Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What were the findings of the Georgia Secretary of State and Fulton County investigations into ballot handling?
Executive summary
Investigations by Georgia’s Secretary of State and by Fulton County into ballot handling have repeatedly found no evidence of widespread ballot-stuffing or illegal coordinated ballot harvesting; a State Election Board review concluded footage cited by critics showed people submitting ballots for themselves or household members — conduct that is lawful in Georgia [1]. The Secretary of State’s office emphasizes routine post-election audits and recounts — including hand counts of randomly selected ballots statewide — as part of normal election verification processes [2].
1. What each office said and why it matters
The Georgia Secretary of State’s Elections Division presents routine audits, recounts and a My Voter Page for transparency; it notes county officials hand-counted randomly selected ballots in a statewide audit and that absentee and early-voting rules and safeguards (photo ID, no automatic mail ballots) are in place to protect integrity [2]. Fulton County’s public materials (sample ballots and canvass notices) and county boards participate in the same statewide processes that feed into Secretary of State reporting and certification [3] [4]. Those institutional roles matter because the Secretary of State coordinates statewide audits and certification while counties execute ballot processing on the ground [2] [4].
2. The specific 2000 Mules / True the Vote-related review
A direct, high-profile claim — that surveillance camera footage showed coordinated “ballot stuffing” — was examined by the State Election Board and the Secretary of State’s investigators. That review found the footage used in the film showed people depositing ballots for themselves or family members who lived with them, an act allowed under Georgia law, and the board dismissed a lawsuit seeking enforcement of subpoenas after the alleging group failed to produce evidence of coordinated ballot stuffing [1]. The finding undermined the central evidentiary claim used by those alleging mass illegal ballot handling in that episode [1].
3. What the Secretary of State’s investigations do (and their limits)
Brad Raffensperger’s office has investigators who look into specific allegations — signature-match issues on absentee envelopes, duplicate voting, votes cast by nonresidents or deceased persons — and it can order audits or recounts when margins or law require them [5] [2]. However, sources do not provide exhaustive lists of every investigation result or every allegation examined; available sources do not mention the outcomes for every specific allegation beyond the high-profile reviews cited [2] [5] [1].
4. Fulton County’s role and the certification process
Fulton County’s Boards of Elections and sample ballot materials illustrate the local administration tasks: opening absentee envelopes, scanning ballots, reconciling provisional ballots, and canvassing before certification — processes that are then submitted to the Secretary of State for final recording [3] [4]. In public meetings certification questions have been raised by some board members about historical ballots, but the official administrative procedure remains that counties reconcile and certify results during canvassing [4] [3].
5. Competing narratives and how reporting framed them
One narrative pushed by election-denial activists seeks to portray large caches of ballots (for example, the frequently cited “148,000 ballots”) as proof of fraud; reporting shows such claims have been amplified by partisan actors and sometimes linked to federal or DOJ inquiries in headlines, but the materials provided do not substantiate that those ballots indicate systemic illegal handling — and independent reviews cited found the specific camera evidence did not show illegal ballot-stuffing [6] [1]. The Secretary of State’s office and the State Election Board explicitly dismissed or failed to substantiate the ballot-stuffing allegations in the cases documented [1] [5].
6. What remains unconfirmed or outside current reporting
Available sources do not mention every investigatory action or final disposition for all allegations raised since 2020; for example, the specific letter allegedly demanding “immediate access” to 148,000 ballots is referenced in reporting but its authenticity could not be independently verified in that account [6]. Likewise, comprehensive, up-to-the-minute lists of all open inquiries by the Secretary of State or Fulton County are not provided in the set of documents you supplied [2] [6].
7. Bottom line and what to watch next
The documented, cited official findings in these sources show the Secretary of State’s office and the State Election Board found no evidence in the cited footage of illegal ballot-stuffing and rely on routine audits and hand counts as verification mechanisms [1] [2]. Watch for public releases from the Secretary of State and Fulton County canvass minutes for any new claims; when activists allege large-scale misfeasance, demand evidence that survives subpoena, audit, or judicial scrutiny — in the cases cited, such evidence was not produced or was rebutted [1] [6].