before the polls opened in 2018.
The lawsuit [PDF] opens with this stinging sentence, which highlights one the many problems with allowing Brian Kemp to oversee the 2018 election.
Kemp was also a candidate in the governor’s election that year. He claimed, however, that he could fairly manage an election at the same time as was running in it.
And how did he "manage" it? Like this:
Two days before the election, Kemp worked with others to release a statement on the Secretary of State’s website that said in all capital letters: “AFTER FAILED HACKING ATTEMPT, SOS LAUNCHES INVESTIGATION INTO GEORGIA DEMOCRATIC PARTY.”
The statement further claimed to “confirm that the Democratic Party of Georgia is under investigation for possible cyber crimes,” and noted that the FBI and Department of Homeland Security had been alerted.
The DNC never hacked the voter registration system. Instead, a private citizen reported security flaws in the Secretary of State's website to a DC election lawyer. This report later made its way to the DNC local branch in Georgia. Eventually, news made its way back to Brian Kemp -- via the DNC, FBI, and the DC election lawyer. It was this information Kemp spun into a fantastic tale of DNC hackery.
The lawsuit recounts Brian Kemp's ineffectual run as Secretary of State, an era marked by multiple reports of serious flaws in the voting system he was supposed to be overseeing. Then, as he was running for a new post, he decided to broadcast unsupported claims about Democratic Party interference in the very election he was interfering with. This included Kemp's bizarre anger over DHS penetration testing -- testing he had apparently asked the DHS to perform.
He converted both of his fantasies into last-minute electioneering for his governor run, sending out emails to supporters claiming he had "intercepted" the Democrats' "fourth quarter Hail Mary pass" and would be holding these "power-hungry radicals" accountable for their "criminal behavior."
The lawsuit says many people and entities were informed about security flaws in the voting system, but Kemp chose a single target to attack with baseless claims of criminal behavior.
The DNC accuses Kemp of violating federal law by falsely targeting it with these accusations. It alleges this was done in retaliation for its efforts to unseat Kemp and support its own candidates.
Here, Defendant Kemp has shown a pattern of falsely accusing Democratic administrations and Democratic parties of “hacking.” In 2016, he accused President Obama’s Department of Homeland Security of a “large attack on our system.” Unsatisfied with the DHS explanation for why there was no attack, Defendant Kemp asked the incoming Trump administration to investigate further. Later, he conceded that there had never been any hacking.
[...]
Defendants accused the Democratic Party of Georgia even though the Democratic Party of Georgia’s only involvement was to (1) receive information from Richard Wright on a voter security hotline; (2) forward that information to two experts at Georgia Tech; and (3) inform the Secretary of State’s office.
[...]
Defendants conspired to accuse the Democratic Party of Georgia of cyber crimes without any basis.
[...]
Defendants’ choice to maintain the public statements on the Secretary of State website even after they found out that the Democratic Party of Georgia was not the source of the vulnerability information was and is an ongoing substantial step in furtherance of the conspiracy.
Defendants’ choice not to remove the public statements on the Secretary of State website even after they found out that the supposed “intrusion” was the Department of Homeland Security acting at the request of the Secretary of State was and is an ongoing substantial step in furtherance of the conspiracy.
That's one potential federal law violation. There's another one listed in the lawsuit. Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act forbids anyone from intimidating voters or coercing votes. The DNC alleges Kemp's actions and statements were meant to intimidate the DNC and divert its resources towards responding to baseless accusations during the final days of the state election.
The DNC isn't asking for much. The damage request is limited to $20.00. But it does want an injunction in place requiring the removal of Kemp's disproven accusations from the state's Secretary of State website.
This lawsuit is one of what will likely be several postscripts appended to the 2020 elections. Claims of hacking, fraud, and other voting related misconduct have been delivered by a number of Republicans over the past several weeks. But baseless claims of election malfeasance aren't a recent development.
They've been a permanent fixture of the Republican party since Trump took office -- urged on by a president who lost the popular vote in 2016 but ended up with the most Electoral College votes. Ever since then, the Republican Party has waged war on the democratic process, having realized allowing the voting process to go unfucked could possibly result in fewer Republicans being elected.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: brian kemp, elections, georgia, voting, voting machines
Companies: dnc
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If you have to cheat to win...
The utter desperation and open corruption would be hilarious if were just one ranting idiot, however the fact that said 'ranting idiot' has no small amount of power and a higher than zero number of the public fall for such obvious cons rather takes the humor out.
I'd say they should come up with some new lies but if the current one is working just fine on gullible fools then no need I guess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: If you have to cheat to win...
It depends on how you define "working".
It's working in that it's keeping Trump's cult whipped up.
As far as actually convincing any judge to throw out the results of the election? That ain't working, and doesn't look like it's going to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: If you have to cheat to win...
"It's working in that it's keeping Trump's cult whipped up."
Yeah, and republicans all know that as long as the 30% remember their names it means they've got those votes in the bag come their own elections. For republican politicians this is the proper time to persuade the alt right that they too do not give a shit about the constitution, good governance, or law younger than the code of Hammurabi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: If you have to cheat to win...
Just ask Martha McSally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: If you have to cheat to win...
Ah, the woman fighter pilot who started her political career swinging for women's rights and talking about how repulsive Trump was only to two years later switch her entire persona to become on of his most loyal sycophants? I guess as a republican you can only complain about a man being a rapey molester if the man isn't Dear Leader?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When people talk about voter fraud and abuses of power, people should never, ever forget that as Georgia Secretary of state, Brian Kemp closed polling places and made it as hard for minority voters as he could ahead of a gubernatorial election he was running in, and rebuffed offers for help with election security from the department of homeland security.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And the same voting apparatus that intentionally destroyed the evidence (hard drives) of whether their voting system servers had been hacked (turns out they were) after being served with a lawsuit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The sad part...
Is that if it turns out that most of the "rampant election malfeasance" in recent years is committed by Republican officeholders, prosecution of such offenders will be seen by the party faithful as "proof" of the conspiracy against conservatives.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Every accusation, a confession.
It's a basic liar/con-artist trick, if you're doing or going to be doing something and it would be problematic if you got caught simply accuse someone else of it first, that way should you get caught and they accuse you you can simply frame it as them being defensive and trying to blame someone else for their actions, which of course is exactly what you just did.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The sad part...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/nov/16/georgia-brad-raffensperger-lindsey-graham-elections- ballots
That's a Republican senator openly querying whether he would have the power throw out legally cast ballots because they didn't vote for his team. It's anecdotal, but I wonder if we will find other examples where they weren't as cautious about whether they could do it.
This is really just another glimpse into the mindset of these people - since they lie and cheat all the time, they can't comprehend that other people aren't doing the same.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The sad part...
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/11/17/lindsey-graham-spoke-election-offic ials-multiple-states-ballots/6326680002/
It seems he was doing this in multiple states. Not his own though, of course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
how much of this game
do we want to play?
This has been going on longer then watergate, which wasnt much of anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It is truly sad that we've grown to accept lies & misinformation.
Cops lie on the stand, elected officials lie on the record, and other than some "outrage" there isn't any punishment.
Using his position to spread this information in this way should be seen for what it was, a stunt to undermine public faith in the system. Like Judges issuing orders demanding prior restraint or Congressmen bent on undermining the 1st Amendment for anyone who doesn't share their Trumpian view of the world, there needs to be punishment.
Instead we'll just tut & tsk, pretending this is just how things are.
We have the leadership we believe we deserve, perhaps we need someone to come in and save us from out abusers & open our eyes that this abuse isn't acceptable & should be punished.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's a bunch of victim-blaming BS, right there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
so we play the hand we are dealt, or we force the dealer to QUIT CHEATING??
Last time I saw this on TV, the dealer got shot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
We are the abused spouse.
A grand jury failed to indict officers when someone they detained & put in the back of a car hands cuffed behind them managed to produce a super secret hidden gun, get his hands in front of him, shoot himself in the head, then put his hands back.
We give a pass to things we shouldn't because our abusers tell us it'll be worse if we hold them accountable. But then they hit us again, then bring us flowers & we take them back... to be safe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
So, uh...we're in agreement about you blaming the victim, then?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"That's a bunch of victim-blaming BS, right there."
No, not really. qui tacet consentire videtur is a terrible line for law but an unfortunate reality in politics. Hitler could never have won in 1933 if even half of the germans had decided to stand against him. But this isn't victim-blaming.
It's blaming the vast majority of americans who saw the victims abused and never could be arsed to move in enough numbers to suppress what started out as a small minority and is now about 30% of the US citizenry.
The fact of the matter is that despite Trump being as openly malicious as he was Biden barely won. And still doesn't hold congress and senate. Why?
Because while 1 out of 3 americans are so eager for a leader of ANY kind to emerge who will "fuck the liberals" over at any price the saner 2/3 keep fooling themselves into believing there is a rational and civil answer as long as the savage animals keep being invited to the dinner table.
The republicans have been fairly above board with their agenda for some time now. It's time to draw lines, the same way they have.
When you sit down with the racist uncle at the dinner table you provide validation for his views.
Your friend whose s.o. is a bona fide nazi? Yeah, you may have to abstain from hanging with him if she's a tagalong.
Your in-law who voted for Trump? He's made his position clear and it's not a political one - it's a statement that he's OK with atrocities as long as it brings a victory for his "team".
The american political establishment has kept inviting, to serious debate, people who would have the Greatest Generation grasping for their M14's and Colts. All because in a naíve belief in bipartisanship with the Very Fine People and those who believe those Very Fine People are OK enough to vote for.
Biden more or less has to speak of reconciliation where Trump and GWB were happy to divide. Well, it might be time for liberals and the rational moderates to tell Biden to Fuck That Noise and send the message that no sane person wants to bridge the gap leading to racists and fascists.
Because every time that hand is extended is just an ask for another beating. At some point this becomes the image of a violent asshole beating up a well-intentioned idiot who won't defend himself until the asshole's already beaten him into a cripple.
This is the reason why Malcolm X said he feared the ignorant well-intentioned liberal more than the openly aggressive klansman. Because they don't stay angry. They just calm down and invite more debate, sweeping the latest spate of atrocities under the carpet.
Victim-blaming? No, but it's time to own that if it hadn't been for moderates and liberals continually trying to lure the racists and fascists to the negotiation table the GOP would never have gotten the impression that catering shamelessly to that crowd was a winning idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
He won the popular vote by 6 million and the electoral vote by 74. I would have liked to have seen him win by more, but this election wasn't close, it just took a long time to count because of the large number of mail-in ballots.
I assume by "doesn't hold Congress and Senate" you mean "the House and the Senate", both of which are part of Congress. If that is indeed what you mean, then you are mistaken. Democrats maintained control of the House, and control of the Senate will not be decided until January.
That said? The Senate grants disproportionate influence to racists. That's not a bug, it's a feature. When the US was founded, more populous states wanted a legislature that gave more representation to states with more people, while rural (read: slave-owning) states wanted every state to have equal representation. The Senate is the latter. It's the one designed by the slavers.
Not for nothin', despite all that the Democrats won more seats than they lost. With a set of mostly-Republican seats up, in a body that grants disproportional influence to Republicans, only one Democratic incumbent lost his seat. And that was in Alabama.
The House is closer to proportional representation, but it grants disproportionate influence to smaller states too, as it's capped at 435 representatives. Wyoming gets 1 representative for a population of about 600,000 people, and California gets 53 representatives for a population of 40 million. You do the math.
And I haven't even gotten into gerrymandering or voter disenfranchisement.
If you're blaming 1 out of 3 Americans, and also blaming "the saner 2/3", in what conceivable way are you not blaming the victims? I mean, it's been awhile since I got my math minor, but I'm pretty sure that if you take 1/3 and then add 2/3, hang on, carry the 1...you're blaming literally everybody.
How is that not blaming the victims? I'm pretty sure they're a subset of that 100% of the population you're blaming.
Shit, how did you find out my friends and family are made of straw?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"That said? The Senate grants disproportionate influence to racists. That's not a bug, it's a feature. "
That's not exactly making the case for dismissing the claim that most of the US bears the blame for the current GOP holding so much power.
"...you're blaming literally everybody."
Yup. Sorry in advance if this comes out as...emotional, but we who happen to not be american have had to watch - and experience - how, for a great many years now, a minority of racist assholes and empire-builders have consistently hijacked that nation to its own detriment and that of others. And every damn time the otherwise sane people who are in the position to stop it calm down and start trying to make nice with the racist minority eager to beat everyone up because that minority wants liberals, foreigners and brown people gone no matter the price.
The analogy here? This is the sort of spousal abuse where the abused are the bigger and stronger of the pair; Where the abuser goes after other people as well. And after every beating the abused party, bigger and stronger though they may be, always, invariably, ends up extending a hand of forgiveness and saying "It'll change".
The US as a whole is becoming a menace. To itself and to the world. And the victim in question? Just keeps right on trying to "bridge the gap" to people who have made it abundantly clear their only skin in the game is "fuck liberals".
No, this isn't victim-blaming. It's Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance playing out, in real life, to the detriment of fucking everyone.
When no intervention is possible, no other player strong enough, credible enough, or - by now - invested enough to give too many shits about the US tearing itself to shreds it'll fall to americans themselves - those 70% who aren't malicious fuckwits - to realize that being a gentle giant may be a great thing...but it's time to give up on that civil discourse the opposition abandoned long ago, and find a sharp rock. Because inept morons those 30% may be but they won't stop beating the rest of you until they win.
Trump is a symptom of cancer. Not just a pain in the ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Everyone thinks the president is all powerful, and thats NOT our system. its the other 500+ idiots we need to get rid of.
And the idea of how may people WERE REALLY running for office? Generally over 1000 have signed up. but NOT in each state, and where can you find that list?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just because you're too ignorant to know what hacking actually is doesn't make everything hacking. It does however make you a hack Mr. Kemp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
too little, too late
Why didn't they do this back in 2018? Did they have to wait for things to shake out? This blatantly corrupt nazi trash stole the election from Stacy Abrams with this bullshit. If we had a functioning society, they would be able to have him banned from office for this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Crazed
So Tim?
How do you know the "claims" are bullshit? What if the "claims" aren't claims anymore? And solid evidence is presented.
What if your 0% reasoning is dismantled 100% by evidence?
Will you then crow like a demented magpie that Trump was "bested" again?
The extreme dementia regarding Trump on this blog is really truly sincerely insane.
The guy's got a case. Stop spitting on it. It makes you look stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does he have an actual case, or does he have a bunch of smoke and mirrors that are meant to make you think he has a case instead of unsubstantiated allegations and uncorroborated anecdotes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'If we claim smoke there MUST be fire!'
Based upon the current cases regarding 'voter fraud' the two are basically indistinguishable to Trump's cultists, with claims(by their side) treated as evidence and evidence(against them) treated as just part of the great anti-'conservative' conspiracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 'If we claim smoke there MUST be fire!'
"...with claims(by their side) treated as evidence and evidence(against them) treated as just part of the great anti-'conservative' conspiracy."
Well, yes, that is how a religious cult works.
I found it concerning when Dawkins once upon a time re-published the statistics that 50% of the US citizenry were creationist but the social spectacle in wake of the last four years and the election are proof-positive that to a significant proportion of the US population facts are optional extras which should be ignored when inconvenient.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Crazed
"How do you know the "claims" are bullshit? "
Because Trump would have presented evidence to one of the 25 attempts in court he's tried so far, instead of them being laughed out of court.
"And solid evidence is presented."
That is literally all that anyone is waiting for. Why is your hero not presenting it?
"The guy's got a case"
Oh cool, you have it? I don't know why he's shown it to you instead of the courts, but any chance you could share?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Crazed
"Because Trump would have presented evidence to one of the 25 attempts in court he's tried so far, instead of them being laughed out of court."
It's restless94110 we're talking to here. To him that's not an indication Trump's got nothing but his dick in his hand, it's "evidence" every court in the land is crooked, because "But Obama!". He's blamed the Bad Black Man for every malfeasance since the Fall of Man so surely the court asking for actual evidence is also the fault of that Kenyan Muslim.
"That is literally all that anyone is waiting for. Why is your hero not presenting it?"
Why, a republican governor opened his mouth and hollered there was a nefarious plot against Dear Leader. Surely this is evidence enough?
"I don't know why he's shown it to you instead of the courts, but any chance you could share?"
Strangely we are forced to conclude that the rock-solid evidence of malfeasance republicans keep screaming about evaporates in sunlight, requiring them to handle it away from prying eyes and courtrooms where the super-powers of Barrack Obama would disintegrate it before anyone managed to get a proper look.
It's the only logical explanation. Aside from the Very Fine People lying through their teeth of course. But they'd never do that, surely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Crazed
reasoning?
Lets see.
Over the past 20 years a few things have been added.
With Just this, and a few other things that have been done.
Cross referencing and ID verification of Every person in the USA. Which is to say that we have lost abit of our privacy and the Gov, state and fed, really hate it when we move around allot. NOW go find a job, and get NEW ID, NEW insurance, NEW medical, NEW everything and have it ready by Nov. of next year.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]