Host Leahy and Carmichael Discuss Open Document Request by the Georgia Star News Mysteriously Goes Under Seal After April Release to GPB

Host Leahy and Carmichael Discuss Open Document Request by the Georgia Star News Mysteriously Goes Under Seal After April Release to GPB

 

Live from Music Row Friday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. – host Leahy and all-star panelist Crom Carmichael discuss breaking news as Fulton County, Georgia refuses to provide chain of custody documents now under seal to The Georgia Star News.

Leahy: Crom, we have some breaking news from the Star News Network. As you know, we own and operate eight state-based news sites including The Tennessee Star. One of them is The Georgia Star News.

The Georgia Star News has been requesting in open records request information from Fulton County, which is the big County down there in Georgia, that had all sorts of election problems in 2020.

I’m just going to read this request that we sent to Fulton County officials on June 20 and then I’m going to read you the official response we got back from them about 15 minutes ago.

And I’d like to get your reaction. The setup is a little bit long but just hang with me here. We wrote to the Fulton County officials on June 20th.

Georgia Public Broadcasting report Wednesday, June 16, 2021. “After GPB News asked Fulton County on Monday about the forms not included in The Georgia Star New’s request for records, election staff located all about eight of the more than 1,500 forms. Provided them to Georgia Public Broadcasting on a flash drive.” The Georgia Star News requests your response to the following request.

A, provide to The Georgia Star News the absentee ballot dropbox transfer forms that were provided to Georgia Public Broadcasting that have not yet been provided to The Georgia Star News.

B, an explanation as to why the previously ‘missing absentee ballot dropbox transfer forms were provided to Georgia Public Broadcasting within 48 hours of the request, but not to The Georgia Star News despite the incomplete responses to our three open records request dating back to December of 2020. That sounds like a reasonable request doesn’t it?

Carmichael: Sure. Oh yeah.

Leahy: Remember, we reported that Fulton County was missing 24 percent of the critical chain of custody documents documenting absentee ballots, which represented about 18,901 absentee ballots cast in the presidential election in a state where the margin of victory for Biden was less than 12,000 votes.

Okay, so here is a response. We just got this about 15 minutes ago from the open records custodian for Fulton County by the name of Steve Rosenberg.

I’m gonna read this exactly to you. And then you tell me what you think this means.

“The records you seek have been transferred to the clerk of court and are currently being held under seal. They are therefore exempt from public disclosure pursuant to Georgia Law 21-2-500 A-C.”

Carmichael: So let me be sure I understand what you’re saying. You’re saying that the documents that have been placed under seal that was not delivered to The Georgia Star News were previously delivered to the Georgia Public Broadcasting?

Leahy: That’s what Georgia Public Broadcasting claims. And they’ve published those documents. They claim they got them from Fulton County.

Fulton County is now three weeks later telling us we can’t get those same documents because they’ve been transferred to the clerk of court and are currently under seal.

Carmichael: Well, as you and I have been discussing, there are six cities in the country where the way that the votes were collected and how they were counted is suspicious.

Leahy: Atlanta is one of them. Detroit, Milwaukee, Philadelphia.

Carmichael: In other words, not normal. And in every one of those cases, the officials up there have fought disclosure. So you have to just ask, what are they trying to hide?

Obviously, it is important if half the population is concerned that the presidential election was stolen. But for those on the left who say that those who are concerned about that shouldn’t be.

I just merely point to the mayor’s race in New York City, which was 100 percent, Democrat, because it’s the Democrat primary. And three of the candidates up there are suing because they said the election up there was irregular.

To claim that Republicans have no right to question the results of elections where there are facts that are known. For example, all six of those cities stop counting votes at the same time.

For hours they didn’t count or they claimed they weren’t counting. And then when they opened back up to count again, then they went from there.

And we have no idea what happened during the hours that those places were shut down and where the people who would have been on the Republican side observing were thrown out of the room.

And that happened in those six cities. So there are issues that should be addressed. One good thing is that the legislature of Arizona and the governor have passed laws that will fix a lot of their problems.

And Georgia has done the same thing. I think other states are still in the process of passing laws to fix the irregularities in the election.

What’s interesting is even 62 percent of Democrats think that voter ID should be required. 87 percent of Independents think that voter ID should be required.

Voter ID is required to do virtually anything that matters. And voting is one of those things that “matters.” To ask people to identify themselves and to be sure that they are who they say they are is a very reasonable thing to do for those who want honest elections. Fulton County is clearly trying to cover something up.

Leahy: They’re covering something up because let’s just reiterate what they’ve done. We had a story on June 14 written by Laura Baigert that said, we have not received the required chain of custody documents to track the movement of absentee ballots deposited in drop boxes in Fulton County.

We are missing 385 out of 1,500 of those transfer forms that Fulton County is supposed to have. That’s 24 percent that no chain of custody document for 24 percent of the absentee ballots placed in drop boxes.

Now, here we are today on July the seventh and Fulton County still has not produced those chain of custody documents, although purportedly Georgia Public Broadcasting claims that they receive those and published those documents on June 16. Fulton isn’t giving those documents to us. Why is that Crom?

Carmichael: It seems to me to be obvious that there’s something untoward and that the Fulton County officials don’t want to provide. Michael, you guys follow this very closely.

Leahy: Yes. We relentlessly track this.

Carmichael: Has the Georgia law been changed so that the issues that you are trying to learn more about will be much more difficult?

In other words, drop boxes that are sent there by private citizens, they’re not going to be allowed. Is that correct?

Leahy: No, they will be allowed. There were 300 authorized not by the state legislature, so not legally authorized but authorized in 2020 by this election code rule of the state election board.

The legislature has ruled that, yes, they will allow a much lesser number of drop boxes, but they can be only located right next to voting centers.

They can’t be out all over the community, which is part of the problem. So we’ll address it partially. But I am very, very troubled here.

If Georgia Public Broadcasting is telling the truth, then records that Fulton County allegedly gave them on June 16 have subsequently been transferred to the clerk of court and are being held under seal and not being transferred to us.

Carmichael: Somebody does not seem to be being honest. Somebody is not acting in an honest way. Let’s put it that way.

Leahy: You are the king of understanding. (Laughter) I agree. This is breaking news everybody. And I think this is central to the issue of credibility of our elections here and why I call the Biden administration legal, but not legitimate.

Listen to the full third hour here:

– – –

 

Crom Carmichael Dissects Legislature in Regards to Absentee Ballots, Vote Harvesting and Drop Boxes

Crom Carmichael Dissects Legislature in Regards to Absentee Ballots, Vote Harvesting and Drop Boxes

 

Live from Music Row Friday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. – host Leahy welcomed the original all-star panelist Crom Carmichael to the studio to discuss Arizona and Georgia State Legislature in regard to HB2023, absentee ballots, voter harvesting, and drop boxes.

Leahy: We are joined in studio by the original All-star panelist Crom Carmichael. Crom good morning.

Carmichael: Good morning, Michael.

Leahy: Well, you told me you were listening.

Carmichael: I was listening as I was driving in.

Leahy: How I spent my Thursday morning.

Carmichael: Dive a little deeper because right at the end, you were talking about what you thought was the key phrase in the 5,000-word opinion. And there are in all Supreme Court cases, there are always in the rulings key phrases. I think Breyer wrote the descent. Is that correct?

Leahy: Kagan wrote the decent. But Breyer dissented along with Kagan. And you know who the other one was.

Carmichael: Sotomayor.

Leahy: What a surprise.

Carmichael: And now you see with Merrick Garland, he’s really showing himself to be a political hack.

Leahy: Total political hack.

Carmichael: The Supreme Court, it’s amazing how often times they do vote nine to nothing or eight to one. It really is. It’s over a majority of the time that they vote either nine to nothing or eight to one.

But there are a few cases where they tend to divide along with ideological lives. I’m not going to necessarily say political lines, but in this case, when I say finally, I’m not saying that in a good way or a bad way.

But this is the first time where the lines break where you have Democrat-appointed judges and you have Republican-appointed judges who regularly broke and voted with the Democrat-appointed judges.

Leahy: Let’s elaborate on this. There were two issues that the court decided in favor of the state of Arizona. One had to do with a statute called HB 2023 which banned ballot harvesting.

In other words, if there was an absentee ballot it had to be delivered in almost every case by the individual who had the ballot not collected by a friend.

Carmichael: Who voted. Not who just had it, but who voted.

Leahy: Exactly.

Carmichael: The legislature in Arizona voted or ruled and created legislation that said that it’s Arizona that said that if you have an absentee ballot, you have to deliver it yourself. You can’t let somebody else gather up a bunch of them and bring them in. And Arizona voted to outlaw the harvesting process. Arizona did. So the Supreme Court didn’t outlaw harvesting.

Leahy: It was the state of Arizona. It was actually a bill called HB 2023. It was a past in 2016, as it turns out, the state Senator did. Last night I spoke with the state Senator who was the primary sponsor of that bill, wrote a story about that at Breitbart as well. And her name is Michelle Ugenti-Rita. That’s her name.

And she basically said in an exclusive interview with Breitbart with me last night, she said, ‘the Supreme Court found the exact opposite of what Democrats have claimed. Thursday’s Supreme Court ruling in Brnovich v. Democrat National Committee affirms that. As the primary sponsor of HB 2023, that’s state Senator Michelle Ugenti-Rita and my colleagues in the legislature who voted for it, did not do it with discriminatory intent. That’s what Democrats have been saying for five years. Democrats owe Arizona voters an apology.’

Carmichael: Let me ask you a question. So that bill passed that you could not do vote harvesting in Arizona in 2,016, right. Did they do vote harvesting in 2020?

Leahy: You know, that’s a little bit of what this audit is Maricopa County is attempting to find out. I don’t think so. I think they’re looking into whether that law was violated.

Carmichael: Okay. So what you’re saying is, let me be sure I’m clear here to give a comparison. The Secretary of State of Georgia, in his capacity, believed that he had the authority to settle lawsuits and give the Democrats and Zuckerberg the right to do things that the legislature of Georgia did not authorize?

Leahy: Specifically, it was the state election board that he chairs that put an election code rule in that allowed the use of drop boxes for the deposit of absentee ballots which was not statutorily authorized, as it should be by the state legislature.

Carmichael: And they were private drop boxes. In other words, they weren’t Post Office boxes controlled by the post office.

Leahy: No.

Carmichael: They were private drop boxes.

Leahy: Controlled by the county election administration.

Carmichael: Which you’d have to assume is a form of vote harvesting because anybody who wants to could bring a pile of ballots and dump them in one of those private drop boxes correct? There’s nothing that would keep somebody from doing that.

Leahy: Supposedly Crom, that’s what all of our reporting has been. Supposedly they had 24/7 cameras on that. Nobody looked at it and it’s a massive task to look at it. Nobody’s really taken all those records. But in Georgia now the chain of custody has not been established for more than half of those ballots placed in drop boxes. We’ve shown that at the Georgia Star News.

Carmichael: But if you did that with a post office box, if you dumped a bunch of illegal ballots into a post office box, that would be federal mail fraud.

Leahy: Yes.

Carmichael: And that would be a big deal. But if you drop it in a Zuckerberg box, that’s not federal mail fraud because you didn’t use the U.S. Postal Service.

Leahy: You’re exactly right.

Carmichael: And the Secretary of state in Georgia did something that he had no legal right to do, but he did it and got away with it.

Leahy: The state election board of which he chairs did that.

Carmichael: Did that. Thank you for the clarification. So in Arizona, you have a law that was passed in 2,016. That law has been passed. It was 2,016. And it’s taken this long to get to the Supreme Court.

Leahy: Correct. It took five years to get to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, it’s supposed to have been enforced in Arizona. They have a different dropbox mechanism. In Georgia, the drop boxes are all over the place. You could go miles and miles and miles from the collection center. In Arizona, I think they just placed drop boxes outside of election offices. So it’s a little different. And I think they had a number of them, but they were right inside of voting locations.

Carmichael: Okay. Now, according to this ruling then, if a state wants to allow vote harvesting and the legislature passes legislation for vote harvesting within that state, vote harvesting would be legal correct?

Leahy: Well, I don’t know the answer to that question because that wasn’t exactly the issue that was tried here. The issue wasn’t can any state pass vote harvesting? The issue is the ban on harvesting legal. Is a ban a violation of section two of the Voting Rights Act? According to them, it wasn’t.

Carmichael: So Alito ruled in favor of the States of Arizona’s right as a state to pass election laws under the Constitution that are non-discriminatory.

Leahy: Yeah, exactly.

Carmichael: But Alito didn’t rule one way or the other on whether or not vote harvesting itself is discriminatory one way or the other or legal. Aren’t there some states that have passed laws that allow for vote harvesting?

Leahy: Actually, there are a total right now when you talk about there are two elements to vote harvest. You talk about depositing absentee ballots and drop boxes. That’s one thing. But there’s also in North Carolina, which is very controversial.

It has been common practice not to vote harvest in a different way. In other words, what the Democrats did for many, many years there. They would send absentee ballots off to nursing homes and various places like that.

Then they would put their operatives and that’s a kind word. And they would go to the nursing homes, and they would go to people and make sure that they had signed them. They would collect them and they’d take hundreds at a time and place them back.

Carmichael: Now, in North Carolina, there was a Democrat who did that for many elections, who got mad at the Democrat Party.

Leahy: Yes. Exactly.

Carmichael: And then did exactly what he had been doing for the Democrat Party, he did it for the Republican Party and got somebody elected by doing it. And then that person, the election was overturned.

And that individual, I don’t remember his name, but that individual was then arrested and ended up indicted and convicted.

Leahy: I think he’s serving a little time for them. It was a common practice, but it was often violated in practice by usually Democratic operatives. But in one case, when a Republican operative got caught doing it he was indicted.

Carmichael: Now because of that case, it must now be in North Carolina, must be illegal because the person was criminally convicted for doing it for the Republican Party.

Leahy: It was illegal before they just got away with it. (Chuckles)

Carmichael: All right, well, now the question is whether or not if the Democrats go back to doing it again, whether or not the authorities…

Leahy: You mean selective prosecution might be a possibility? Just ask Donald Trump’s, CFO, if the idea of selective prosecution is a possibility.

Carmichael: When we get back, I want to talk about that and compare it to Bill Cosby.

Leahy: Let’s do that.

Listen to the full second hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.
Photo “Voting Booths” by Tim Evanson. CC BY-SA 2.0.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mayor Ogles Weighs In on the Potential Decertification of 2020 Election State Results

Mayor Ogles Weighs In on the Potential Decertification of 2020 Election State Results

 

Live from Music Row Tuesday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed Maury County Mayor Andy Ogles in the studio to discuss the potential for the 2020 election results to be decertified and the consequences of unelected bureaucrats.

Leahy: I’m always glad to have that great, steady, calming influence of that find Southern gentleman Andy Ogles, the Mayor of Maury County.

Ogles: Good morning. Because, you know, it’s good to have that calm, thoughtful, responsiveness to the hot energy I bring when we’re looking at these election issues. I would love to get your reaction to this.

And we have a story at The Tennessee Star. I’ll read the headline and the first two paragraphs and then get your reaction. This is a national story, but it does have state impact because we’ve got the problem here of illegal aliens coming into Tennessee. And it’s causing difficulties and expenses from the state.

We’ll get to that in a bit. Let me look at this story. I want to get your reaction. Headline. Former Trump Campaign Advisor Boris Epshteyn Predicts States Will Decertify 2020 Election Results.

Boris Epshteyn, attorney and former strategic advisor to the 2020 Trump campaign predicted many states will decertify their election results for the November 2020 election. In an interview with Gina Loudon, our friend, Epshteyn said the series of audits that may occur could lead to the reversal.

Additionally, this is what he says. There is no language in the Constitution that prevents such a move. “The further we go on this freight train of audits from Arizona to Georgia to Pennsylvania, and the more deeply horrifying information is uncovered. Ballots missing. Databases missing in Arizona. Fulton County, chain of custody documents missing in Georgia and Atlanta. Pennsylvania, a total cesspool of disaster. The more that information comes out, the more Americans believe this was a fraudulent election,” Epshteyn said.

What do you make of this claim that states will decertify their election results?

Ogles: I think that the last statement is key. We’re in unprecedented waters here constitutionally. The question is, there is no mechanism. So what happens next? And so ultimately, you think, well, it’s going to get kicked to the Supreme Court.

Well, the Supreme Court has already dodged this bullet. They wouldn’t hear it. You only had two dissenting votes in that case, and it was Alido and Thomas. So if they decertify and there’s a case to decertify and it goes to the Supreme Court, What’s the standing? How do you get standing before the Supreme Court?

Leahy: Neither of us are attorneys. But I think you’ve asked a critical question. I do think that it’s entirely possible that Georgia and Arizona, and in particular, Arizona because the state Senate is Republican.

The state House is Republican, same as in Georgia, although they’ve been a little weak in Georgia, they’re controlled by Republicans. I think it is possible that a special session could be held or even a regular session in January.

And reviewing all this evidence, I think they could say we vote to decertify the election. Okay. What’s the impact of that? And the answer is in terms of legal mechanism, nothing. Now in terms of public opinion, however, and I think this is the angle they’re going at.

I think a growing belief that this was an unlawful election and in many cases, and we’re looking in Georgia more and more that they can’t produce chain of custody documents as we speak today, seven and a half months after the election, there are no chain of custody documents for more than 300,000 absentee ballots cast in that election where the margin of victory was less than 12,000.

Ogles: Wow. At what point does this one become criminal? But, you know, I’ve had the opportunity kind of here as COVID’s been waning to speak, quite frequently across the state. And I can tell you, overwhelmingly, as I go around and I’m talking to these various groups from Jackson to Knoxville and everywhere in between that people think this election was stolen.

And I think more and more of these audits are showing that there’s a whole lot of monkey business or incompetence that took place. But at the end of the day, we were defrauded out of a true and honest election.

Leahy: Well, that’s the mantra now from the Secretary of State in Georgia. Sloppy but not fraudulent.

Ogles: Yeah, right.

Leahy: Sloppy, but not fraudulent. And it’s not just The Georgia Star News our site in Georgia. Just the News. Did you see what they got? John Solomon’s group. They got a 29 page memo from this guy by name of Carter Jones, who observed what happened in Fulton County from November second to November seventh.

And it is just a litany of a massive chain of custody problems. We’ve only reported on the movement of absentee ballots, which, by the way, they still haven’t produced the 385 missing transfer forms for 18,000 ballots to us at The Georgia Star News.

Fulton County claims to provided or Georgia Public Broadcasting complains that they provided all the missing documentation to them on Wednesday in 48 hours of receiving a request from them.

Six and seven months after we’ve requested it. We don’t have any of that data yet. They still haven’t provided it to us.  And by the way of the ones we looked at, five percent of those absentee ballots were delivered to the registrar before they were collected at the dropbox. (Ogles chuckles) Time travel. If you believe in time travel, you believe in the certification of that election.

Ogles: I mean, that’s like Pulitzer Prize-winning. You just proved time travel.

Leahy: Time travel!

Ogles: But, you know, Laura Baigert who was on this story for The Georgia Star News, she got a shout out from our former President Trump. That has to be an amazing accomplishment from a journalist’s perspective.

I mean, Trump is Trump. Whether you like, like Trump or dislike Trump, he’s in his own kind of stratosphere. And to be given a shout-out by the former President is pretty amazing.

Leahy: Well, he’s tracking this, and it’s important stuff. And what’s interesting is you get in the weeds on this stuff. But in an election where you have absentee ballots placed in drop boxes, what a formula for fraud that is.

By the way, the Georgia state legislature did not authorize the use of drop boxes. There were 300 around Georgia. 37 in Fulton County not authorized. It was an emergency election code rule passed by the Georgia State Election Board that put them in place.

They had a rule about how you track them. So it’s very complicated. But the chain of custody was broken on so many levels there. The way they worked it is you would put these ballots in a dropbox.

And then these election workers, some of them who worked for apparently, this attempt service called Happy Faces, who got the contract with Fulton County because they were represented by wait for it…Stacey Abrams. (Ogles chuckles)

Gee, what could go wrong there? But what we can trace is they took these ballots, apparently, to a warehouse. And they held them there until they were going to count them in the election.  Supposedly they tracked the movement of absentee ballots from 37 drop boxes to the warehouses.

They’re also supposed to, although it’s not an election code rule, apparently, there were some instructions that there’s a mechanism for tracking the movement of absentee ballots from the warehouse a couple of days before the election to four miles away to the counting center at the State Farm Arena, and then back.

You’re supposed to put them in a box. Number the boxes and track all that. They haven’t done that at all.

Ogles: So you’re saying an unelected bureaucrat change election law under the nose of the legislature, kind of like CRT in Tennessee.

Leahy: Exactly like it. This is why this is kind of circling back to what is making people so angry.

Ogles: That’s right. Because our bureaucrats are doing things that they’re not authorized to do by law, and we’re being forced to live with it. And not just on the consequences of this election, but in everyday life and in everyday life here in Tennessee.

Ogles: That’s right.

Listen to the second hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Star News Network’s Laura Baigert Talks Fulton County Suspicious Preferential Treatment Regarding Request for Chain of Custody Docs

Star News Network’s Laura Baigert Talks Fulton County Suspicious Preferential Treatment Regarding Request for Chain of Custody Docs

 

Live from Music Row Monday morning on The Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. –  host Leahy welcomed The Star News Network’s Senior Reporter Laura Baigert to the newsmakers line to discuss her recent story regarding the investigation and request into chain of custody documents from Fulton County, Georgia’s Board of Registration and Elections Board.

Leahy: On our newsmaker line now, Tennessee Star, Star News Network, The Georgia Star News ace reporter Laura Baigert. Good morning, Laura.

Baigert: Good morning, Michael. How are you today?

Leahy: Well, you know, it’s been a very busy week for you, hasn’t it?

Baigert: Well, for all of us. (Laughter)

Leahy: So the big news was a week ago Monday you had a groundbreaking story and tell us what you discovered in that story. And then I will follow the chain of events from that story.

Baigert: For six months, we’ve been trying to get the chain of custody documents for the absentee ballots that were deposited by voters into drop boxes in Fulton County where Atlanta is located.

And we’ve got a bunch of documents from Fulton County, but not all of them. So we’ve followed up and followed up as a team to Fulton County asking for those documents. Finally, they came back and said, we have to admit that there are a few forms missing due to COVID and some quarantining that they back in October, that they misplaced documents.

This was after we showed them how many documents were missing and how many ballots they represented. But they disagreed with us on some of our numbers. But this is the first time that someone had any elections official had admitted that there have been any irregularities with their elections.

Leahy: Exactly. Their official spokesperson, Mariska Bodison, who’s the board Secretary for the Fulton County Board of Registrations and Elections, said a few forms were missing and paperwork may have been misplaced. (Chuckles) Procedural paperwork. That’s what she said.

Baigert: Right. And she really kind of dismissed in that terminology that these are critical chain of custody documents that go back to where those ballots even came from. And granted, anybody could do anything with these forms.

But the emergency rule that Secretary of State Raffensperger and the state elections board put into play in July, circumventing the legislature, which is what’s required by the Georgia Constitution, at least they should have followed that.

Leahy: And then the story gets more interesting because Monday afternoon, after our story, by the way, Mariska Bodison, the spokesperson who represented the Fulton County Board of Registrations and Elections admitted, a few forms may be missing.

We show that of the 1,565 transfer forms that should have been there to document chain of custody, they had only 1,100. So 385 are missing.

Leahy: It’s about 24 percent of them. But it’s a little bit more, right? (Chuckles)

Baigert: Right. It’s a little bit more than a few.

Leahy: So then that afternoon, Secretary eight Raffensperger announced that he’s investigating Fulton County for their absentee ballot chain of custody problems.

Baigert: Right after he exonerated them in April, three very tiny counties that only accounted for about a third of a percent of that absentee ballots were the only ones that were out of compliance.

Leahy: Then on Wednesday…

Baigert: Wednesday, the Georgia Public Broadcasting, the taxpayer-funded arm of NPR in Georgia, reports that they got all the documents between Monday afternoon or sometime Monday after our story came out and Wednesday in enough time for them to look at all of them and confirm that they received every one of the 1,565 documents.

And they evaluated them for no duplicates and everything else that they were able to publish a story and debunk as their fact check.

Leahy: That was their claim except they didn’t produce any of the transfer form documents as we did. We produced all of them that we got from Fulton County. And the other part of the story is the election director there, Richard Barron, admitted in public on Thursday that he dedicated 200 man-hours to finding these ‘missing absentee ballots,’ verifying your reporting, in essence.

Baigert: Right.

Leahy: Wednesday he gives a flash drive to this reporter for Georgia Public Broadcasting and doesn’t give it to us.

Baigert: Right. And at the same time, he could have just sent that file over and said, hey, we have it here.

Leahy: I think it was on Saturday when this Georgia Public Broadcasting reporter, Stephen Fowler, puts a tweet out with a little partial image of two of these supposed 377 transfer forms.

We haven’t seen 375 of them, we just saw the top of them. And you looked at that form and what did you find out?

Baigert: In looking at that, compared to other documentation that Fulton County has provided us in the way of a spreadsheet where they tracked all of their 37 dropbox locations in the 41 days that they collected during early voting and Election Day that the numbers that they recorded on their spreadsheet don’t match up with what Stephen Fowler reported in his report.

And it was off by 21  ballots between the two locations. He may have been trying to help (Laughter) Fulton County, but I think he might hurt them even more.

Leahy: Yeah, because this is a discrepancy now and another discrepancy with this partial information. By the way, you’ve asked again, very politely on Friday for Fulton County to produce the flash drives that apparently have this data that they gave Georgia Public Broadcasting on Wednesday, but still haven’t given it to us.

Baigert: Right. And for an explanation as to how they got a 48-hour turnaround in getting the documents that we’ve been waiting months for. And in the same tweet by Stephen Fowler implies that it was his skills that allowed him to get the documents and not us. (Leahy laughs)

And if we could only tell Fulton County what documents were missing. Well, it would seem that the people who run the election would be the subject matter experts in how many documents they have to administer the election rather than us knowing how many documents they have.

Leahy: Yeah. That’s their duty. It’s a Secretary of State’s duty to obtain those before he certifies the election. That was way back in November. He didn’t do that. Where do you think this particular story is going to go? Will Fulton County respond to us?

Baigert: I would say not likely. If they didn’t voluntarily turn those over and say, hey, we located the documents you’ve been asking for.

And since, by the way, Steven Fowler at the Georgia Public Broadcasting reported that at the same time, he got a flash drive from Fulton County last week that the documents were turned over to state investigators who were now, as Raffensperger said, the Secretary of State was going to investigate this. So they turned it over to them, but not the people who originated the request.

Leahy: Yeah, that’s a little fishy, wouldn’t you say?

Baigert: Yes. (Leahy chuckles) I’d say it’s doubtful that they’ll respond to us today. We basically haven’t asked them for much at this point. By state law, they’re also supposed to reply to you within three days. They did give us an automated response last week.

Leahy: Yeah, we got your request. We’ll process it. (Laughter) They had a different response to Georgia Public Broadcasting. Okay, here they are but you can’t share them with anybody else, and you can’t make them public. And you can only put partial information about two of these 377 transfer forms. (Chuckles)

Baigert: And what’s really interesting about it is that there were six full days that we didn’t get documents for. It’s an interesting scenario and it’s obvious that not all public document requesters are treated equally. And I think that is something that Rasmussen pointed out in a tweet after Steven Fowler touted his prowess and his amazing skills.

Leahy: (Chuckles) Well, it’s probably illegal, actually, to treat different requests for records differently. And we just might have something to say to Fulton County about that. Wait, and stay tuned. Laura, thanks so much for joining us this morning. Great reporting.

Baigert: Thank you, Michael. Have a great day.

Listen to the full second hour here:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 a.m. to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio.