Source guide

PIN Emails on the Michigan Voter-Registration Investigation and Declination

A redacted 2021 FBI and Justice Department email chain documenting reported concerns about Muskegon voter-registration applications, investigative steps, authorization limits, and an August 2021 direction that no further action be taken in the referenced district at that time.

Open full source PDF ↗ 4 pages Embedded source text
01

Reported registration anomalies

A February 2021 FBI email recounted that the Muskegon clerk began receiving applications in October 2020 that were flagged as potentially fraudulent because of nonexistent addresses, invalid phone numbers, signature issues, and similar handwriting. These are reported investigative allegations in the email, not final findings of fraud.

“started receiving voter registration applications that were flagged as potentially fraudulent.”
FBI email; investigative lead
Source: page 3 ↗
“Concerns included: Addresses that did not exist, invalid phone numbers, signature matching issues, and same/similar handwriting on multiple applications.”
FBI email; reported anomalies
Source: page 3 ↗
02

State and local investigative actions

The same email said Muskegon police and Michigan state authorities opened an investigation and that the Michigan State Police executed a search warrant on October 29, 2020. It reported that agents saw boxes of reloadable debit cards described as “blue cards” and that subsequent interviews indicated an unidentified subject used the cards to pay workers who brought in voter applications.

“On October 29, 2020, The Michigan State Police executed a search warrant”
FBI email; investigative action
Source: page 3 ↗
“noted a number of boxes with “blue cards” or some other re-loadable debit cards.”
FBI email; search observation
Source: page 3 ↗
“used these cards to pay workers bringing in voter applications.”
FBI email; account of subsequent interviews
Source: page 3 ↗
03

Different authorization for “blue cards” and registration allegations

A March 11 email said PIN concurred in a full-field grand-jury investigation of the “blue cards” allegations. It did not concur, absent further predication, in an investigation focused purely on alleged voter-registration fraud that state officials had investigated.

“PIN concurs in proceeding with a full field, grand jury investigation into the allegations involving the “blue cards.””
PIN email; authorization decision
Source: page 2 ↗
“PIN does not concur at this time, barring further predication, with a specific investigation focused purely on the voter registration fraud”
PIN email; authorization limitation
Source: page 2 ↗
04

Preliminary fact gathering authorized

An April 1 email said PIN concurred only in the preliminary step of contacting state and local election and law-enforcement authorities to gather more information about the alleged registration fraud. It requested detailed assessments of the number and types of registrations judged fraudulent or inaccurate and required renewed consultation before additional investigative action.

“PIN concurs in the preliminary investigative step of contacting the State/local election and law enforcement authorities to gather more information about the alleged voter registration fraud.”
PIN email; preliminary authorization
Source: page 2 ↗
“Please consult again if and when your office or the FBI seeks to pursue additional investigative action.”
PIN email; authorization condition
Source: page 2 ↗
05

District-specific no-further-action direction

An August 12 email said the sender had been informally advised that no further action should be taken in “this District” at that time and that an official response would follow. The sender separately said the status of any Eastern District authorization was unknown, making the visible disposition district-specific rather than a final adjudication of the underlying allegations.

“no further action should be taken in this District at this time.”
Email body; informal disposition
Source: page 1 ↗
“I do not know the status of any authorization for the Eastern District investigation.”
Email body; jurisdictional caveat
Source: page 1 ↗