At my age, I should know better.
I actually thought Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar was truly interested in protecting our elections from fraud and would work with us at the Pigpen Project to get our dirty voter files cleaned up.
I was wrong.
Short recap before the latest bombshell…
Around January of 2024, we began submitting “residency discrepancy reports” to the county clerks and registrars of voters.
But a few weeks into the project, Aguilar issued a memo telling the clerks and registrars not to work with us on such “list maintenance” activities.
He advised that we should instead file “challenges” to voters who were suspected of not living where they were registered.
So we did.
We filed over 33,000 challenges with local election officials – based on the exact same data sources they’re allowed to use – last summer.
In response, Aguilar issued another memo telling the clerks/registrars to reject the challenges.
So we went to court.
However, a judge in Carson City dismissed our case because the challenges purportedly lacked “personal knowledge” that the voter had moved, using an extremely strict interpretation of what constitutes “personal knowledge.”
That was all bad enough.
But after the election, we discovered that 881 of the voters we challenged had voted in the November 5, 2024, election in Nevada…BY MAIL!
As such, last month we started submitting “Election Integrity Violation Reports” (EIVR) with the Secretary of State. I mean, if they’ve moved, how and why did they vote by mail?
These weren’t “list maintenance reports” or a “challenges.” These were requests to open an investigation into potential voting fraud.
And there’s nothing I can find in statute or code or on the EIVR form that requires the person filing the report to have “personal knowledge” of the voter. Such a requirement simply doesn’t exist.
Nevertheless, Aguilar is now rejecting our EIVRs.
Let me give you one example of a report we filed…
“Nevada Secretary of State Statewide Voter Registration Records show that [name redacted] registered to vote on 3/7/1998, at [address redacted], LAS VEGAS, NV 89129 (Clark County), with the date of birth of [date redacted] and having Nevada Secretary of State Voter ID of [number redacted] and a Clark County Voter ID of (number redacted).
“National Change of Address (NCOA) records from the U.S. Postal Service indicates that registrant moved to [address redacted], FORT MYERS, FL 33912 (Lee County) in January 2022.
“According to 2024 general election records, a mail ballot was returned for this registrant from an address where that registrant indicated they no longer reside.
“We believe the circumstances of the registrant filing a permanent change of address with the U.S. Postal Service and a mail ballot being returned for the same registrant warrants an investigation by the Nevada Secretary of State.”
But in a letter we received today, Aguilar again told us to stick it where the sun don’t shine.
In his letter, Aguilar asserts that “you allege residency challenges regarding numerous voters in the State of Nevada.”
No we didn’t. These weren’t “residency challenges.” They were requests for an investigation – with MORE than enough documented reasonable suspicion.
Aguilar then proceeded to quote to us the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) – which has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with reporting suspected voting fraud…
“The SOS is unable to verify that apparent challenges submitted through the EIVR process adhere to the requirements of uniformity and non-discrimination.”
What bull-spit.
These were NOT challenges. Challenges are submitted BEFORE an election. These are requests for investigations of suspicious activity AFTER the election.
Worse, if the SOS really thought we were operating in a partisan fashion by only targeting, say, Democrats…he’s got the freaking information to verify it!
I mean, he’s the SECRETARY OF STATE, for crying out loud.
All he had to do was run our EIVRs against the official state voter file and he’d see for himself that our reports were submitted for Democrats, Republicans, non-partisans, and third-party voters.
So it’s not that he was “unable” to verify if we were operating in a uniform, non-discriminatory manner. He was simply UNWILLING to do so – because those records are at his fingertip.
But since he was unwilling to verify that our reports were filed in a uniform and non-discriminatory manner, I had our data analyst, Dan Burdish, research the party registrations for the complaints we filed…
- Democrats: 321
- Republicans: 294
- Non-Partisans: 222
- Independent Americans: 29
- Libertarians: 7
- Others: 8
Sorry, Mr. Secretary, but on this one you don’t have a leg to stand on – and have embarrassed yourself by even making such an allegation against us without any evidence.
Nevertheless, Aguilar advised…
“As a result, the SOS will not be taking action on EIVRs that indicate, based on third-party data and not personal knowledge, that a voter might have changed residence.”
Again, these are NOT challenges. They are requests for investigations.
Aguilar continued – I’m assuming with the straight face – by writing…
“The SOS takes Nevada’s list maintenance obligations seriously.”
His nose must have grown six inches after writing that. This guy has done nothing but interfere with and block every effort of ours to assist in cleaning up the voter rolls.
He went on…
“Routine list maintenance is conducted on a regular basis and results in significant inactivation and cancellation of voters’ registrations.”
But we’re not talking about routine list maintenance here. We’re talking about suspected voting fraud. Sad that our Secretary of State doesn’t seem to understand the difference.
That said, the 33,000 challenges we filed last summer were filed AFTER the routine list maintenance process was completed.
Which means whatever system they’re using is broken, because they clearly missed a ton of moved voters.
Oh, and by the way, the process WE use to identify moved voters is the exact same process election officials in Nevada are allowed, but not required, to use.
So, once again, it’s not that they’re unable; they’re unwilling.
In conclusion, Aguilar wrote…
“Because the allegations described must be submitted to the county clerk and do not amount to statutory violation under Title 24, no further action will be taken by this office, and your file will be closed.”
Again, bull-spit.
If someone unlawfully casts a mail-in ballot, that ABSOLUTELY is a violation of Title 24.
And the required EIVR form itself from the Secretary of State states…
“The information you report on this form may be used to help us investigate violations of Nevada election laws. When completed, mail, email, or fax your form and supporting documents to the office listed above.”
The office listed above?
State of Nevada
Secretary of State
Francisco V. Aguilar
101 N. Carson Street
Carson City, NV 89701
Phone: (775) 6845705
Fax: (775) 684-5718
Email: nvelect@sos.nv.gov
Yeah, we sent them to the right place. Aguilar just doesn’t want to deal with them because he really doesn’t want to clean up our dirty voter files.
To summarize, the Nevada Secretary of State doesn’t want to work with us on list maintenance; doesn’t want to work with us on challenges; and doesn’t want to investigate potential voting fraud.
So much for his claim that “Nevada runs some of the most secure, accessible and transparent elections in the country, and we’re dedicated to ensuring voters are confident in that.”
Yeah, sure. Nothing instills “confidence” like systematically obstructing any and all efforts to assure we have clean voter files for what clearly appears to be partisan purposes.
Why would the state’s chief elections officer NOT want to clean the voter files or investigate reasonable suspicions of voting fraud?
It’s starting to look like we have a dirty Secretary of State.
The Pigpen Project is a project of Citizen Outreach Foundation, an IRS-approved 501(c)(3) grassroots organization founded in 1992. Donations are tax-deductible for federal income tax purposes.
