Sherikia Hawkins faces 6 felonies of election fraud

So rare, this election fraud, right? She altered well over one hundred ballots. Wonder if she is kinfolk to Brenda Snipes? I dont think CNN covered this, guess what party?


Southfield clerk will go to trial on six felony charges
www.detroitnews.com › oakland-county › 2020/06/12
Jun 12, 2020 - Southfield Clerk Sherikia Hawkins is alleged to have altered 193 absentee ballot records during the 2018 general election.

Clerk Sherikia Hawkins, charged with election fraud, gets next ...
www.theoaklandpress.com › news › copscourts › clerk-sh...

May 19, 2020 - Hawkins is charged with falsifying returns/records - election law, forgery, common law offenses and using a computer to commit a crime in relation ...

 

We are told that election fraud is extremely rare as so little of it is ever proven.

Reminds me of something from about 30-40 years ago (I'm old). It was common knowledge that there was what we called the, "triangle trade" in the welfare system. People would go to three states, New York, Massachusetts and Florida and collect welfare in all 3. Again, it was allegedly happening a lot (hopefully modern communications and information sharing has made this difficult to impossible to do today. Mox Nix: today's total package of medical, food, cash, housing, clothing, etc. allowances supposedly amount to about $70k a year, which is a problem. Most individuals do not make $70k a year so people can be trapped into this socially destructive system. But I digress.) Yet I recall only ONE highly publicized case of the recipient getting caught.

You think a system open to abuse, ANY system, will not get abused? Just because there aren't convictions doesn't mean it is not happening. A lot.

 

I got trapped in a jury duty Hell for three weeks way back when, and in those three weeks we did just 3 cases of welfare fraud. It was incredible how much time, money, and effort had to be expended in order to force a few welfare cheat dirtbags to face justice, and, in the end, the punishment was little more than a slap on the wrist.

It became obviously clear throughout the ordeal that the DA did NOT want to be trying the welfare fraud cases, because it was such a tedious waste of everybody's time, and no real punishment would come of it, and, as a result of all that, only the worst of the worst of the most blatant welfare cheat cases ever went forward.

 

You might want to check in on Steve Watkins (R) in Kansas on this subject...
https://www.cjonline.com/news/20191...llegations-for-listing-ups-store-as-residence

 

She didn't alter any ballots, she altered some paperwork recording receipt of the ballots (the first article has a correction to that effect). It apparently didn't impact the results and it isn't entirely clear that it was ever intended to (I can't access the second article so I don't know if that has more detail). I get the impression she just messed up her job and tried to cover that up after the fact but I could be wrong.

It is worth noting that voter ID wouldn't have made the slightest difference of course.

 

Election Fraud is rare, but voter fraud is exceptionally rare.

But I am super curious why you chose to talk about this clerk from June 12th and not the Kansas Congressman Steve Watkins felony voter fraud charges announced yesterday.

Bet you can't guess what party....

 

Sounds like a great idea...for a thread of your own.

 

See post #7

 

Here's the primary difference between "welfare fraud" and "voter fraud."

The later provides the person committing the fraud with a direct and tangible monetary benefit. The later does...pretty much next to nothing. Even if you could ever know that the race was going to be insanely close, the chance that altering votes or voting more than once would actually result in your preferred candidate winning is virtually zero. And even if your preferred candidate does win, the likelihood that it results in a direct benefit to you starts to trend into the realm of negative probability.

And that is why welfare fraud, while still rare, is still exceptionally more likely than voter fraud.

 

I can see the second article just fine, here is a list of charges it details....Hawkins is charged with falsifying returns/records - election law, forgery, common law offenses and using a computer to commit a crime in relation to the November 2018 election. She could face multiple years in prison if convicted.

 

I don't think we need new threads for each incidence of voter fraud. And I don't think its derailing your thread in any way - just another example of it happening.

 

You did not even address my topic at all, just some whataboutism.

 

I can't see it because I'm in the UK and there is an EU regulation issue which means lots of US-based news sites aren't accessible from the EU.

Sure, that's in the first article too. I was wondering if there was anything about her motives, whether she was actually trying to influence the election results or just trying to cover her ass for messing up her job, as I suspect.

 

Quite right...
So it would appear that Hawkins' made clerical errors that didn't affect the election.
When charges were announced in September, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said the alleged actions did not alter the outcome of any election.
"There were no voters that were disenfranchised," Benson said.
"All valid votes in the election were ultimately counted and the final official vote total was accurate."

In other news, a Republican State Rep. committed voter fraud by providing an illegal address in order to vote in two districts.

 

What the hell is a Sherikia? Sounds like a skin condition.

 

Editor's note: This story was corrected to indicate the clerk is accused of altering qualified voter records tied to absentee ballots, not the ballots themselves.

When an absentee ballot arrives at a clerk's office, it is logged into the Qualified Voter File. The clerk then checks to make sure the file entries are valid.

Rozell "contacted Hawkins when he noticed that ballot summary sheets were blank," LaMay's report notes.

Rozell, after questioning Hawkins about her ballot sheets, said it appeared "that the ballot return dates for voters were added or removed from the report in order to force the reports to balance to the number of ballots tabulated for each precinct on Election Night."

"It appears that Hawkins had switched her original reports with altered reports," LaMay wrote.

When charges were announced in September, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said the alleged actions did not alter the outcome of any election.

"There were no voters that were disenfranchised," Benson said.

"All valid votes in the election were ultimately counted and the final official vote total was accurate."

 

I don't care if there is widespread voter fraud or not, if just one democrat party ballot harvester fills out a blank ballot cancelling my vote then it is one too many.

 

Honest-ly Joe...doesn't that tell you straight out that Europeans only get a portion of the truth about the U.S.?

 

I'm not sure it makes a huge difference since it's the smaller local publications that have the problem (and note that the problem is that they're unwilling/unable to commit to EU data protect rules, not the EU choosing to block them). It's more of an occasional irritation than anything else, as in this case.

 

Thanks.

 

Sherikia huh? Dang I was 100% certain that was the name of a white woman, surprise surprise. and a democrat no less, shocking.

 

Hey, It looks like Biden has just found the ideal candidate for his VP pick

 

But WHADDABOUT???!!!

 

And then when mail-on ballots come in by the thousands.....................

 

How much does it take the change the outcome of an election?