The Democracy Communications Collaborative defines election interference as election officials refusing to certify results they disagree with.
Posted by Badlands Media, Checked
- Sources
- 12 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 30%
Badlands MediaAug 11, 2026
None of the provided sources mention the Democracy Communications Collaborative or any definition it has published, so the claim cannot be checked against them. The extracted claim does match the passage's wording, and the only related source (a Campaign Legal Center report) describes refusing to certify results as election subversion but does not attribute that definition to the DCC.
This claim is about the present, so it is judged as of the day it was checked.
What was said
… I don't know, maybe. All right, so we went through, we went through some of these, these, um, actions are appropriate: I s or FBI agents present or near voting locations, all of those kinds of things. These are how they are defining election interference. So, the Democracy Communications Collaborative is defining elections interference as one, election officials refusing to certify results that they disagree with. I would also think that that's inappropriate if they're only decertifying the results because they disagree with the results, but if you're decertifying, refusing to, if you're refusing to certify the election because you don't believe that the election was …
Badlands Media · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Context. No source names the Democracy Communications Collaborative, so none addresses what that organization defines as election interference.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]
Context. The 2026 Campaign Legal Center report describes refusing to certify election results as a form of 'election subversion' but attributes no such definition to the DCC, so it is about a different referent.[12]
Context. Mainstream definitions in the sources (AP, Full Fact, Brennan Center, PolitiFact) center on foreign actors, voter intimidation, and disinformation, not on officials refusing to certify, which gives no direct signal on the DCC's own definition.[1][2][4][8]
Sources
12 sources: 2 fact-checkers, 1 primary, 9 not rated
- 1Election 2024 prime target for foreign disinformation, US ...apnews.com · fact-checker · cited for: context
- 2fullfact.org · documents · 393Full Fact Report 2025fullfact.org · fact-checker · cited for: context
- 3Text - GovInfogovinfo.gov · primary source · cited for: context
- 4Did Zelenskyy's PA visit count as election interference?api.politifact.com · not rated · cited for: context
- 5[PDF] Cyber interference with democracy: Concepts – Examples – Solutionsrm.coe.int · not rated · cited for: context
- 6Election interference - Vaalitvaalit.fi · not rated · cited for: context
- 7Multi-Stakeholder insights: A compendium on countering election ...canada.ca · not rated · cited for: context
- 8Foreign Influence vs. Foreign Interference in Electionsbrennancenter.org · not rated · cited for: context
- 9Scrolling towards the ballot boxrathenau.nl · not rated · cited for: context
- 10Election Interference: Overview | Law | Research Starters ...ebsco.com · not rated · cited for: context
- 11Protecting Against Threats to the Electoral Processelections.ca · not rated · cited for: context
- 122024 Election Subversion Reportcampaignlegal.org · not rated · cited for: context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- Mark Elias opposes local election officials having a role in the certification of election results.False
- Local election officials in Michigan and Arizona were threatened and bullied into certifying election results.Can’t tell
- Donald Trump has attempted to interfere in states' elections.True
- The Trump administration is planning to seize ballots and make fraud claims after the midterms to justify interference.Can’t tell