this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2026
261 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29393 readers
185 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Chad Bianco of Riverside county obtained warrants to seize ballots cast for state’s successful redistricting referendum

A California sheriff’s decision to seize about 650,000 ballots based on specious allegations of fraud has raised considerable alarm bells that similar efforts to undermine confidence in the electoral system could materialize this fall.

The episode underscores how sheriffs and other officials can transform shoddy claims about voter fraud into law enforcement actions. Executing a warrant to seize ballots disrupts the chain of custody that is critical to maintaining ballot integrity, and also plants the idea in the public’s mind that a crime has occurred.

Chad Bianco, the sheriff in Riverside county, California, obtained warrants in February and March to seize the ballots related to a special election last year in which voters overwhelmingly approved a referendum to redraw California’s congressional districts. The warrants remain sealed, but Bianco had said he was investigating claims by a citizen activist group that there was difference of 45,896 in the number of ballots cast and counted. The referendum, Proposition 50, passed by nearly 30 points statewide. In Riverside county, which stretches from just east of Los Angeles to the Arizona border, it passed by more than 82,000 votes, a nearly 13-point difference.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 58 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The blatantly illegal theft of ballot records, and attempt to deprive voters of their rights under color of law should be prosecuted.

[–] manxu@piefed.social 40 points 1 week ago

In particular, the judge that signed the warrant should face questions. What kind of "evidence" of misconduct was presented and was it sufficient to grant such an outlandish remedy?

[–] minorkeys@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is there not an election integrity system that is responsible for investigating and actioning on election fraud? Why is a normal law enforcement empowered to action on this?

The sheriffs have a lot of leeway due to being what amounts to a leftover from the 1800s, some are relatively chill others are openly corrupt. Pretty sure half their power is written in the state constitution which just makes stripping them of it all the more annoying.

[–] h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)
[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Lol that shit looks like someone's kid made it for them

It broke on my phone. I don't think they put their resolution parameters in right.

[–] samus12345@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago

They're an insult to the NCR!

Holy fuck. That's like... Straight rebellion. They think they can supercede the existing California government. He is calling himself governor pro tempere.

Fucking weird.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 6 points 1 week ago

warrants around elections should require sign off from the local election running agency (usually boards where I am at) and the state level highest one and if one or the other won't sign then the state congress should have to authorize it along with one of the agencies or the state congress with a 2/3rds vote.

Yea. This doesn't seem like it should be under the jurisdiction of just any sheriff. But I'm not sure who I think it should fall under.

[–] GutterRat42@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Class warfare

[–] SnarkoPolo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

The Democratic side of the primary ballot is a clusterfuck. California is a top-two state, so we will have to choose between this douche canoe and the equally douchey but more polite Steve Hilton.

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world -4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

As long as they are following proper chain of custody and using impartial entities to perform their review? Who cares? Let them count as much as they want. They won’t find anything significant. Usually if fraud found it’s from a republican.

This is political theater to whip up votes.

[–] CainTheLongshot@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Except, that's not how it will play out.

They need x number of ballots to overturn the will of the people. They will then look through all of the ballots and find "anamolies" that they will point to as fraudulent like a circle not fully filled in (see "hanging chads") and use that as the basis to throw that ballot out.

Rinse and repeat until x number of ballots have been tossed out, and oh would you look at that, they won! Pretty fucking convenient!

And just like Florida in 2000, when the ballots in question are being relooked at by a neutral party, some douchbags in collared shirts and khakis start rioting outside the facility and "oh no, for safety of the people inside the count has to stop" by court order passed down from a judge; the same judge that signed this warrant in the first place.

And on up to the Supreme Court it goes, which guess what happens there. Check out the Brooks Brothers riot, and look at some of the familiar faces in there.

Fuck that, challenge this in courts before it gets to that point. Then vote this sheriff and judge out as soon as possible.