Sept 8 (Reuters) - The death threats brought Staci McElyea to tears. The caller said that McElyea and other workers in the Nevada Secretary of State’s office were "going to f------ die.” She documented the threats and alerted police, who identified and interviewed the caller. But in the end, detectives said there was nothing they could do – that the man had committed no crime.
The first call came at 8:07 a.m. on Jan. 7, hours after Congress certified Donald Trump’s loss to Joe Biden in the November 2020 presidential vote. The caller accused McElyea of “stealing” the election, echoing Trump’s false claims of voter fraud. “I hope you all go to jail for treason. I hope your children get molested. You’re all going to f------ die,” he told her.
He called back three times over the next 15 minutes, each time telling her she was “going to die.”
McElyea, 53, a former U.S. Marine, called the Nevada Capitol Patrol and sent the state police agency a transcript of the calls, according to emails Reuters obtained through a public-records request. An officer contacted the man – who police would later identify as Gjurgi Juncaj of Las Vegas – and reported back to McElyea that their inquiry “might have pissed him off even further,” the emails showed.
A week later, state police concluded that Juncaj’s threats were not criminal, characterizing them as “protected” political speech, according to a summary of the case. Juncaj was never arrested or charged. Asked about the calls, Juncaj told Reuters he didn’t believe he had done anything wrong. “Like I explained to the police, I didn’t threaten anybody,” he said.
The case illustrates the glaring gaps in the protection that U.S. law enforcement provides the administrators of American democracy amid a sustained campaign of intimidation against election officials and staff. The unprecedented torrent of terroristic threats began in the weeks before the November election, as Trump was predicting widespread voter fraud, and continues today as the former president carries on with false claims that he was cheated out of victory.
In an investigation that identified hundreds of incidents of intimidation and harassment of election workers and officials nationwide, Reuters found only a handful of arrests.
Local police agencies said in interviews that they have struggled to identify suspects who conceal their identities and to determine which threats are credible enough to prosecute. The U.S. Justice Department has acknowledged that law enforcement has not responded well to the surge in threats to election officials.
“The response has been inadequate,” John Keller, a senior attorney in the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section, told a meeting of secretaries of state in Iowa on Aug. 14. Keller heads a task force created in July to investigate threats of violence to election workers and to coordinate with local and state authorities that receive most initial reports of intimidation.
The Justice Department did not comment for this report.
The Reuters investigation revealed a breakdown in coordination and accountability among various levels of law enforcement. Some election officials fumed that police investigators or federal agents didn’t appear to take the threats seriously and that it was unclear which agency, if any, was investigating. Some said they never heard from investigators again after reporting threats of violence. When pressed about the status of some cases, several police officials said they had no involvement and pointed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Federal officials, by contrast, bemoaned a lack of information-sharing by local authorities.
Through public records and interviews, Reuters documented 102 threats of death or violence received by more than 40 election officials, workers and their relatives in eight of the most contested battleground states in the 2020 presidential contest. Each was explicit enough to put a reasonable person in fear of bodily harm or death, the typical legal threshold for prosecution.
Almost all of the 102 threats of violence appeared to be inspired by Trump’s debunked claims that the election was rigged against him. The messages often included highly personal, sometimes sexualized threats of violence or death, not only to the officials themselves but also to their family members and their children.
A spokesman for Trump did not respond to requests for comment for this story.
Reuters interviewed 26 election officials for this story, including eight secretaries of state. Only one of those officials, Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, was aware of anyone being charged in connection to the intimidation. That incident is among just four nationwide in which Reuters was able to document an arrest, based on public records or news accounts, though it is possible that more arrests were made.
Those four open cases have yet to result in a conviction.
The 102 threats were the most egregious examples among a larger set of hundreds of hostile messages received by local and state election workers, according to interviews and records documenting the intimidation. In addition to the messages that threatened violence, hundreds of others contained harassing language that was disturbing, profane and sometimes racist or misogynistic. The intimidation has affected all levels of election administrators, from rank-and-file poll workers to secretaries of state.
In his August speech, Keller, the Justice Department task-force leader, said the department has until recently had little visibility into threats received by election workers. That’s changing, he said, with the task force now collecting threats from election officials through the FBI’s 56 field offices, rather than relying on local law enforcement.
But he added that federal authorities lacked the “infrastructure” to monitor threats against all officials. “We're relying heavily right now on reports from individuals who are aware of these kinds of threats.”
The FBI’s Washington headquarters, along with field offices in several states, declined to comment for this story.
Often, police have failed to identify the person making reported threats to election workers. But some police who have identified suspects have determined they committed no crime. In the Nevada incident, the investigating detective concluded in his summary of the case that the threats constituted legally protected speech because the suspect merely said he “wished” election workers would die.
McElyea’s witness account contradicts the detective’s assessment and never quotes the caller saying he “wished” death on election workers. Rather, she makes clear the man repeatedly told her that she and her colleagues would be killed. “This is what you’re going to f------ get from now on,” her transcript quotes the caller as saying. “You’re all going to f------ die, and it is what you deserve.”
That language rises to the level of a criminal threat that could be prosecuted under federal law, said Jared Carter, a law professor at Cornell University and specialist in protected speech who reviewed the threat at the request of Reuters. “Whoever made that call is certainly at risk of being prosecuted,” said Carter, who is not connected to the case.
State police declined to comment when asked if the investigating detective mischaracterized the threat.
Two prosecutors and three constitutional law experts interviewed for this story said the rash of threats against election workers has exposed confusion in law enforcement over protections for political speech. Threats to commit any violence – especially repeated threats intended to cause terror – are not protected by the First Amendment, said Mary McCord, a former acting assistant attorney general for national security at the Department of Justice who now teaches at Georgetown Law School. McCord and other experts say some incidents pose challenges for prosecutors, and that applicable laws don’t prescribe any “magic words” that a threat must include to constitute a crime.
A number of state and federal laws allow for the prosecution of people who threaten political violence. Many states make it a felony to threaten acts of terrorism, according to a recent report by Georgetown Law School’s Crime and Justice Institute. Such laws generally define terrorism as violent acts intended to coerce a political outcome, such as reversing an election result. Prosecutors also can use anti-stalking laws to charge people with committing acts of intimidation, scholars say. And federal law makes it a felony to issue a threat across state lines, such as by phone or email.
As law enforcement struggles to respond effectively, some election officials are taking responsibility for their own security. Milwaukee’s city election commissioner, Claire Woodall-Vogg, plans to install security glass in her office. A senior county election official in Arizona said in an interview that he wears body armor whenever he leaves his house. Janice Winfrey, Detroit’s city clerk, took firearms training and now carries a concealed weapon after receiving threats.
“I never believed in guns before, even living in Detroit,” which is historically among America’s most violent cities, she said. “I was afraid for my life.”
Law enforcement’s inaction has frustrated some of the election officials living in fear of being assaulted or killed. The Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) has made no arrests after investigating threats against Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, and his family. The Raffenspergers received dozens of menacing messages that were documented in a Reuters investigation published in June.
Some of the threats to the Raffenspergers and other election officials were investigated by the GBI, and more serious threats involving imminent physical harm were investigated by the FBI, according to a statement from the Georgia Attorney General’s office. The AG determined that none of the threats it reviewed rose to the level of criminal conduct, the office said.
The FBI’s Atlanta field office declined to comment on its investigation of the threats.
No arrests have been made.
Tricia Raffensperger, wife of the secretary of state, said the lack of action to protect election workers stands in stark contrast to the Justice Department’s sprawling investigation into the pro-Trump insurrection at the U.S. Capitol in January, which has produced about 600 arrests.
“You look at January 6 and how many people they’ve arrested,” she said in an interview. “They were able to locate those people and arrest them. Why can’t they follow up on the death threats we get?”
“The only way it’s going to stop is when people get caught,” she said.
The FBI is now stepping up its investigation into the threats against Georgia election officials that were first reported by Reuters in June, according to Fulton County Elections Director Richard Barron. Barron said he met last week with an FBI agent and a GBI agent seeking more information about the threats. The FBI agent, Barron said, told him that Reuters’ reporting had pressured the Department of Justice to intensify the probe. The investigators, he said, asked for documentation of threats against Barron and said they also would investigate intimidation of others in his office.
Local, state and federal authorities have also looked into credible death threats against senior election officials in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Colorado, but have so far made no arrests, according to election officials in those states who are familiar with the investigations.
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who says she continues to get regular death threats, said the lack of prosecutions is “concerning when people are telling you repeatedly they’re going to come hang you, they’re repeatedly threatening you. And that they know where you live, and they’re going to come and get you.”
'I SEE YOU SLEEPING. BE AFRAID'
Griswold’s social media accounts lit up with threats after she adopted rules on June 17 forbidding partisan post-election audits in Colorado similar to those being conducted in Arizona and Wisconsin, which are led by pro-Trump politicians who have amplified his debunked election fraud claims. Reviewing the threats at home, Griswold took screenshots on her cell phone to preserve evidence.
“Patriots will take care of you. I would move and change your address... quickly,” read an Instagram comment. “Guess who is going to hang when all the fraud is revealed? (*Hint ..look in the mirror).” Another comment under a childhood photo she had posted online, to wish her dad a happy Father’s Day, read: “Prepare for the gallows.”
The comments were from Instagram user stevet420, who had been posting harassing and threatening messages against Griswold since April, according to his posts, which have since been deleted.
She sent the screenshots to the Colorado State Patrol, which responded by providing Griswold, 36, with around-the-clock protection for three weeks from late June as officers investigated. They identified stevet420 as Steven Telepchak, a 42-year-old information-technology manager in Pennsylvania, but did not pursue charges.
“These posts have been thoroughly investigated, and there are no planned arrests based upon the findings,” Colorado State Police said in a statement, declining to explain why the force dropped the case.
Telepchak did not respond to requests for comment.
Griswold lamented that no one has been held accountable. While her police protection has ended, the threats of violence have not, she said.
“Watch your back. I KNOW WHERE YOU SLEEP, I SEE YOU SLEEPING. BE AFRAID,” said one Facebook message on Aug. 10. Another anonymous caller telephoned her office on Aug. 3 and said he was “going to shoot every employee in the building,” Griswold said.
(...)