Search This Blog


Pages

Links

Everything Feds Asked for is Required to be Kept by NH

By CNHT | July 13, 2017

by Ed Naile

Unless Bill Gardner is NOT our Secretary of State – he doesn’t have to keep all records which come into his possession.
I think he does if you read this in English.
A voter history is kept by Gardner for every voter as part of their record of voting.

US Code #52 (HAVA)
§20701. Retention and preservation of records and papers by officers of elections; deposit with custodian; penalty for violation.
Every officer of election shall retain and preserve,
for a period of twenty-two months from the date of any general, special, or primary election of which candidates for the office of President, Vice President, presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, or Resident Commissioner from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico are voted for, all records and papers which come into his possession relating to any application, registration, payment of poll tax, or other act requisite to voting in such election, except that, when required by law, such records and papers may be delivered to another officer of election and except that, if a State or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico designates a custodian to retain and preserve these records and papers at a specified place, then such records and papers may be deposited with such custodian, and the duty to retain and preserve any record or paper so deposited shall devolve upon such custodian. Any officer of election or custodian who willfully fails to comply with this section shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
( Pub. L. 86–449, title III, §301, May 6, 1960, 74 Stat. 88 .)

More…

654:31-a Right to Know Exemption. – The information contained on the checklist of a town or city, specifically, the name, domicile address, mailing address, town or city, and party affiliation, if any, of registered voters, except as otherwise provided by statute, is public information subject to RSA 91-A. All other information on the voter registration form, absentee registration affidavit, qualified voter and domicile affidavits, affidavit of religious exemption, and application for absentee ballot shall be treated as confidential information and the records containing this information shall be exempt from the public disclosure provisions of RSA 91-A, except as provided by statutes other than RSA 91-A. Notwithstanding the foregoing, qualified voter and domicile affidavits are public records subject to RSA 91-A for the sole purpose of challenging an individual registering to vote or voting, challenging ballots to be recounted, to the extent that such ballot challenges are specifically authorized by law, or determining the accuracy of any qualified voter or domicile affidavit. Election officials and law enforcement personnel in furtherance of their official duties may access and may disclose information from the voter registration form, qualified voter and domicile affidavits, affidavits of religious exemption, absentee registration affidavits, and applications for absentee ballots, if necessary to resolve a challenge to an individual registering to vote or voting, or if necessary to investigate or prosecute election law violations or any crime. Law enforcement access and use of such records for the investigation or prosecution of crimes unrelated to election law violations shall be limited to the records of the specific individuals who are the subject of the investigation or prosecution.
Source. 2003, 289:53. 2006, 94:1; 305:3. 2009, 278:2. 2010, 366:3. 2012, 284:12, eff. Sept. 1, 2015.

654:45 Centralized Voter Registration Database. –
I. The secretary of state is authorized to plan, develop, equip, establish, site, and maintain a statewide centralized voter registration database and communications system, hereinafter referred to as the voter database, connecting users throughout the state. The voter database shall include the current information on the voter registration forms, the accepted absentee ballot applications, the voter checklists, and voter actions as recorded on the marked checklist maintained by each city, ward, and town in the state.
II. Any election official in the state authorized by this chapter to have direct access to the voter database may obtain immediate electronic access to the information contained in the voter database related to individuals registered or registering to vote in the election official’s jurisdiction. The office of the clerk is hereby designated as a database access point for each town or city. The secretary of state may authorize additional database access points in a town or city, including election day access points at polling places.
III. The voter database shall, upon certification by the secretary of state, be the official record of eligible voters for the conduct of all elections held in this state.
IV. (a) The voter database shall have the following minimum components:
(1) An electronic communications system that provides access for election officials from at least one point in each city and town within the state.
(2) An interactive computer program allowing local election officials access to records contained in the database with a process to add, delete, modify, or print a voter registration record related to the election official’s jurisdiction. The system shall be designed so that there can be regular updates to the database, the records reflect the name of each registered voter with no duplication, and the names of ineligible voters are removed. The system shall contain safeguards to ensure that the names of properly registered voters are not removed in error.
(b) Voter database record data shall be verified by matching the records with those of the department of safety and the federal social security administration as are required by law, and with the records of the state agency or division charged with maintaining vital records. For this purpose the voter registration record database may be linked to the state agency or division charged with maintaining vital records and the department of safety, provided that no linked agency or division may save or retain voter information or use it for purposes other than verifying the accuracy of the information contained in the voter database. The link authorized by this subparagraph shall not allow the department of state or election officials direct access to the motor vehicle registration or driver’s license records maintained by the division of motor vehicles. The commissioner of safety may authorize the release of information from motor vehicle registration and driver’s license records to the extent that the information is necessary to department of state and department of safety cooperation in a joint notification to individuals of apparent discrepancies in their records and to the extent that the information is necessary to resolve those discrepancies. The commissioner of safety and the secretary of state are authorized to enter into an agreement that establishes the services to be provided by the department of safety and the cost for those services. The department of safety shall not be required to provide any services under this subparagraph unless an agreement is in place and there are sufficient funds in the election fund to pay the cost for the services. The system shall facilitate the identification and correction of voter registration records whenever a registered voter has died or has been disenfranchised pursuant to part I, article 11 of the New Hampshire constitution or RSA 654:5 through RSA 654:6, or when the domicile address does not match the address provided by the same individual to the department of safety.
(c) Access by local election officials to the voter database shall be limited to the supervisors of the checklist, city registrars and deputy registrars, and town or city clerks and their deputies, as determined by the secretary of state. Access by local election officials shall be subject to the limitations of paragraph VI, and shall be limited to the records of individuals who are currently registered to vote in the official’s jurisdiction and individuals who are applying to register to vote in the official’s jurisdiction.
V. The secretary of state shall:
(a) Specify the employees of the department of state authorized to access records contained in the voter database, subject to the limitations of paragraph VI.
(b) Provide adequate technological security measures to deter unauthorized access to the records contained in the voter database.
(c) Issue guidelines to implement the voter database.
VI. The voter database shall be private and confidential and shall not be subject to RSA 91-A and RSA 654:31. The secretary of state is authorized to provide voter database record data to the administrative office of the courts to assist in the preparation of master jury lists pursuant to RSA 500-A and to the clerk of the District Court of the United States for the District of New Hampshire to assist in the preparation of federal court jury lists. The voter checklist for a town or city shall be available pursuant to RSA 654:31. Any person who discloses information from the voter database in any manner not authorized by this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
VII. The city and town clerk shall enter, maintain, and keep up to date election official contact information and polling place information as determined by the secretary of state in the statewide centralized voter registration database for use by the secretary of state in effecting election laws.
VIII. The secretary of state may enter into an agreement to share voter information or data from the statewide centralized voter registration database for the purpose of comparing duplicate voter information with other states or groups of states. The secretary of state shall only provide information that is necessary for matching duplicate voter information with other states and shall take precautions to make sure that information in the database is secure in a manner consistent with RSA 654:45, VI. The secretary of state may solicit input from the department of safety and the department of information technology and shall ensure that any information or data shared between the agencies that is of a confidential nature remains confidential.
IX. The secretary of state may enter into an agreement to share voter information or data from the statewide centralized voter registration database for the purpose of comparing duplicate voter information with other states or groups of states. The secretary of state shall only provide information that is necessary for matching duplicate voter information with other states and shall take precautions to make sure that information in the database is secure in a manner consistent with RSA 654:45, VI. The secretary of state may solicit input from the department of safety and the department of information technology and shall ensure that any information or data shared between the agencies that is of a confidential nature remains confidential.
Source. 2003, 266:3. 2006, 305:2. 2010, 182:1, 15. 2014, 111:1, eff. Aug. 10, 2014. 2016, 175:1, eff. June 13, 2016; 270:4, eff. June 26, 2016.

52 U.S. Code § 20703 – Demand for records or papers by Attorney General or representative; statement of basis and purpose

§ 20703.
Demand for records or papers by Attorney General or representative; statement of basis and purpose
Any record or paper required by section 20701 of this title to be retained and preserved shall, upon demand in writing by the Attorney General or his representative directed to the person having custody, possession, or control of such record or paper, be made available for inspection, reproduction, and copying at the principal office of such custodian by the Attorney General or his representative. This demand shall contain a statement of the basis and the purpose therefor.
(Pub. L. 86–449, title III, § 303, May 6, 1960, 74 Stat. 88.)

Topics: Vote Fraud | Comments Off

Public Testimony to Election Commission to Start in a Few Months

By CNHT | July 11, 2017

In a few months, maybe weeks, the President Trump Election Commission will start taking public testimony.

This has the leftist, progressives, Marxists, college professors of gibberish, and our star media all in a panic, to say the least. They will plead there is no need for an election commission to investigate how Federal Elections are conducted by the states. A large portion of their complaint will be there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Progressives will especially object to President Trump pointing out the possibility of millions of illegal votes cast in the last election.

The out-of-their mind whining, gnashing of teeth, nuisance lawsuits, protests, and fake news reveal one thing for certain.
The opponents of clean elections sure ACT like they will lose millions of votes. There is no need to prove that.

I am constantly asked if there really is voter fraud in NH and the US in general. The chance to testify at one or more of the upcoming hearings will let me get some of what has been collected by The Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers on the record.

As far as I can tell there will be no opportunity for progressives in NH to stop me from testifying – as happens with NH Legislative Hearings. I am going to represent NH whether the pro-voter fraud crowd likes it or not.
My question is this.

Who in NH is going to step forward and show proof of voter suppression happening anywhere, at any time in this state over the last twenty years I have been documenting voter fraud? There must be a sharp progressive attorney out there somewhere who has evidence that qualified voters in NH cannot vote or have ever been prevented from voting in any of our 235 towns or cities.

There must be good reasons NH has watered down its voter registration statutes.

Are the liberals in NH so timid as to not step forward and offer their proof of voter suppression – or even suggest that no out-of-state votes are cast in NH? How about no busses? They must be able to prove that simple thing, no busses ever carry out-of-state, unqualified voters to the polls in NH. I hunger to see that evidence.

CNHT has two hours of tape from Project Veritas to show the Commission. That tape is in the hands of the NH Attorney General’s Office Election Division. Of course, they will show up and debunk that tape. Right? I helped James O’Keefe and his crew film some of that tape. The NH hearing will be a great place for opponents of clean elections to point out where there are problems with the tape. Maybe I can help. I tracked down Hugo E. Palma with Veritas’s help. Rich Girard got us the Manchester documents showing how Palma and his Sanders crew voted illegally – and documented it.

I hope the hearings are under oath. That will be fun. Now that the “mobile domicile” judge is retired he can show up and explain to a Federal Commission how it is legal for a Superior Court judge in NH to approve residents from other states voting in Federal Elections in NH.

We could also have someone from the Secretary of State’s Office explain to adults on the Trump Election Integrity Commission how the word “domicile” is impossible to understand or prove. I hope to see at least one court case from a Federal Election where a domicile to vote was not necessary. There must be one.

Since NH Secretary of State Bill Gardner is on the Commission he will have to send a representative to the hearing to show how voters from other states get picked to be on a NH jury, like a citizen, when they do not have, or ever had, a NH driver’s license.

I’m expecting a crowd.

Topics: Vote Fraud | Comments Off

Picnic 2017 Wrap-Up

By CNHT | July 10, 2017

by Jane Aitken, Director

Considering this was not an election year, the hall was filled and the speakers were excellent. We want not only to thank the attendees to our 2017 picnic, but to thank all the volunteers whose names we may not have. These folks helped Ed Naile and Jim Powell cook, haul tables and equipment around, take tickets at the door, and clean up. Rep JJ Valera and his wife Shannon, Roger Wilkins, Merle Burke, Pam Ean, and Linda Powell among those we know!

Here are some of the highlights.

Despite not having the usual gaggle of candidates hosting their campaign tables, we did hear short appeals from CD1 Candidates Eddie Edwards and Senator Andy Sanborn. I am sure either one of these guys would be preferable to who is in US Congress representing us currently!

Our keynote speaker was Hal Shurtleff, formerly of the JBS (constitutional experts) and currently Director of Camp Constitution in Rindge, NH. Hal pointed out the pros and cons of an Article V Convention. He cited numerous liberal groups that would like to have one, and many conservative groups that would not, although groups on both sides of the political spectrum can be found on either side of the “Con Con” issue. We thought it would be a good thing to at least introduce people to the issue, regardless of where they might stand on it.

Frankly, I can’t imagine what liberals might want to do to the Second Amendment for example, if they could open the Constitution up to change it? There are no guarantees.

While CNHT does not itself take a stand on the issue, the NH Tea Party Coalition HAS taken a stand against it, after conferring with the Constitutional experts at the Tenth Amendment Center, JBS, and NH’s own NH Center for Constitutional Studies.

We of course heard from CNHT’s Chairman Ed Naile about NH’s compliance with the federal election commission’s request for simple voter information, the kind of stuff that every person who has ever run a group mailing list or candidate’s campaign, likely has on their computer right now. And Kim Morin from the Women’s Defense League and anchor of GAL’s Politically Buzzed updated us on the left’s weak argument that sending this information to the feds is somehow an invasion of privacy.

CNHT has also joined a multi-state coalition which has begun cooperating on the cross-checking of voter lists to make sure people aren’t registered in multiple states.

Just as voter fraud is one of CNHT’s key issues, so is the Right to Know law (RSA 91-A) which helps to uncover fraud and corruption in so many cases.

David Saad of the Right to Know NH group let attendees know his group specializes in this one issue and for that we thank him. His website is here, and you can contact the group if you need help submitting a RTK request and/or what to expect after you do.

Kate Baker explained how Childrens’ Scholarship Fund raises money to help NH students who find themselves in unsatisfactory school situations. She held a Q and A session afterwards. This was great as many of us didn’t know the details of how her organization worked, although we had a basic understanding of its purpose and fully support it.

And how refreshing to hear from our new Commissioner of Education, Frank Edelblut, who says he is enjoying his new position! There is no question that Frank knows exactly what he is doing, and he promises to bring some much-needed common sense to the system. When we wrote to thank him, we told him that if he wants to know the language of the bureaucrats and snake oil salesmen, he should check this website: http://www.illinoisloop.org/

Also in the house and/or speaking were School District Governance Association (Donna Green and Jorge Mesa-Tejada) NH Liberty Alliance (Dan McGuire) Granite State Taxpayers (Ray Chadwick) 603 Alliance (Fran Wendelboe), Libertarian Party NH (Chip Spangler), Concerned Vets of America (Rep. Steve Negron) and Assembly of Common Law NH (Richie Merritt). We also heard from the Hons. John Burt and Max Abramson.

Both Ray Chadwick and Fran Wendelboe, while speaking for their groups, implored listeners to be active all year round, not just at election times, a point with which we heartily agree.

Next year (2018) is an election year! We’ll have candidates for Governor, CD1, CD2, Executive Council, State Reps and Senators. We’ll likely conduct a straw poll at that time. People who request tables and/or speaking slots MUST check in with jane@cnht.org and have the speaker’s name placed on the list she then gives to the emcee. If someone approaches us to speak but only after arriving at the event, we will allow it or not at our discretion. Please do NOT approach the emcee and ask him as he is not responsible for our policy.

Get your tickets online! It helps us to know how much food to prepare, and you never know, we might someday raise the price of tickets at the door!

The folks from Granite Grok looked like they were filming all speeches, so we hope they will let us know if we can share the videos.

Topics: Events | Comments Off

« Previous Entries