What is "vote integrity" or "voter integrity"? It depends if you are red or blue.

 Note: voter integrity means different things to those who are red and those who are blue. Here is what I hear in store for the Nov. 26 midterms and the 2028 presidential cycle. Red thinks it means only blue states will steal the vote with trickery, so those voters suspected of being illegal migrants and those in swing districts are particularly targeted with steps to 'secure the ballots.. It's necessary to kick off voter rolls in advance, as many registered voters are suspected to be illegal by their last names using detailed information demanded from state rolls, with detailed information, and then require them to 'show their papers' (The SAVE legislation was defeated, but that is what it was about.). "Secure the ballots" means send in the military to seize the ballots and secure them in selected blue states and counties, and put ICE in heavily Hispanic vote districts to scare off as many legitimately legal voters as possible. Such measures are not needed in red leading states and districts because their elections are always fair and free. So what if there is no evidence that the 2020 election was stolen? Such measures are justified because there is "an opportunity for fraud", only in blue and swing districts, of course. https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2026/06/opportunity-for-fraud-is-new-phrase.html

To the blue: it means "secure the ballots and tabulators" from partisan hands. to follow the election administrators' rules designed to ensure both blue and red eyes on the process and the results, and to make sure that the protocols under the rules are followed. For the blue Secretaries of State and the state AG's, it means enforcing the voter laws as written. Sending in the military to take control of the polls and ballots is turning them into Tina Peters, who thought that was what vote integrity and secure the ballots meant. Lock up the ballots so only those who are red have access, she thought.. One thing is clear: the GOP not only plans to try these stunts, but has cleared the legal grounds to do so. When voting for the AG or the Secretary of State, Blue will need a clever and proven track record to stay on top of these attempts and stop them

https://www.ms.now/news/troops-polling-republicans-senate-elections

Once again to those who still think what Tina Peters did was a minor infraction not worthy of criminal prosecution

 Once again, for those who still think what Tina Peters did was a minor infraction not worthy of criminal prosecution, and sentenced to 9 years, here's the fuller story. She was found guilty by a jury of her peers, appealed, and still lost the appeal on the conviction, which stood. However, the sentencing was disputed; she should have received some credit for her First Amendment rights, ordered resentencing, said the courts, and Polis, who acted before the resentencing, was releasing her after she had served four and a half years in prison. 

At the same time, she was caught compromising ballot security and the integrity of the count; two other county clerks also tried to do the same. However, instead of simply breaking the rules and then trying to cover it up and lying, as Peters did, they were removed from their duties in counting and reporting on the election. results. When it was discovered that Peters lied about the identity of the person to whom she gave the codes and put someone up to help her, she got into deeper trouble. Imagine if every county clerk thinks they can just give the codes to a volunteer and get away with it, how much faith would we have in the count? All three clerks involved were Trump supporters, who heeded his call to "secure the machines, ballots; we expect fraud if we lose" by giving the codes or access to an unauthorized person or locking up the ballots in violation of the rules and laws they had sworn to uphold, and just be given a light reprimand for breaking the rules, what then?

Here is the conservative  Heritage Foundation's summary of the case. Tina Peters, the former Mesa County Clerk, was charged by Mesa County with 9 felonies and 5 misdemeanors for her role in an election security breach in 2021. Peters worked with Belinda Knisley to allow unauthorized personnel access to the Mesa County election system, including providing an individual who was never hired by the county with an access badge to the secure election system. Peters and Knisley also had the security cameras overlooking the access machines turned off. In August 2021, images of the Mesa County election management systems and related passwords appeared on the internet. Knisley and Peters then refused to comply with subpoenas and directives from the Secretary of State when this was investigated. As a result, Peters was charged with multiple counts of attempt to influence a public servant; conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation; criminal impersonation; identity theft; official misconduct; violation of duty; and failure to comply with requirements of the Secretary of State. Following a jury trial, she was convicted of 4felonies and 3 misdemeanors and acquitted of the 3 remaining charges. She was sentenced to a total of 9 years (8 ½ in prison and six months in jail) and fined $14,992.50.

Source(s):

https://herit.ag/4cJhjzc, https://herit.ag/4cJBCN4, https://herit.ag/4itXZHy

What do a Colorado AG and Secretary of State. actulaly do? Do they need to be trial attorneys?

Jena Griswold's opponents in the primary race for Attorney General  have impressive backgrounds as trial attorneys, but that is not what the position calls for.  Where do they stand on protecting ballot integrity against election deniers and Trump's drive to federalize elections so he can control the outcome more easily? This will be the hot-button issue for the next two years, as it has been for the past two, and both positions, AG and Secretary of State, will be involved... Grwiswold has earned her spurs on this issue by running smooth elections, providing efficient access to business records, and demonstrating nationwide leadership in dealing with those who would undermine our most sacred right to free and fair elections. Being a trial attorney, no matter how successful in fighting crime, is a great resume for a District Attorney, but not for what the AG's position calls for, which is coordinating a staff of 700, including an entire section of trial attorneys. Protecting Colorado's election integrity does not appear to be any priority or even on the radar of Griswold's opponents.

So much of the chatter on social media about the primary at the end of June dominates who is qualified to be in a courtroom to prosecute cases concerning Colorado law, or whether either the Secretary of State or the State Attorney General needs courtroom experience to be effective. The correct answer is neither needs to be a trial attorney to be qualified and, and claiming otherwise is deceptive. and irrelevant. The attack on both candidates in current ads, who either had little courtroom experience or had rarely actually appeared in a courtroom, is deceptive. Being courtroom litigators is not required for either position because both the SOS and AG have supervisory and administrative roles, and neither has to be in the courtroom, nor is that what their positions primarily demand.. They can and should tap in-house staff and a section of courtroom-experienced prosecutors, as they must also manage multiple administrative matters, set priorities, and serve as the public face for a wide range of issues and enforcement actions handled by hundreds of staff members.

The best example of this is the prosecution of the Tina Peters case. Peters, Mesa County Clerk, had given the codes of the election tabulating machines to. a partisan volunteer, covered it up, and lied about it. Her conviction survived a jury trial and appeal, but the sentencing was the issue, and Polis was criticized for releasing her after she had served half her prison term. https://coloradonewsline.com/.../tina-peters-mesa-county.../ In the high-profile prosecution of Tina Peters for criminally breaking Colorado voter integrity laws,, both SOS Griwswold and AG Phil Weiser had critical roles in supervising the successful action, but both the Mesa County DA and two assistant attorney generals did the actual courtroom and legal work.. That is why it is such BS to attack Griswold for a lack of courtroom experience, and or to attack Phil Weiser for not being directly involved.. The AG has its own staff of courtroom-seasoned attorneys, and asking the question "Would you like Griwold to represent you in court?" is an irrelevant and deceptive attack on Griwold or on Phil Weiser.

Whether you agree with what either did, at least understand what their positions require, and whether their qualifications and experience are the right fit for the job.

FYI. Felicia Muftic is a former county clerk (Denver) and director of a multi-county consumer protection prosecution office with civil and criminal powers.

"Opportunity for fraud" is a new phrase being used for committing fraud on voters by keeping the big lie going for 6 years

 "Opportunity for fraud" is  a new phrase being used for committing fraud on voters by keeping the big lie going for 6  years. and explaining away the lack of evidence, the 2020 election was stolen, Trump's fundamental basis for abusing his power is that the 2020 election was stolen.  It has been his excuse for most domestic acts he has taken to give J6 criminals and election denier icon Tina Peters a get-out-of-jail pass and to federalize elections so the big leader in the White House can more easily control the vote system and the outcome. This is in spite of those charged with seditiion or battering police officers or violating rules protecting ballot integrity have been given due process,  jury trials, pleading guilty, and after appeals upon appeals. Now, a new possible director of national intelligence, former SEC Chairman Jay Clayton, for Director of National Intelligence (DNI), is using the term "opportunity for fraud" to describe Trump's relentless search for an event. for which no court has found sufficient evidence so far in six years to change the 2020 outcome. Even Trjmps's own AG said the 2020 election was fraud-free.   Despite this, Trump is obsessed with keeping this lie alive, giving him the tool to rationalize a witch hunt because if there is smoke in the process itself and these isolated examples, there's certainly fire everywhere else.  and then he also has a pitch that puts.  into question any vote tally that does not go his way. For those in MAGA who dismiss the issue of evidence as some lib press and media,  or lib judges, trust the truth in every word coming from Trump, are those who are willing victims or ignorant of the deception of Trump's pitch that" since there is an opportunity for fraud, there is fraud."( In the case of California, it was uttered even before and during the counting was completed.) There is also a willful ignoring of the rigorous measures used to mitigate fraud, or of the lack of evidence that enough was done to overturn the outcome of 2020. 

 Even claiming "an opportunity for fraud" is another way to institutionalize an aura of paranoia, undermine faith in the electoral processes, give more fodder to Trump to fix what is not broken for political gain, and avoid looking like a loser, with such lies and insinuations.   https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2026/06/how-do-you-tell-political-lie-from.html

The term "opportunity for fraud" is used in risk management of the systems proposed or in use by those who evaluate it because it indicates the steps needed to reduce the likelihood of that happening.  The fraud Truad has committed is to ignore and keep followers in the dark about the extreme measures, legitimate practices, and rules already required of compliant election officials to keep such "opportunities" to isolated examples.  There are thousands of county clerks and state election officials who are sworn to such risk management procedures, but the one who violated her oath to follow procedure is Tina Peters, who listened to Trump's speeches to "secure the votes cast". Instead of following the required procedure, she secured the vote tabulators by locking them. up and giving the codes for access to a MAGA loyal volunteer, tried to cover it up, lied, and got convicted by a trial of peers of violation of the state of Colorado criminal law. She appealed, and her conviction was upheld, though the sentence did not take into consideration her First Amendment rights to state her opinion, and Colorado Governor Polis released her from state prison after she had already served half her 9-year sentence. Note: her conviction was not overturned.  

For those who are ignorant of the procedures their clerks use to verify their votes, both in the registration process and in ensuring their ballots are counted, the "opportunity for fraud" needs to be scrutinized, as do the measures taken. States are in control of this per the Constitution, not the federal government.  Being ignorant of that is to fool oneself, and not understanding or learning about it is to be a willing fool. 

The key to having a voter's ballot counted, whatever the process, is that the signature at registration matches the signature on the ballot cast. That is true whether the voter received their ballot by mail, did not request it, requested it, mailed it, dropped it off, was "harvested" by someone else, or turned up in person at a polling place. or showed them their papers or didn't. In most instances, there are both red and blue clerks examining signatures, and if there is a question. The ballot is kept separate and provisional until the voter is given a chance to appeal. That makes "opportunity for fraud" rarely happen in reality. 

This constant drumbeat that there was fraud in 2020, in 2026 November there will also be fraud by libs and into 2028 asell, is in itself a fraud on their MAGA supporters.  There is a high leap between "opportunity for fraud" to actual evidence of fraud itself, and that "opportunity" appeals to either the blind loyal  (if Trump says it happens and will, it did and will) or to the unthinking ignorant who do not know squat about the process elections officials use to keep that risk at a minimum.  One would think that after 6 years, and with no evidence from both red and blue judges that the 2020 election was stolen, and based on isolated examples of those who tried to cheat getting caught, there was enough of this to have changed the outcome of the 2020 election.

A word to the media: Make how the vote counts, and the signature process works a big and ongoing story. Part of the problem is that it is easier to just cite court cases, but voters need a greater understanding of the processes used to mitigate fraud in the process they use.  This is a good one for local and state media since each local or state elections official have their own set  of rules and process.