Donald Trump’s campaign manager said Friday that a source of the Republican’s allegation that millions voted illegally in the presidential election is none other than Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach.
Kellyanne Conway, the Trump-Pence campaign manager who has continued to help the president-elect during the transition, made the comment on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” There’s been no evidence to back up Trump’s allegation.
“The president-elect has been talking to different people, including Kris Kobach of Kansas, about voting irregularities or the number of illegal votes that may have been cast,” Conway told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “And I believe that he bases his information on that.”
“There is no evidence that there were millions of illegal votes. Zero,” Stephanopoulos replied.
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Kansas City Star
“There’s also no evidence that a re-count is going to change the results in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania,” Conway said, referring to Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s re-count efforts in those states.
Democrat Hillary Clinton leads Trump by more than 2 million in the nationwide popular vote.
But Trump won the presidency with more than 300 projected Electoral College votes. The Electoral College is the state-by-state tally used to determine who wins the presidency.
“I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” Trump wrote in a tweet Sunday.
Kobach, a vocal supporter of the president-elect, said Wednesday that he supports Trump’s claim, despite offering no evidence of mass voter fraud happening in the 2016 election. Kobach reportedly has been considered for a post in the administration.
“I think the president-elect is absolutely correct when he says the number of illegal votes cast exceeds the popular vote margin between him and Hillary Clinton at this point,” Kobach said.
Kobach then tried to back up his claim by citing a survey of the 2008 presidential election. The analysis he cited Wednesday has been widely criticized and debunked by both political scientists and the Harvard-run group that collected the data used in the analysis.