Calif. Sheriff Investigates ‘Massive’ Ballot Discrepancy In Special Election
Riverside, California - June 7, 2026
Riverside County Sheriff Launches Investigation into Vote Discrepancy in 2025 Special Election
Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco has initiated a criminal investigation into a reported discrepancy between electronic vote tabulations and handwritten poll worker logs from a 2025 special election. The inquiry focuses on a difference of approximately 45,896 votes between machine counts and physical records maintained at polling sites.
According to court documents, machine scanners recorded over 657,000 ballots cast in the election, while handwritten logs kept by poll workers documented just over 611,000 voters. Sheriff’s deputies, acting under search warrants authorized by a superior court judge, seized more than 1,500 boxes of election materials from the Riverside County Registrar of Voters office for further examination.
A judge has appointed an independent special master to oversee the physical verification process. The materials are being held in secure storage under court supervision.
Statements from Officials
Sheriff Bianco, who is also a candidate for California governor, stated that the purpose of the investigation is to determine the accuracy of the election results. He described the scale of the discrepancy as significant and emphasized the need for a complete review.
Registrar of Voters Art Tinoco has attributed the difference to human error by temporary workers who filled out the poll site paperwork. He has maintained that the machine tabulations accurately reflect the ballots cast.
Response from State Officials
California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office has opposed the investigation, describing it as an unprecedented action lacking credible evidence. Officials from the attorney general’s office issued letters attempting to halt aspects of the probe, though the sheriff’s department proceeded with the court-authorized seizure.
The investigation comes amid broader scrutiny of California’s election administration, including questions about voter roll maintenance and ballot processing timelines raised in other recent legal actions.
The seized materials will undergo a court-supervised review to reconcile the electronic records with the physical poll logs. The outcome of the verification process will determine whether further action is warranted regarding the 2025 special election results.
Sheriff Bianco has indicated that the investigation will continue until the discrepancy is fully examined. State election officials have reiterated that California’s voting systems include multiple layers of verification, though the current inquiry represents an unusual level of local law enforcement involvement in post-election review.
Top Democrat SHREDDED After Backing Graham Platner - His Career Is Over
Washington, D.C. - June 7, 2026
Rep. Ro Khanna Endorses Graham Platner for Maine Senate Despite Allegations of Past Misconduct
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) has publicly endorsed Graham Platner, the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Maine, even as Platner faces allegations of abusive behavior in past relationships. A New York Times report this week detailed claims from an ex-girlfriend alleging volatile and abusive conduct.
Platner has denied the allegations of physical abuse. In an interview with MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, he stated that the ex-girlfriend was lying about the abuse claims. He also criticized the media coverage as “journalistic malpractice” and accused the whistleblower of political motivation.
Platner has additionally addressed a Nazi-themed tattoo he received, stating that he did not know the design at the time it was applied. He described allegations that he knew the tattoo’s meaning as politically motivated.
Khanna’s Defense of Platner
Khanna acknowledged the New York Times report and described some of Platner’s past relationships as “toxic and volatile.” He stated that no one should make excuses for the past conduct or attack the women who came forward. Khanna added that Platner has “sought redemption,” “took accountability,” and has “worked to be a better man, a better human being.”
During a rally for Platner in Maine, Khanna attributed some of the candidate’s past difficulties to his service in the War on Terror, suggesting that the experience “broke” him and thousands of other veterans. He stated that sometimes the country itself feels “broken.”
Platner previously made public comments blaming women for being raped, which have also drawn criticism during the campaign.
Campaign Context
Platner is seeking the Democratic nomination for the open Senate seat in Maine. The race has drawn national attention as Democrats work to retain or expand their presence in the chamber. Khanna, often described in media reports as a progressive voice within the party, has positioned his support for Platner around themes of personal growth and accountability.
The allegations and Khanna’s response have generated discussion within Democratic circles about candidate vetting and standards for elected officials. Platner has maintained that he is committed to moving forward and representing Maine in the Senate.
The Democratic primary in Maine remains competitive, with vote counting and candidate positioning continuing in the weeks ahead of the general election.
Judge Delivers Ruling on Mail-In Ballots as Election is Too Close To Call
Washington, D.C. - June 7, 2026
Federal Judge Denies Immediate Injunction Against Trump Executive Order on Mail-In Voting
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols ruled on May 28 that a request by Democrats for a preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s March 31 executive order on mail-in voting was premature. The judge concluded that federal agencies had not yet taken concrete steps to implement the order, so no immediate harm had been demonstrated.
Trump’s executive order directs federal agencies to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens and requires the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail-in ballots only to voters appearing on approved state mail-in voting lists.
Democrats challenged the order in court, arguing that it exceeds presidential authority and could affect voting access for millions of Americans. Nichols did not issue a ruling on the legality of the executive order itself. He determined only that the plaintiffs had not shown sufficient grounds for immediate judicial intervention at this stage.
The decision leaves existing voting procedures unchanged for now. No alterations to how Americans currently cast ballots have taken effect as a result of the ruling.
Appeal and Ongoing Litigation
The Democratic Party has formally appealed the May 28 decision. Legal challenges to the executive order are proceeding on multiple fronts. A separate lawsuit filed in Massachusetts by several voting rights organizations seeks to block portions of the order. A federal judge in Boston is scheduled to hear arguments in that case.
On May 29, the U.S. Postal Service proposed a rule that would require states to provide lists of voters who receive mail-in ballots. The proposal is undergoing a 30-day public comment period before any final action.
The Massachusetts lawsuit was brought by groups including the League of Women Voters, the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, the Association of Americans Resident Overseas, the U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA–Asian Pacific American Advocates, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. The plaintiffs are represented by organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Legal Defense Fund, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that the Constitution reserves authority over election rules to the states and Congress, not the president. They expressed concern that the order could affect organizations assisting voters who rely on mail-in ballots, including overseas voters, military families, seniors, voters with disabilities, students, and rural residents.
Administration Position
The administration has defended the executive order as a measure to strengthen election security and improve verification processes. The Justice Department has not yet commented on the appeal of the May 28 ruling.
The executive order remains in effect while litigation continues. Federal courts are expected to play a significant role in determining the scope of presidential authority over election procedures in the coming months. Multiple lawsuits are advancing simultaneously, and additional rulings are anticipated before future federal elections.
