In early October, we reported (twice) on the presence of online “news” outlets created by deep Left money guy David Brock. The second piece included a list of likely suspects. Did we find another one, and are they doing the Left’s dirty work?
Related: We have The List and Links to Democrat David Brock’s “Swing” State Fake News Sites.
The outlet is run by a career journalist and former USA Today Assitant Opinion editor named Steven Porter. On its face, it appears objective, and even if it is not, so what? It is still almost a free country. Whether Brock funds it or not, it has a right to write. And is it not all fun and games, even if used to meddle in local matters with a very partisan purpose?
About the Alleged Meddling
New Hampshire has a Committee on Voter Confidence. Its objective has been to conduct interviews about election integrity and collect that into a report for the Secretary of State. It has one job. Provide an account of what interviewees claim has compromised voter confidence in New Hampshire Elections.
The Committee has been doing its job for months, and just as things wind down, Porter and Granite Memo have published a piece titled “Unvetted claims folded into NH voter confidence draft report.” The thrust of it is this.
The draft report doesn’t just outline the committee’s findings and recommendations. It also recites numerous election-related claims without regard for whether they are true or false.
The claims were made by members of the public during a series of meetings the committee held over the summer. The claims are listed in a roughly three-page summary that describes the public’s comments without adding any discussion or analysis.
The summary refers to “potentially serious concerns” found by “citizen audits,” alludes to “out-of-state people/students voting in NH elections” and conjures the image of “vote tabulations taking place un-monitored in the back of polling places,” according to a recent draft reviewed by Granite Memo and discussed during a public meeting Tuesday. The summary also notes that unnamed people have described “voting machines” as a “black box” and “old technology” with vulnerabilities.
That sounds like the Left’s stenographer-media narrative, and it’s not even subtle. But much like whether Granite Memo is another well-funded plant of the left-wing political machine or not, it doesn’t matter.
The Committee on Voter Confidence was not convened to act as a filter. Their job was to gather testimony from Granite Staters about what they feel undermines confidence in our elections and present it to the New Hampshire Secretary of State. Period.
And again, you might say – so what? A local online site no one reads that is somehow able to pay the salary and benefits of a career journalist wrote a partisan piece about undermining the integrity of the purpose of the Committee on Voter Confidence. What of it?
Someone sent that piece via email to members of the Committee unvetted (if you take my meaning). Was it to convince them to alter the three-page summary to exclude testimony that happens to offend the partisan Left?
Will it be a problem for the Committee if people whose concerns might be removed from the draft summary or the report itself reach out to me for an interview, and I share what they excluded?
Would the New Hampshire Secretary of State need to create a committee on the integrity of the Committee on voter confidence, and is that the point? To undermine election integrity and undercut efforts to identify those concerns and share them with the public and people in positions of authority?
And why go to all the trouble?
Wouldn’t it be easier to let it all come out and then continue making fun of the people and their concerns, over which the Left is already dismissive?
The Committee on Voter Confidence has one job. Collect election integrity concerns for the Secretary of State to review. There’s not much point in the exercise if it excludes what Steven Porter at Granite Memo decides is unvetted.
So, maybe someone should share this piece with the committee members for the sake of balance.
We’re not claiming to be independent like Granite Memo but believe more speech is the answer, especially if it is unvetted. Get it all out there and let the watchful public debate is as the Secretary of State reviews what the Committee has to share.
Update: Steven Porter reached out to indicate that Granite Memo is self-funded, and he is not supported by anyone but himself.
