The fake news is now brazenly defending the (alleged) election fraud happening in California.
To give you a quick rundown of what’s been going on in the LA Mayor race, Spencer Pratt was solidly in second-place to Karen Bass on Election Night, with Nithya Raman trailing behind in third.
But, as Election Day turned into days, flood after flood of mail-in ballots have come in. And, they have not been favorable to Spencer Pratt.
Now, at this point, he’s only barely beating out Nithya Raman and may not advance at all.
We covered the latest in the race here:
Spencer Pratt’s Lead Over Progressive Nithya Raman Nearly Vanishes After Latest Ballot Drop
One ballot dump this week had exactly zero votes for Spencer Pratt.
Not just a few in the batch, which honestly would be suspicious in and of itself.
No. There was not even a single vote for Pratt in the tens of thousands of ballots that flooded in from that drop.
Social media posts, like this one, pointed out the extremely sketchy election update when it happened:
PROOF OF CHEATING IN CALIFORNIA.
Notice that Karen Bass and Nithya Raman each increased by about 10,000 votes, but Spencer Pratts number stayed the EXACT SAME.
So, in over 20K votes cast, Spencer didn't get ONE.
This is IMPOSSIBLE.
The fix is surely in. pic.twitter.com/YAgNssszOY
— Mila Joy (@Milajoy) June 4, 2026
If that's not clear-cut evidence of something fishy going on, then I don't know what is.
In fact, it's statistically impossible for such a thing to occur.
But, the Los Angeles Times is now trying to explain why this happened.
They are pinning the blame on a convenient "glitch" in the system and telling everyone that it is absolutely not proof of fraud.
According to the news outlet, Spencer Pratt actually did get more votes during that ballot drop. But, they did not get processed immediately due to a "lag" in the system.
From the Los Angeles Times:
Since election night in California, a single theory of election fraud has taken root like no other among online conspiracy theorists, bot accounts, conservative influencers and people close to President Trump. It proved to be a simple misreading of the voting data.
Late on election night, an update of vote counts in the Los Angeles mayor’s race appeared on election results pages of various media outlets including the Los Angeles Times. It showed leading Democrats Mayor Karen Bass and Councilmember Nithya Raman receiving tens of thousands of new votes, and leading Republican former reality TV star Spencer Pratt receiving no new votes.
Some observers of the vote tally immediately took screenshots, with some shouting fraud. Others ran statistical analyses that showed it would be impossible for a candidate such as Pratt — running second in the race — to receive zero votes in such a large batch of ballots.
In fact, the update that showed zero Pratt votes was followed one minute later by another update that showed tens of thousands of votes for Pratt, and none for Bass or Raman.
There was no batch of votes that included zero votes for any candidate, as Los Angeles County’s own data show plainly.
ADVERTISEMENTBut the claim fit into the broader, false narrative being pushed relentlessly by Trump and other Republicans in recent days, that California Democrats were cheating.
Voting data pushed out by the Associated Press came as two separate updates one minute apart, with Bass’ and Raman’s votes in the first and Pratt’s in the second.
“The AP vote count receives updates as provided by election officials and adds them to our vote count. What happened in this case is that there was a lag in an automated update such that some candidates’ votes were added in one update and the other candidates followed about a minute later,” the Associated Press said in a statement to The Times.
“Specifically, an electronic update from the Los Angeles County website pulled in votes for only one group of candidates, including Karen Bass and Nithya Raman. Exactly one minute later, the electronic update picked up the votes for another group of candidates including Spencer Pratt. Taken together, the updates included 21,870 votes for Pratt, 12,850 votes for Bass and 9,521 votes for Raman, along with votes for other candidates.”
ADVERTISEMENTThe Times’ election results page relies on the AP’s data feed, and checks for updates once a minute.
According to a Times review of election night results data, The Times pulled data from the AP’s feed at approximately 8:35 p.m. that included 0 new votes for Pratt and eight other candidates. When The Times’ system next checked for new numbers a minute later, there was an update with votes for Pratt but no new votes for Raman, Bass and others.
The LA Times also put out a video to assure everyone that "conspiracies" about election fraud are totally baseless and explain the apparent glitch in more detail.
Watch here:
Here we go, the Los Angeles Times is admitting that yes, tens of thousands of mail in ballots did get processed for only Mayor Karen Bass and Nithya Raman but it was “a glitch”
They say the system just “glitched” for a minute and didn’t process any ballots for Spencer Pratt but… pic.twitter.com/MswgINgu4l
— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) June 7, 2026
Here we go, the Los Angeles Times is admitting that yes, tens of thousands of mail in ballots did get processed for only Mayor Karen Bass and Nithya Raman but it was “a glitch”
They say the system just “glitched” for a minute and didn’t process any ballots for Spencer Pratt but really there were ballots for Spencer, they just didn’t get processed during the “glitch”
No, we don’t believe you. This is fraud and Democrats are cheating
ADVERTISEMENT“It was the result of a lag in an automated collection of the data in which there was one data collection that captured votes in a single batch of votes for Bass and Raman, and then about 1 minute later, the collection of the rest of that same batch of votes — Folks I spoke to also said there is no fraud. But again, there was no batch of votes without any Pratt votes. There was sort of a 1-minute variation between the upload of Bass and Raman votes and Pratt votes on some media websites.
Officials and others who have reviewed the data say that is not any proof of fraud. There was no fraud.”
Again, yeah right. We need a federal audit into California elections
What do you think?
Are you buying this explanation?
Join the conversation!
Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!