District Attorney Avoids Real Election Fraud Case For Political Reasons

 

District Attorney George Gascon

ANDREW PERRY 

Los Angeles, California - In an era filled with false charges of election fraud, people might think District Attorney George Gascon would have been eager to prosecute an actual case of election fraud in his own backyard, in the city of Artesia, located in southeast Los Angeles County. Ironically, he is choosing not to. 

Election fraud is a common accusation these days. Former President Donald Trump still claims that’s how he lost the 2020 election, despite there being no evidence to support the claim. Arizona governor candidate Kari Lake claimed it too, but still - no evidence. So far, there have been few legit cases of election fraud. However, when a legitimate case of election fraud came in the city of Artesia came before Attorney General George Gascon after an almost year long investigation by the LA County Sheriff's Public Corruptions Unit, what did Gascon do? Nothing. In fact, he seems to actively be avoiding the case.

The Context of Artesia’s Election Fraud

City of Artesia employees, residents, and business owners, have alleged that the City’s former City Manager Bill Rawlings purposely defrauded the 2020 municipal election so that he can have a City Council that was easier for him to manipulate. 

Rawlings did this by making it exceedingly easy for his chosen candidates to collect and return their election paperwork, but stonewalling two other candidates whom Rawlings thought were problematic. He even directed the City Clerk at the time to avoid two other candidates that were trying to run. This happened during the Covid-19 pandemic. 

When the candidate filing period ended (August 7, 2020), the two "unwanted" candidates had been successfully ghosted, and the chosen candidates were able to run unopposed.

By the end of the election, Rawlings got what he wanted: two candidates who ran uncontested to fill one incumbent seat (Tony Lima), and one vacant seat (formerly Miguel Canales).

However, behind the scenes a ball was set into motion that would eventually lead to Rawlings’ exit from the public sector, and the unionization of the City’s entire staff (except for three notable people). This all was prompted in large part by the existing employee union and a group of unionizing managers. Soon after being directed to not speak to certain candidates, Sanchez went to Human Resources Manager Boyd Horan to report what happened. This report to the HR Manager happened towards the end of the candidate filing period.

But that is a story that has already been told. If you want to read about it, you’re welcome to.

This story is about how District Attorney George Gascon refuses to prosecute an actual case of election fraud. 

Why Is George Gascon Not Prosecuting This Case?

Short answer: probably politics.

Gascon is considered by most to be an establishment Democrat politician, which means he won’t embrace bold ideas but will still opt for incremental changes. It also means he will occasionally dabble in identity politics when beneficial. The current wisdom of Democratic establishment politicians is to avoid election fraud cases like they are the plague. Republican candidates in the past few years have cried “Wolf!” so many times about the subject, that to get wrapped up in an election fraud case is political suicide, at least in the eyes of these establishment politicians. 

But is it really political suicide if an election fraud case actually has merit?

The Artesia case does not have the conspiracy theory component that President Donald Trump’s or Kari Lake’s election fraud claims did. There’s no dead voters, no “massive dumps” of election ballots, no undocumented voters, and definitely no partisan politics. The Artesia case is simple: the City Manager allegedly electioneered the election so that he would have a City Council that was easier for him to manipulate. He did this by preventing at least two candidates from running and providing plenty of assistance from city staff to two other candidates so that they can run for office uncontested. On top of that, he had two councilmembers (Tony Lima and Ali Taj) who were complicit with these actions, and one new councilmember (Monica Manalo) who had benefited from them.

Antonio ‘Tony’ Simoes was one of those candidates who were allegedly ghosted by the City and never had a chance to run.

Simoes was a former city maintenance worker, a former union president, and is a resident of Artesia. 

“Basically, I wasn’t allowed to pull my papers,” said Simoes.

“I was Emailing and calling them back and forth, and then one day I was asked if I was the same Tony who used to work for the City.”  

“I answered ‘yes’, continued Simoes. “And then I heard an, “Oooohh …”

“The tone of voice tipped me off that the City Clerk had some sort of discussion with the City Manager (Bill Rawlings) or one of the higher ups,” said Simoes. “After that, it was radio silence.”

Several Lawsuits Against the City Are Still Active

Before the City Manager left the City, he allegedly directed his second in charge to fire HR Manager Boyd Horan. 

This is assumed because the only person who has the authority to hire or fire an employee is the City Manager, who at this time was Rawlings. Rawlings, however, was at this time making very rare appearances due to unionization efforts of the entire city staff, in large part in response to his own management style.

Prior to Horan’s firing, city staff (including Horan) were organizing to unionize, and he was essentially being both a responsible HR Manager and a whistle blower.  Given the context of his firing, Horan currently has a lawsuit against the City for wrongful termination and other charges.

Joseph Marcus is one of the attorneys representing Horan’s case. “The Horan case is very comprehensive. First, this is a clear case of retaliation. Second, there’s the whole election issue. Finally, the Sheriff’s Public Corruptions Unit did roughly a year of investigations on the matter.”

Marcus said, “The sheriffs submitted it to the District Attorney, and then the District Attorney just rejected it. A year’s worth of investigations was rejected out of hand.”

Eye On Pioneer reached out to the District Attorney’s Office, but has not received a response.

The LA County Recorder’s Clerk, however, did respond. Mike Sanchez of the Registrar Recorder County Clerk’s Office said, “I encourage you to review and learn election-related laws, codes, and regulations.”

Good idea, Mike.

Combing Through California”s Election Code

Taking Mike’s advice, the Eye On Pioneer scoured California’s Election Code.

Chapter 3 - Nomination of Candidates, Article 6, Section 18204. Any person who willfully suppresses all or any part of a nomination paper or declaration of candidacy either before or after filing is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for 16 months or two or three years or by both that fine and imprisonment.

That is essentially what happened here, isn’t it? According to the allegations, Rawlings orchestrated a successful attempt to suppress nomination papers for two candidates, preventing them from running for office. At the same time, he helped groom his chosen candidates with an uncontested election. No City Council election was had on the 2020 ballot. 

Chapter 10, Part 2 - Municipal Elections, Article 2, Section 10227. All forms required for nomination and election to all municipal offices shall be furnished only by the city elections official during regular business hours. At the time of issuance of those forms the city elections official shall type in the forms the name of the candidate and the office for which he is a candidate, shall imprint a stamp which reads "Official Filing Form," and shall affix his or her signature. At the time nomination papers are issued to a candidate, the city elections official shall imprint the date. The forms shall be distributed without charge to all candidates applying for them.

Rawlings interfered with the City’s election official (the City Clerk) from performing this duty of this section and other sections of this Article.

Chapter 6 - Corruption of the Voting Process, Article I, 18502. Any person who in any manner interferes with the officers holding an election or conducting a canvass, or with the voters lawfully exercising their rights of voting at an election, as to prevent the election or canvass from being fairly held and lawfully conducted, is punishable by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code for 16 months or two or three years.

Again, Rawlings allegedly interfered with the elections officer to prevent the election from being fairly held and lawfully conducted.

Eye On Pioneer tried to reach the investigators at the Sheriff's Public Corruptions Unit, but they have not responded as of June 21, 2023.

Why Should Gascon Prosecute The Artesia Case?

By not choosing to prosecute the case, Gascon is playing a very dangerous game of politics, one which lends ammunition to people he likely views as his political enemies, while also alienating those who could be political allies. Quite often, ill conceived political "wisdom" comes from the Democratic Party establishment itself, especially their campaign strategists. These strategists are well known for causing devastating losses in elections, even in elections they could have easily won.

Conservatives, especially the MAGA wing of the Republican Party, already believe that the 2020 election was rigged. When they hear that a legitimate, well investigated case of 2020 election fraud came before Gascon's office and it was rejected, their beliefs will be confirmed.

Democratic politicians often view unions as allies, and often take their support for granted. This is not the case any more. A lot of union workers are wise to the game that establishment politicians in particular play. The context of the Artesia case led to a unionization effort that united all the City's employees (management and rank-and-file) under one banner. When union workers hear about how Gascon refused to prosecute a case that union workers fought hard to put into play, it won't be difficult for union employees to deduce that Gascon is an unserious politician.

All this could have been avoided had Gascon instead did what is his duty, to prosecute a case on its merits.

Election fraud is serious. It should be treated as such.

#########################################

Andrew Perry has been in the journalism field for 20 years. He is a Vice President of AFSCME District Council 36, and President of AFSCME Local 1520.