NB: Note again the similarity to the end of the Weimar Republic,
following a similar playbill. This is not the same as in dictatorships
(including theocracies) in which the "police" have the primary function
of keeping what amounts to the criminal elite in power (whether the
Morality Police of the theocratic dictatorship in Iran or the police of
the PRC, etc.), but rather the police of what is nominally a humane
civil society in fact supporting the elements of overt hatred and
repression (as the police did in the post-Reconstruction former CSA area
in which actual members of the Klan who murdered and pillaged
African-Americans were also sworn police officers -- and not too
different from the Greenwood massacre in Tulsa). Unfortunately, once
the police are corrupted as described below, it is very difficult for a
democracy to survive.
https://news.yahoo.com/constitutional-sheriffs-movement-urges-law-enforcement-to-intervene-in-election-process-090017629.html
Yahoo News
'Constitutional sheriffs' movement urges law enforcement to intervene in
election process
Caitlin Dickson
Reporter
Sat, October 29, 2022 at 2:00 AM
Amid reports of harassment outside ballot drop boxes and threats to
election workers, experts are sounding the alarm about another potential
source of election interference ahead of the 2022 midterms: a growing
coalition of far-right "constitutional sheriffs" who are gearing up to
insert themselves into upcoming elections.
The "constitutional sheriffs" movement, which has ties to the Oath
Keepers and other antigovernment fringe movements, is based on the
legally dubious belief that sheriffs are the ultimate law enforcement
authority within their counties, superseding state and federal
officials, including the U.S. president. In recent years, self-appointed
constitutional sheriffs have refused to enforce various laws that they
deem unconstitutional, from state and federal gun laws to pandemic-era
mask mandates.
Zapata County, Texas, Sheriff Raymundo Del Bosque holds his hat over his
heart during the national anthem during an event held by the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association in Las Vegas.
Zapata County, Texas, Sheriff Raymundo Del Bosque holds his hat over his
heart during the national anthem during an event held by the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association in Las Vegas.
(Bridget Bennett/Reuters)
But now, experts warn, key figures in the movement have teamed up with
prominent election deniers as part of a new campaign that seeks to lend
law enforcement credibility to the false notion, promoted by former
President Donald Trump and his supporters, that voter fraud is rampant
in U.S. elections.
Leading this charge are two major constitutional sheriffs groups — the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and Protect
America Now — which have aligned themselves with True the Vote, a
conservative vote-monitoring group whose widely discredited claims about
voter fraud in the 2020 election were the basis for the film "2000 Mules."
The campaign calls on sheriffs to use their supposedly unsurpassed
authority to investigate and intervene in the administration of
elections using a variety of questionable tactics, from surveilling
polling stations and ballot drop boxes, to potentially seizing voting
equipment and deputizing citizens.
"I think that's something we very much need to be worried about,"
Heidi Beirich, co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and
Extremism, said at a recent conference in Pittsburgh.
Former Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack, founder of the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, speaks during a
news conference in Las Vegas.
Former Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack, founder of the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, speaks during a
news conference in Las Vegas. (Bridget Bennett/Reuters)
In fact, Beirich has been following the constitutional sheriffs movement
since her days at the Southern Poverty Law Center, where she previously
headed the anti-hate organization's intelligence-gathering arm. She said
the recent effort by constitutional sheriffs groups to insert themselves
in election-related issues is the thing she's currently "more worried
about than anything else."
Beirich’s comments came during the second-ever Eradicate Hate Global
Summit conference last month, which drew a wide variety of experts,
academics and advocates as well as federal government officials and
representatives from the tech industry. Over three days, conference
attendees discussed pressing topics, including addressing the prevalence
of violent extremism in law enforcement and the military, and the rise
of hate-fueled violence among young people.
Yet the panel on constitutional sheriffs, which took place on the final
day of the conference, struck a particularly urgent tone.
In addition to Beirich, panelists included Emily Farris, an associate
professor of political science at Texas Christian University and the
co-author of a recent survey of the country’s roughly 3,000 sheriffs,
which found that a substantial minority (more than 200 of over 500 who
responded to the survey) agree with the constitutional sheriffs' belief
that their authority supersedes that of the state or federal government.
More than 300 sheriffs surveyed (who make up roughly one-tenth of the
country’s sheriffs) said they are willing to "interpose" on behalf of
their constituents to oppose a state or federal law that they believe is
unjust or unconstitutional.
Sheriffs and panelists are seen onstage as the screen says
Sheriffs and panelists are seen onstage as the screen says "election
fraud has happened" during an event held by the Constitutional Sheriffs
and Peace Officers Association in Las Vegas. (Bridget Bennett/Reuters)
"It really is a growing movement that has [an] increasing number of
actors in it, which is really concerning," said panelist Mark Pitcavage,
a senior research fellow at the Anti-Defamation League's Center on
Extremism that published a 20-page report last year on the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and its founder,
former Graham, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack, who was also a founding
member of the Oath Keepers’ paramilitary group.
Pitcavage explained how, in just over a decade, Mack has not only turned
the association into "an unusually successful extremist group" but,
through relentless outreach, speaking engagements and law enforcement
trainings, has managed to create "a constitutional sheriff's ecosphere
or movement" centered around his thesis that the county sheriff is the
"last line of defense" against government "tyranny."
While opposition to state and federal gun control laws has always been a
core issue for the constitutional sheriffs, it was the coronavirus
pandemic that really gave Mack’s movement a boost, as sheriffs around
the country capitalized on frustrations over lockdowns by promising not
to enforce stay-at-home orders, mask mandates and other public health
measures that they deemed unconstitutional.
The pandemic-era momentum gave rise to new organizations, like Protect
America Now, a nonprofit coalition of sheriffs that promises to fight
"those who want to trample on our Constitution" and asks supporters to
donate $17.76 a month. Several smaller groups like the Idaho
Constitutional Sheriffs or the Sheriff Brigades of Pennsylvania are
dedicated to electing constitutional sheriffs in every county of their
respective states or commonwealths.
Former Graham County, Arizona, Sheriff Richard Mack, founder of the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, is also a
founding member of the Oath Keepers' paramilitary group.
Former Graham County, Arizona, Sheriff Richard Mack, founder of the
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, is also a
founding member of the Oath Keepers' paramilitary group. (Bridget
Bennett/Reuters)
Pitcavage pointed out that support for the constitutional sheriffs
movement has also extended beyond law enforcement circles, from groups
that oppose vaccine mandates to local governments. In the last year, at
least three counties in Nevada have paid $2,500 to become lifetime
members of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association.
"You actually have governmental entities as members of extremist
groups," Pitcavage said.
More than anything, though, Pitcavage and his fellow panelists were most
alarmed by the recent alliance between leaders of the constitutional
sheriffs movement and True the Vote, the Texas group behind some of the
most popular, yet widely discredited claims regarding voter fraud in the
2020 election.
In June, Protect America Now leader Mark Lamb, who serves as sheriff of
Pinal County, Ariz., and True the Vote’s Catherine Engelbrecht,
announced that their groups had joined forces to create
ProtectAmerica.Vote, a new initiative to "provide local sheriffs with
information, resources, and tools to support election integrity in their
county."
As part of this joint effort, the groups promised to launch a "national
election integrity voter hotline" to connect citizens with tips to
sheriffs, run ads on the radio, TV and online in states to "educate
voters," and raise money for grants to outfit sheriffs with video
surveillance equipment so they can have "real-time eyes on voting in
their county."
A month later, Lamb and Engelbrecht appeared together onstage at an
event hosted by the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers
Organization in Las Vegas, where Mack announced that election issues
were now his group’s top priority. The event also reportedly featured
speeches from other prominent election deniers such as Trump ally and
MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, as well as a handful of county sheriffs who
claim to be investigating the 2020 election.
Then-President Donald Trump greets Sheriff Mark Lamb of Pinal County,
Ariz., as he meets with U.S. Border Patrol agents and local law
enforcement officers and sheriffs while visiting the U.S.-Mexico border
in Calexico, Calif., in 2019.
Then-President Donald Trump greets Sheriff Mark Lamb of Pinal County,
Ariz., as he meets with U.S. Border Patrol agents and local law
enforcement officers and sheriffs while visiting the U.S.-Mexico border
in Calexico, Calif., in 2019. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
Neither Mack nor Lamb responded to multiple requests for comment. A
spokesperson for True the Vote also did not respond to a request for
comment.
During the panel discussion in Pittsburgh, Mary McCord, a former Justice
Department official who now runs the Institute for Constitutional
Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law Center, said that while the
news of the alliance between the sheriffs' movement and True the Vote
set off alarm bells for herself and other experts, many were initially
hesitant to draw attention to it "out of concern it would just give it a
whole lot more publicity."
"But now it's to the point [where] we're actually seeing examples of
sheriffs starting to ask questions of election officials," McCord told
conference attendees in Pittsburgh.
Specifically, McCord cited the reported activities of Johnson County,
Kan., Sheriff Calvin Hayden, who appeared at the constitutional sheriffs
event in Las Vegas this summer.
Hayden is one of a handful of county sheriffs who claim to be
investigating fraud in the 2020 election, despite repeated reassurances
from state and local officials that there's no evidence to support such
claims.
Johnson County Sheriff Calvin Hayden. (JCSO)
Johnson County Sheriff Calvin Hayden. (JCSO)
Hayden's sudden interest in voting procedures raised red flags for some
local officials earlier in the summer. Peg Trent, Johnson County's chief
legal counsel, outlined these concerns in a July 7 memo in which she
described a meeting days earlier between herself, Hayden and other local
election officials. In the memo, Trent wrote that during the July 5
meeting, the sheriff had "inquired of County staff about prior election
processes, challenged the integrity of elections in Johnson County, and
requested that local law enforcement participate in the current election
procedures."
Specifically, Trent said that Hayden questioned the placement of ballot
drop boxes at public libraries in 2020, proposed limiting the hours
ballot drop boxes would be available in future elections, offered to
have his staff pick up ballots from drop boxes in unmarked vehicles and
requested to have a sheriff's deputy in the room to observe the counting
of ballots.
"As we discussed, my concern is that these requests give the appearance
that the Sheriff’s office is attempting to interfere with an election,"
Trent wrote.
At the time, Hayden issued a statement disputing Trent’s account of the
meeting; he insisted that his office has “no intention of asserting
ourselves into any election” but that they’d simply made suggestions in
response to a request “by the Board of County Commissioners to provide
security.”
Hayden, via a spokesperson, declined to provide additional details about
this request or answer any other questions from Yahoo News.
In response to requests for comment from Trent and the Board of County
Commissioners, Theresa Freed, assistant director of public affairs for
the Johnson County government, told Yahoo News in an email that “county
staff has been directed that there’s an ongoing criminal investigation
and cannot disclose information related to the Sheriff’s Office’s
investigation.”
Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab answers questions during an
interview in his office in Topeka, Kan., in July. The Kansas Court of
Appeals has ruled that Schwab violated the state's open records law by
having office computer software altered so that it no longer produced
data sought by a voting-rights advocate.
Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab answers questions during an
interview in his office in Topeka, Kan., in July. The Kansas Court of
Appeals has ruled that Schwab violated the state's open records law by
having office computer software altered so that it no longer produced
data sought by a voting-rights advocate. (John Hanna/AP)
In an emailed statement, Kansas Secretary of State Scott Schwab's office
disputed the "unfounded claims" on which Hayden's investigation is
based, noting that "to date, not a single instance of election fraud
from the 2020 General Election has been prosecuted in any court in the
105 counties in the state of Kansas."
Not long after the Pittsburgh conference, McCord's team at Georgetown
and States United Democracy Center, a nonpartisan organization that
promotes free and fair elections, released a fact sheet for state and
local election officials on how to respond to similar inquiries by
sheriffs aligned with the constitutional sheriffs movement.
The guidance explains that sheriffs typically do not have the authority
to oversee the administration of elections — a role that is "ordinarily
performed by other state or local officials" — and urges local election
officials who receive requests for information from sheriffs seeking to
assert that authority to "immediately consult with the municipal
attorney (such as the city or county attorney), the district or
commonwealth attorney, county or state election officials and their
legal advisors, and/or the state attorney general."
“Left unaddressed, sheriffs who overstep their roles may not only
violate the law, but also may give the impression of attempting to
interfere in an election or preventing duly authorized election
officials from fulfilling their responsibilities,” the fact sheet says.
Lynnette, 50, left, and Nicole, 52, watch a ballot drop box while
sitting in a parking lot in Mesa, Ariz., on Oct. 24, 2022.
Lynnette, 50, left, and Nicole, 52, watch a ballot drop box while
sitting in a parking lot in Mesa, Ariz., on Oct. 24, 2022. (Bastien
Inzaurralde/AFP via Getty Images)
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, many states have laws
restricting law enforcement officials from "policing polling centers
because of the potential that their presence will intimidate and deter
voters," which is prohibited under federal law.
During a recent episode of his podcast, Mack dismissed concerns about
sheriffs or other uniformed officers intimidating voters as "woke crap."
"To have a uniformed officer, or private security guard in uniform,
they're all there to do one thing and that is to provide a safe and
peaceful and accommodating, friendly atmosphere for people to come and
vote," Mack said.
In another recent podcast appearance, Mack said, “Sheriffs should
actually be verifying how the votes are tabulated in his county."
But Lorraine Minnite, a Rutgers University expert in voter fraud, said
that the presence of a uniformed officer, especially one with a gun,
could be perceived as "very threatening" to voters, particularly people
of color. Unless state or local law allows for it, or they're called for
a specific reason, law enforcement officials who show up to patrol
voting sites "will be coming very close to a line of violating federal
law about intimidating voters."
People cast their ballots early for the upcoming midterm elections in
Las Cruces, N.M.
People cast their ballots early for the upcoming midterm elections in
Las Cruces, N.M. (Paul Ratie/Reuters)
It's unclear what exactly sheriffs are planning to do on Election Day,
but recent reports of voter intimidation at ballot boxes in Arizona show
that individuals seem compelled to act. In an October incident, one of
several reported voter intimidation incidents in the state, at Maricopa
County headquarters, a group of "camo clad people" reportedly took a
photo of a voter and the voter's license plate as the voter was dropping
off mail-in ballots at a drop box.
Days after the reported encounter, Paul Penzone, the sheriff of Maricopa
County, a region that includes Phoenix, said he increased security
around drop boxes to ensure that people can vote safely.
In an interview with Yahoo News, Penzone said that while he believes
sheriffs do "have a responsibility to investigate a crime that
effectively impacts the vote within our community," as they would any
other criminal offense, they also have an obligation to make sure that
such investigations are based on facts and evidence, and that they don't
exceed the authorities of their office regarding probable cause.
If a sheriff or any other law enforcement official fails to find
evidence to support the belief that there was fraud in the election, but
continues to promote that narrative anyway, "then you are doing a
disservice to the people that you are sworn to protect," Penzone said.
Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone and other elected officials from
Maricopa County refute allegations of irregularities with county's
handling of the 2020 election during a news conference in Phoenix in 2021.
Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone and other elected officials from
Maricopa County refute allegations of irregularities with county's
handling of the 2020 election during a news conference in Phoenix in
2021. (Jonathan J. Cooper/AP)
Penzone said he is not aware of specific efforts or plans by sheriffs or
law enforcement agents to monitor polling stations or ballot drop boxes.
But he said: "What I have seen is sheriffs taking a more dominant role
in partisan events that have, in many ways, done two things: undermine
confidence and provoked aggression."
Unlike police chiefs and commissioners, who are typically appointed by
mayors or city councils, most county sheriffs are voted into office,
meaning they must campaign for reelection every few years like any other
partisan politician.
Still, Penzone, a Democrat and former Phoenix police sergeant who
defeated Maricopa’s controversial longtime Republican sheriff Joe Arpaio
in 2016, insists that law enforcement officials, including elected
sheriffs, should be "nonpartisan," "objective" and "pragmatic."
"Being an elected official in law enforcement is not an entitlement,
it's a responsibility," Penzone said. "We're supposed to be caretakers
of the oath of office, not people who take the oath, and then leverage
it for our own ideology."