Outrage Follows Wasserman-Schultz Election Integrity Appearance

This article was originally published via Activate Now, and is my own intellectual property.

(ActivateNow) - Earlier this month, Congresswoman and former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz spoke at a May 6th Field Hearing on Voting Rights and Election Administration in Florida. Her appearance sparked a flurry of public outrage regarding Wasserman-Schultz’s central role in multiple corruption and election interference sagas, including the infamous rigging of the 2016 Democratic Primary, the Awan brothers scandal, and alleged election interference in races between Wasserman-Schultz and rival progressive Tim Canova.

The hearing, broadcast live on Youtube, saw Wasserman-Schultz counter statements regarding the “mysterious” appearance of ballots and whether those ballots were valid.

“U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, objected to the portrayal of ballots that turned up after Election Day that Republicans used to raise doubts about the conduct of the election. She said they were lawfully cast mail ballots that were received by the deadline. “We did not have mysterious ballots that suddenly showed up out of clear blue sky,” the Sun-Sentinel wrote.

Tim Canova, a tenured law professor who ran against Wasserman-Schultz for Florida’s 23rd Congressional district, contested the results of the 2018 midterm race after the official vote count awarded him a mere 5% of votes, despite a poll conducted shortly before election day that revealed the independent was tied with the former DNC Chairwoman.

In response to Wasserman-Schultz’s appearance at the May 8th hearing, Canova Tweeted: “Debbie Wasserman Schultz takes part in House Administration field hearing on election integrity in Broward County. Next have an arsonist testify on fire prevention. Same committee refuses to hear our complaint challenging Debbie’s 2018 rigged election.”

Canova wrote to his supporters: “The U.S. House Committee for Administration held a field hearing on voting rights and elections right here in Broward County, Florida, the epicenter for election rigging. This is the same committee where we filed our complaint challenging the results of our November 2018 election against Debbie Wasserman Schultz. The committee has never even acknowledged receiving our complaint, yet it invited Debbie Wasserman Schultz to take part in this recent field hearing!”

Video evidence from election night was purported to show a digital scanner voting machine sending results wirelessly as well as the illegal transportation of ballots.

As readers may recall, former Broward County Supervisor of Elections Brenda Snipes was found legally responsible for ordering illegal ballot destruction that arguably benefitted Wasserman-Schultz’s interest. Snipes was later photographed openly campaigning with Wasserman-Schultz just days before 2018’s midterms took place.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, left campaigned with Brenda Snipes, right. Image via Twitter.

 

The Sun Sentinel explained Snipes’s direct involvement in the destruction of ballots, writing: “Canova, who was checking for voting irregularities in the race, sought to look at the paper ballots in March 2017 and took Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes to court three months later when her office hadn’t fulfilled his request. Snipes approved the destruction of the ballots in September, signing a certification that said no court cases involving the ballots were pending. Snipes called the action a “mistake” during testimony she gave in the case, saying the boxes were mislabeled and there was “nothing on my part that was intentional” about destroying the contested ballots.”

Additional press reports indicated that on May 11, 2018, the Florida Circuit Court granted Plaintiff Canova summary judgment, finding that Snipes had violated numerous state and federal statutes, including laws punishable as felonies with up to five years in prison.

Wasserman-Schultz’s presence during the May 6th hearing was additionally galling to some in light of the House Committee’s lack of response to allegations of election interference lodged by Canova when he contested the result of the 2018 midterm race. Canova explained the reasoning behind the decision, writing:

“Our campaign was capped at an unlikely 5% of the vote. Moreover, we were capped at that level for every demographic group — something so unbelievable that a leading expert in computational science concluded it was as likely as winning the lottery every day for a year!”

Lulu Friesdat, an award-winning journalist, wrote about Canova’s election via Truthout: “In the results of Canova’s 2016 run against Wasserman Schultz, we found an over 1,000-vote discrepancy between the number of voters and the number of cast ballots. Out of 211 precincts, only 19 had the same number of voters as cast ballots. Election experts I spoke with were stunned, saying the results indicated either gross negligence or fraud.”

Wasserman-Schultz also played an essential role in the Awan scandal, with Luke Rosiak reporting that Imran Awan served as a systems administrator for Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and other Democratic lawmakers from 2005, until he was banned from the House network on suspicion of data breaches and theft. Rosiak later reported that Wasserman-Schultz threatened the chief of the U.S. Capitol Police with “consequences” for holding a laptop in order to build a criminal case against Awan, who was suspected of massive cybersecurity breaches involving funneling sensitive congressional data offsite.

The Department of Justice eventually declined to prosecute the Awan brothers. It was also previously reported that Assistant United States Attorney for the US Attorney’s Office is none other than Debbie Wasserman-Schultz’s brother. In 2017, Wasserman Tweeted an article dismissing the Awan Scandal and its implications for his sister. It remains unclear as to whether Steven Wasserman was involved in the case in which his sister was embroiled.

Steven Wasserman, far left, is pictured with Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, far right. Image via social media

Despite all this, Wasserman-Schultz was appointed to the Congressional House Oversight Committee earlier this year. Floridian press reported: “Democratic U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of South Florida was named to serve on the Committee on Oversight and Reform late Tuesday, the panel charged with launching congressional investigations.”

The article continued: “Chairman Elijah E. Cummings commented on the appointment of Wasserman Schultz and other Democrats to the Committee. “Our Committee is the primary investigative body in Congress, and we will address the issues that affect the American people every day while we root out waste, fraud, and abuse,” he added. “The American people voted for accountability and transparency this past election, and I’m eager to work in a bipartisan manner on behalf of all of our constituents to deliver on these goals.”

In January, local press reported Wasserman-Schultz’s claim that she was a “victim” of WikiLeaks: “The Mueller indictment shows that Roger Stone, at the direction of senior Trump campaign officials, willingly weaponized information stolen by WikiLeaks on behalf of Russia to help Donald Trump get elected President,” she said.”

In contrast with Wasserman-Schultz and the DNC’s infamous support of Clinton in 2016, Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard resigned from her position as vice chair of the DNC during the 2016 primary to endorse Sanders, rather than allow for an ongoing conflict of interest. Prior to her resignation, Gabbard reportedly “clashed with DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz over the Democratic presidential debate schedule.” Gabbard is now a candidate in the upcoming 2020 Democratic primary.

Wasserman-Schultz’s appearance at this recent field hearing on election integrity acts as a symbol for many progressives that not only has the DNC failed to learn from its mistakes in 2016, but that the larger political apparatus has worked in favor of protecting those responsible for illegal behavior, rather than acting on behalf of the public interest or election integrity.

Support Elizabeth Vos's independent journalism via Patreon