Fire Hydrant of Freedom

Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities => Politics & Religion => Topic started by: DougMacG on September 30, 2008, 10:19:15 AM

Title: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on September 30, 2008, 10:19:15 AM

ACORN was mentioned by Crafty in the voter fraud discussion, but not normally named by Obama as the group where he built his career community-organizing.  This group deserves its own DB topic IMO beyond its connection to the 'Obama phenomenon'.

My awareness of ACORN started with reading the fliers they give to tenants in inner city neighborhoods espousing a philosophy let's say that is different than mine, or of freedom, property rights, or individual responsibility.

On election 2004 in south Minneapolis, I had a personal run-in with them.  They tried all but physically to drag me off a roof to register and vote (in a precinct where I don't live).  They just couldn't take no for an answer.  I was refusing to tell them whether or not I had already voted asserting that it was a private matter and they kept trying to clarify that the question was whether or not I had voted, not who I would vote for.  I kept replying that I understood the question perfectly and still considered it very much a private matter.  At the point where I should have demanded they leave, I realized I was keeping them for the rest of their blockwork for as long as they cared to obsess on me.  It became quite a scene.  Quite clearly you could tell that their organization assignment was to not take no for an answer.  They wanted 100% turnout - or better...

ACORN is also tied to the mortgage meltdown as forced 'community reinvestment' anti-capitalism is part of their mission.
---
Relevant NY Post story yesterday: "BARACK'S 'ORGANIZER' BUDS PUSHED FOR BAD MORTGAGES"

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09292008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_dangerous_pals_131216.htm?page=0

By STANLEY KURTZ

September 29, 2008

WHAT exactly does a "community organizer" do? Barack Obama's rise has left many Americans asking themselves that question. Here's a big part of the answer: Community organizers intimidate banks into making high-risk loans to customers with poor credit.

In the name of fairness to minorities, community organizers occupy private offices, chant inside bank lobbies, and confront executives at their homes - and thereby force financial institutions to direct hundreds of millions of dollars in mortgages to low-credit customers.

In other words, community organizers help to undermine the US economy by pushing the banking system into a sinkhole of bad loans. And Obama has spent years training and funding the organizers who do it.

THE seeds of today's financial meltdown lie in the Community Reinvestment Act - a law passed in 1977 and made riskier by unwise amendments and regulatory rulings in later decades.

CRA was meant to encourage banks to make loans to high-risk borrowers, often minorities living in unstable neighborhoods. That has provided an opening to radical groups like ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) to abuse the law by forcing banks to make hundreds of millions of dollars in "subprime" loans to often uncreditworthy poor and minority customers.

Any bank that wants to expand or merge with another has to show it has complied with CRA - and approval can be held up by complaints filed by groups like ACORN.

In fact, intimidation tactics, public charges of racism and threats to use CRA to block business expansion have enabled ACORN to extract hundreds of millions of dollars in loans and contributions from America's financial institutions.

Banks already overexposed by these shaky loans were pushed still further in the wrong direction when government-sponsored Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac began buying up their bad loans and offering them for sale on world markets.

Fannie and Freddie acted in response to Clinton administration pressure to boost homeownership rates among minorities and the poor. However compassionate the motive, the result of this systematic disregard for normal credit standards has been financial disaster.

ONE key pioneer of ACORN's subprime-loan shakedown racket was Madeline Talbott - an activist with extensive ties to Barack Obama. She was also in on the ground floor of the disastrous turn in Fannie Mae's mortgage policies.

Long the director of Chicago ACORN, Talbott is a specialist in "direct action" - organizers' term for their militant tactics of intimidation and disruption. Perhaps her most famous stunt was leading a group of ACORN protesters breaking into a meeting of the Chicago City Council to push for a "living wage" law, shouting in defiance as she was arrested for mob action and disorderly conduct. But her real legacy may be her drive to push banks into making risky mortgage loans.

In February 1990, Illinois regulators held what was believed to be the first-ever state hearing to consider blocking a thrift merger for lack of compliance with CRA. The challenge was filed by ACORN, led by Talbott. Officials of Bell Federal Savings and Loan Association, her target, complained that ACORN pressure was undermining its ability to meet strict financial requirements it was obligated to uphold and protested being boxed into an "affirmative-action lending policy." The following years saw Talbott featured in dozens of news stories about pressuring banks into higher-risk minority loans.

IN April 1992, Talbott filed an other precedent-setting com plaint using the "community support requirements" of the 1989 savings-and-loan bailout, this time against Avondale Federal Bank for Savings. Within a month, Chicago ACORN had organized its first "bank fair" at Malcolm X College and found 16 Chicago-area financial institutions willing to participate.

Two months later, aided by ACORN organizer Sandra Maxwell, Talbott announced plans to conduct demonstrations in the lobbies of area banks that refused to attend an ACORN-sponsored national bank "summit" in New York. She insisted that banks show a commitment to minority lending by lowering their standards on downpayments and underwriting - for example, by overlooking bad credit histories.

By September 1992, The Chicago Tribune was describing Talbott's program as "affirmative-action lending" and ACORN was issuing fact sheets bragging about relaxations of credit standards that it had won on behalf of minorities.

And Talbott continued her effort to, as she put it, drag banks "kicking and screaming" into high-risk loans. A September 1993 story in The Chicago Sun-Times presents her as the leader of an initiative in which five area financial institutions (including two of her former targets, now plainly cowed - Bell Federal Savings and Avondale Federal Savings) were "participating in a $55 million national pilot program with affordable-housing group ACORN to make mortgages for low- and moderate-income people with troubled credit histories."

What made this program different from others, the paper added, was the participation of Fannie Mae - which had agreed to buy up the loans. "If this pilot program works," crowed Talbott, "it will send a message to the lending community that it's OK to make these kind of loans."

Well, the pilot program "worked," and Fannie Mae's message that risky loans to minorities were "OK" was sent. The rest is financial-meltdown history.

IT would be tough to find an "on the ground" community organizer more closely tied to the subprime-mortgage fiasco than Madeline Talbott. And no one has been more supportive of Madeline Talbott than Barack Obama.

When Obama was just a budding community organizer in Chicago, Talbott was so impressed that she asked him to train her personal staff.

He returned to Chicago in the early '90s, just as Talbott was starting her pressure campaign on local banks. Chicago ACORN sought out Obama's legal services for a "motor voter" case and partnered with him on his 1992 "Project VOTE" registration drive.

In those years, he also conducted leadership-training seminars for ACORN's up-and-coming organizers. That is, Obama was training the army of ACORN organizers who participated in Madeline Talbott's drive against Chicago's banks.

More than that, Obama was funding them. As he rose to a leadership role at Chicago's Woods Fund, he became the most powerful voice on the foundation's board for supporting ACORN and other community organizers. In 1995, the Woods Fund substantially expanded its funding of community organizers - and Obama chaired the committee that urged and managed the shift.

That committee's report on strategies for funding groups like ACORN features all the key names in Obama's organizer network. The report quotes Talbott more than any other figure; Sandra Maxwell, Talbott's ACORN ally in the bank battle, was also among the organizers consulted.

MORE, the Obama-supervised Woods Fund report ac knowledges the problem of getting donors and foundations to contribute to radical groups like ACORN - whose confrontational tactics often scare off even liberal donors and foundations.

Indeed, the report brags about pulling the wool over the public's eye. The Woods Fund's claim to be "nonideological," it says, has "enabled the Trustees to make grants to organizations that use confrontational tactics against the business and government 'establishments' without undue risk of being criticized for partisanship."

Hmm. Radicalism disguised by a claim to be postideological. Sound familiar?

The Woods Fund report makes it clear Obama was fully aware of the intimidation tactics used by ACORN's Madeline Talbott in her pioneering efforts to force banks to suspend their usual credit standards. Yet he supported Talbott in every conceivable way. He trained her personal staff and other aspiring ACORN leaders, he consulted with her extensively, and he arranged a major boost in foundation funding for her efforts.

And, as the leader of another charity, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Obama channeled more funding Talbott's way - ostensibly for education projects but surely supportive of ACORN's overall efforts.

In return, Talbott proudly announced her support of Obama's first campaign for state Senate, saying, "We accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer."

IN short, to understand the roots of the subprime-mort gage crisis, look to ACORN's Madeline Talbott. And to see how Talbott was able to work her mischief, look to Barack Obama.

Then you'll truly know what community organizers do.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on September 30, 2008, 12:00:13 PM

**SanFranNan provides cover for the guilty**

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13967

Democrat Leaders Played to Lose
By The Prowler
Published 9/30/2008 12:50:21 AM

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ordered her Majority Whip, Jim Clyburn, to essentially not do his job in the runup to the vote on Monday for the negotiated Wall Street bailout plan, according to House Democrat leadership aides.

"Clyburn was not whipping the votes you would have expected him to, in part because he was uncomfortable doing it, in part because we didn't want the push for votes to be successful," says one leadership aide. "All we needed was enough to potentially get us over the finish line, but we wanted the Republicans to be the ones to do it. This was not going to be a Democrat-passed bill if the Speaker had anything to say about it."

During the floor vote, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and House Democrat Conference chair Rahm Emanuel could be seen monitoring the vote on the floor, and gauging whether or not more Democrat votes were needed. Clyburn had expressed concerns, says the leadership aide, of being asked to press members of the Black and Hispanic caucuses on a bill he was certain those constituencies would not want passed.

"It worked out, because we didn't have a dog in this fight. We negotiated. We gave the White House a bill. It was up to the Republicans to get the 100 plus votes they needed and they couldn't do it," said another Democrat leadership aide.

Emanuel, who served as a board member for Freddie Mac, one of the agencies that precipitated the economic crisis the nation now finds itself in, had no misgivings about taking a leadership role in tanking the bill. "He was cheerleading us along, mothering the votes," says the aide. "We wanted enough to put the pressure on the Republicans and Congressman Emanuel was charged with making it close enough. He did a great job."

Pelosi and her aides have made it clear they were not going to "whip" or twist the arms of members who did not want to vote, but they also made no effort to rally any support for a bill they attempted to hijack over the weekend.

Further, according to House Oversight Committee staff, Emanuel has received assurances from Pelosi that she will not allow what he termed a "witch hunt" to take place during the next Congressional session over the role Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac played in the economic crisis.

Emanuel apparently is concerned the roles former Clinton Administration members may have played in the mortgage industry collapse could be politically -- or worse, if the Department of Justice had its way, legally -- treacherous for many.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on September 30, 2008, 04:01:24 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/30/video-stanley-kurtz-on-obama-acorn-and-the-cra/

Obama and ACORN.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 30, 2008, 10:16:33 PM

Thanks for starting this thread Doug.

IIRC ACORN has some sordid history in Philadelphia too.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on October 02, 2008, 08:26:24 AM

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/02/voter-fraud-alert-more-thug-thizzlin-in-ohio/

Ohio, ground zero of ACORN voter fraud.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: DougMacG on October 05, 2008, 10:14:12 PM

My original point in starting this thread was just to expose what an extreme leftwing group they are, how amazingly powerful they are, how anti-capitalism, freedom and market economy they are, along with the corruption and voter fraud issue.  The timing hit the forefront with the Obama candidacy as his career and political views are intertwined with ACORN.  The issue of ACORN is separate from Obama just in the sense that ACORN precedes him and will live on and regardless of how this one disciple fairs in this year's election.

The heart of my beef is just that they represent a political view opposite to my own.  God Bless their right to organize and espouse Marxist views.

Then I see a Michelle Malkin column alleging that 40% of their funding comes from taxpayers.  Now I'm mad.  Looking at Michelle's achive, I see that she has been all over this group and Obama's shady involvement with them.
-------------
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/25/the-acorn-obama-knows/
The ACORN Obama knows
By Michelle Malkin

My syndicated column today spotlights the whistleblower report on ACORN, which I’ve been blogging about (here) and which deserves more attention in the media and in Washington–especially in light of the radical activist group’s embrace of Barack Obama. The Consumer Rights League e-mailed to let me know that three GOP congressmen (Hensarling, Feeney, and Royce) have called on Barney Frank (D-Housing Boondoggle) to investigate ACORN’s taxpayer abuses. Snowball’s chance, I know, but conservatives ought to be turning up the heat and using every ounce of energy they have to, well, act like conservatives and push to de-fund the Left.

For excellent background on Obama and ACORN, see Stanley Kurtz’s NR piece here, plus City Journal pieces here and here. Also here and here.

If you don’t know what ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is all about, you better bone up. This left-wing group takes in 40 percent of its revenues from American taxpayers — you and me — and has leveraged nearly four decades of government subsidies to fund affiliates that promote the welfare state and undermine capitalism and self-reliance, some of which have been implicated in perpetuating illegal immigration and encouraging voter fraud. A new whistleblower report from the Consumer Rights League documents how Chicago-based ACORN has commingled public tax dollars with political projects.

Who in Washington will fight to ensure that your money isn’t being spent on these radical activities?

Don’t bother asking Barack Obama. He cut his ideological teeth working with ACORN as a “community organizer” and legal representative. Naturally, ACORN’s political action committee has warmly endorsed his presidential candidacy. According to ACORN, Obama trained its Chicago members in leadership seminars; in turn, ACORN volunteers worked on his campaigns. Obama also sat on the boards of the Woods Fund and Joyce Foundation, both of which poured money into ACORN’s coffers. ACORN head Maude Hurd gushes that Obama is the candidate who “best understands and can affect change on the issues ACORN cares about” — like ensuring their massive pipeline to your hard-earned money.

Let’s take a closer look at the ACORN Obama knows.

Last July, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of Washington State. Seven ACORN workers had submitted nearly 2,000 bogus voter registration forms. According to case records, they flipped through phone books for names to use on the forms, including “Leon Spinks,” “Frekkie Magoal” and “Fruto Boy Crispila.” Three ACORN election hoaxers pleaded guilty in October. A King County prosecutor called ACORN’s criminal sabotage “an act of vandalism upon the voter rolls.”

The group’s vandalism on electoral integrity is systemic. ACORN has been implicated in similar voter fraud schemes in Missouri, Ohio and at least 12 other states. The Wall Street Journal noted: “In Ohio in 2004, a worker for one affiliate was given crack cocaine in exchange for fraudulent registrations that included underage voters, dead voters and pillars of the community named Mary Poppins, Dick Tracy and Jive Turkey. During a congressional hearing in Ohio in the aftermath of the 2004 election, officials from several counties in the state explained ACORN’s practice of dumping thousands of registration forms in their lap on the submission deadline, even though the forms had been collected months earlier.”

In March, Philadelphia elections officials accused the nonprofit advocacy group of filing fraudulent voter registrations in advance of the April 22nd Pennsylvania primary. The charges have been forwarded to the city district attorney’s office.

Under the guise of “consumer advocacy,” ACORN has lined its pockets. The Department of Housing and Urban Development funds hundreds, if not thousands, of left-wing “anti-poverty” groups across the country led by ACORN. Last October, HUD announced more than $44 million in new housing counseling grants to over 400 state and local efforts. The White House has increased funding for housing counseling by 150 percent since taking office in 2001, despite the role most of these recipients play as activist satellites of the Democratic Party. The AARP scored nearly $400,000 for training; the National Council of La Raza (”The Race”) scooped up more than $1.3 million; the National Urban League raked in nearly $1 million; and the ACORN Housing Corporation received more than $1.6 million.

As the Consumer Rights League points out in its new expose, the ACORN Housing Corporation has worked to obtain mortgages for illegal aliens in partnership with Citibank. It relies on undocumented income, “under the table” money, which may not be reported to the Internal Revenue Service. Moreover, the group’s “financial justice” operations attack lenders for “exotic” loans, while recommending 10-year interest-only loans (which deny equity to the buyer) and risky reverse mortgages. Whistleblower documents reveal internal discussions among the group that blur the lines between its tax-exempt housing work and its aggressive electioneering activities. The group appears to shake down corporate interests with relentless PR attacks, and then enters “no lobby” agreements with targeted corporations after receiving payment.

Republicans have largely looked the other way as ACORN has expanded its government-funded empire. But finally, a few conservative voices in Congress have called for investigation of the group’s apparent extortion schemes. This week, GOP Reps. Tom Feeney, Jeb Hensarling and Ed Royce called on Democrat Barney Frank, chair of the House Financial Services Committee, to convene a hearing to probe potential illegalities and abuse of taxpayer funds by ACORN’s management and minions alike.

Where does the candidate of Hope and Change — the candidate of Reform and New Politics — stand on the issue? Barack Obama, ACORN’s senator, is for more of the same old, same old subsidizing of far-left politics in the name of fighting for the poor while enriching ideological cronies. It’s the Chicago way.
   
   


    * Location: By Michelle Malkin

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 08, 2008, 06:38:39 AM

Finally ACORN is getting investigated. AND a dem controlled election board caught it. I just saw on FOX News the investigation has expanded to 9 states. While not old news about ACORN, the news is they are finally being investigated.
=================================================

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10...investigation/

Nevada state authorities seized records and computers Tuesday from the Las Vegas office of an organization that tries to get low-income people registered to vote, after fielding complaints of voter fraud.
Bob Walsh, spokesman for the Nevada secretary of state's office, told FOXNews.com the raid was prompted by ongoing complaints about "erroneous" registration information being submitted by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, also called ACORN.
The group was submitting the information through a voter sign-up drive known as Project Vote.
"Some of them used nonexistent names, some of them used false addresses and some of them were duplicates of previously filed applications," Walsh said, describing the complaints, which largely came from the registrar in Clark County, Nev.
Secretary of State Ross Miller said the fraudulent registrations included forms for the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys football team.
"Tony Romo is not registered to vote in the state of Nevada, and anybody trying to pose as Terrell Owens won't be able to cast a ballot on Nov. 4," Miller said.
Walsh said agents from both the secretary of state's office and Nevada attorney general's office conducted the raid at 9:30 a.m. local time, and "took a bunch of stuff." Miller's office reported seizing eight computer hard drives and about 20 boxes of documents.
Bertha Lewis, interim chief organizer for ACORN, released a statement saying the group has for months been turning over any suspicious registration information to elections officials. She said those officials routinely ignored their tips, and called the raid a "stunt."
"When we have identified suspicious applications, we have separated them out and flagged them for election officials. We have zero tolerance for fraudulent registrations. We immediately dismiss employees we suspect of submitting fraudulent registrations," she said. "Today's raid by the secretary of state's office is a stunt that serves no useful purpose other than discredit our work registering Nevadans and distracting us from the important work ahead of getting every eligible voter to the polls."
Neither the group, which hires canvassers to register voters, nor any employees have been charged or arrested for fraud or other crimes, said Miller, a Democrat.
But it's not the first time ACORN's been under investigation for registration irregularities. The raid is the latest of at least nine investigations into possible fraudulent voter registration forms submitted by ACORN -- the probes have involved ACORN workers in Wisconsin, New Mexico, Indiana and other states.
In response to the Las Vegas raid, Republican Nevada Sen. John Ensign and seven other senators penned a letter to the Federal Housing Finance Agency calling for the suspension of taxpayer dollars to "controversial groups like ACORN." The letter referred to contributions that potentially could come from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008.
In 2006, ACORN also committed what Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed called the "worse case of election fraud" in the state's history.
In the case, ACORN submitted just over 1,800 new voter registration forms, and all but six of the 1,800 names were fake.
More recently, 27,000 registrations handled by the group from January to July 2008 "went into limbo because they were incomplete, inaccurate, or fraudulent," said James Terry, chief public advocate at the Consumers Rights League.
__________________
October 8, 2008

In today's Political Diary

The 'Voter Registration' Racket
McCain Is an Unguided Missile
The Housing Skit Is Back - Minus the Incitement to Homicide
Looking on the Bright Side of President Obama


A Smelly Acorn

Members of the left-wing activist group ACORN had a quick and predictable response to yesterday's raid of their Nevada offices by authorities investigating a possible massive voter registration fraud scheme.

The Las Vegas Sun reports that ACORN volunteer Frank Beaty immediately claimed the raid, which removed computers and files from the group's offices, was a conspiracy designed to prevent the registration of new voters. ACORN's national chief Bertha Lewis called the raid "a stunt that serves no useful purpose other than [to] discredit our work registering Nevadans and distracting us from the important work ahead of getting every eligible vote to the polls."

Reverting to the rhetoric of the 1960s voting rights struggle in the South may be politically useful, but it bears precious little resemblance to the reality of ACORN today. The group has constantly faced charges it mistreats its employees and even broke up their internal efforts to unionize their workplace.

Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax told the Sun that ACORN has been registering voters in Las Vegas since January and "we started having problems with them almost immediately." His staff met with ACORN and was offered promises that fraudulent registrations would no longer be turned in. "But those controls weren't sufficient," Mr. Lomax said.

Indeed, the more his office and that of Nevada's Secretary of State looked into ACORN's effort, the more worried they became. Jason Anderson rose to the rank of supervisor in ACORN even though he was a convicted felon. Other employees had served time for identity theft. Another former inmate who worked for ACORN told authorities his co-workers were "lazy crack heads."

ACORN's activities are under investigation or suspicion in a dozen states, with one of its workers indicted just last week in Wisconsin. Perhaps the Nevada raid will spur authorities elsewhere to dig down and conclude their investigations by Election Day -- before ACORN can do even more damage to the integrity of the vote.

-- John Fund

Title: WSJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 13, 2008, 08:03:33 PM

At the recent Emmy Awards, historian Laura Linney averred that America's Founders had been "community organizers" -- like Barack Obama. Too bad they aren't like that any more. Mr. Obama's kind of organizers work at Acorn, the militant advocacy group that is turning up in reports about voter fraud across the country.

 
APAcorn -- the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now -- has been around since 1970 and boasts 350,000 members. We've written about them for years, but Acorn is now getting more attention as John McCain's campaign makes an issue of the fraud reports and Acorn's ties to Mr. Obama. It's about time someone exposed this shady outfit that uses government dollars to lobby for larger government.

Acorn uses various affiliated groups to agitate for "a living wage," for "affordable housing," for "tax justice" and union and environmental goals, as well as against school choice and welfare reform. It was a major contributor to the subprime meltdown by pushing lenders to make home loans on easy terms, conducting "strikes" against banks so they'd lower credit standards.

But the organization's real genius is getting American taxpayers to foot the bill. According to a 2006 report from the Employment Policies Institute (EPI), Acorn has been on the federal take since 1977. For instance, Acorn's American Institute for Social Justice claimed $240,000 in tax money between fiscal years 2002 and 2003. Its American Environmental Justice Project received 100% of its revenue from government grants in the same years. EPI estimates the Acorn Housing Corporation alone received some $16 million in federal dollars from 1997-2007. Only recently, Democrats tried and failed to stuff an "affordable housing" provision into the $700 billion bank rescue package that would have let politicians give even more to Acorn.

All this money gives Acorn the ability to pursue its other great hobby: electing liberals. Acorn is spending $16 million this year to register new Democrats and is already boasting it has put 1.3 million new voters on the rolls. The big question is how many of these registrations are real.

The Michigan Secretary of State told the press in September that Acorn had submitted "a sizeable number of duplicate and fraudulent applications." Earlier this month, Nevada's Democratic Secretary of State Ross Miller requested a raid on Acorn's offices, following complaints of false names and fictional addresses (including the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys). Nevada's Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said he saw rampant fraud in 2,000 to 3,000 applications Acorn submitted weekly.

Officials in Ohio are investigating voter fraud connected with Acorn, and Florida's Seminole County is withholding Acorn registrations that appear fraudulent. New Mexico, North Carolina and Missouri are looking into hundreds of dubious Acorn registrations. Wisconsin is investigating Acorn employees for, according to an election official, "making people up or registering people that were still in prison."

Then there's Lake County, Indiana, which has already found more than 2,100 bogus applications among the 5,000 Acorn dumped right before the deadline. "All the signatures looked exactly the same," said Ruthann Hoagland, of the county election board. Bridgeport, Connecticut estimates about 20% of Acorn's registrations were faulty. As of July, the city of Houston had rejected or put on hold about 40% of the 27,000 registration cards submitted by Acorn.

That's just this year. In 2004, four Acorn employees were indicted in Ohio for submitting false voter registrations. In 2005, two Colorado Acorn workers were found to have submitted false registrations. Four Acorn Missouri employees were indicted in 2006; five were found guilty in Washington state in 2007 for filling out registration forms with names from a phone book.

Which brings us to Mr. Obama, who got his start as a Chicago "community organizer" at Acorn's side. In 1992 he led voter registration efforts as the director of Project Vote, which included Acorn. This past November, he lauded Acorn's leaders for being "smack dab in the middle" of that effort. Mr. Obama also served as a lawyer for Acorn in 1995, in a case against Illinois to increase access to the polls.

During his tenure on the board of Chicago's Woods Fund, that body funneled more than $200,000 to Acorn. More recently, the Obama campaign paid $832,000 to an Acorn affiliate. The campaign initially told the Federal Election Commission this money was for "staging, sound, lighting." It later admitted the cash was to get out the vote.

 

The Obama campaign is now distancing itself from Acorn, claiming Mr. Obama never organized with it and has nothing to do with illegal voter registration. Yet it's disingenuous to channel cash into an operation with a history of fraud and then claim you're shocked to discover reports of fraud. As with Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers, Mr. Obama was happy to associate with Acorn when it suited his purposes. But now that he's on the brink of the Presidency, he wants to disavow his ties.

The Justice Department needs to treat these fraud reports as something larger than a few local violators. The question is whether Acorn is systematically subverting U.S. election law -- on the taxpayer's dime.

Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2008, 08:36:56 AM

copied from the 2008 thread:

Vote drives defended, despite fake names
By Richard Danielson, Times Staff Writer
In print: Tuesday, October 14, 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mickey Mouse tried to register to vote in Florida this summer, but Orange County elections officials rejected his application, which had an ACORN stamp on it. 
 Mickey Mouse tried to register to vote in Florida this summer.

Orange County elections officials rejected his application, which was stamped with the logo of the nonprofit group ACORN.

Tow truck driver Newton Bell did register to vote in Orange County this summer. In the hands of ACORN, his paperwork went through without a hitch.

Two cases, two outcomes, each with a connection to ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

Nationwide, ACORN is a favorite GOP target for allegations of voter registration fraud this year.

That's not new. Similar complaints followed the 2004 elections. A criminal investigation in Florida found no evidence of fraud. ACORN even has a cameo role in the scandal over the 2006 firings of several U.S. attorneys by the Bush Justice Department.

Under attack again, ACORN leaders defend their work. Often, they say, things are as not simple as they're portrayed.

Take Mickey Mouse.

Yes, that's their logo. But they say their workers routinely scanned all suspicious applications.

"We don't think this card came through our system," said Brian Kettenring, ACORN's head organizer in Florida.

With more than 450,000 member families nationwide — 14,000 in Florida — ACORN is a grass roots advocacy group focused on health care, wages, affordable housing and foreclosure.  Bell, the truck driver, certainly, is more representative of ACORN's work in Florida than the cartoon mouse is.

This year, ACORN signed up 1.3-million voters nationwide and about 152,000 in Florida, mostly in Orange, Broward and Miami-Dade counties. ACORN estimates it flagged 2 percent of its Florida registrations as problematic because they were incomplete, duplicates or just plain bogus.

That's enough to give headaches to election officials and to provide ammunition to Republican activists.

Brevard County elections officials have turned over 23 suspect registrations from ACORN to prosecutors. The state Division of Elections has received two ACORN-related complaints, in Orange and Broward counties.  ACORN wasn't active in the Tampa Bay area. Last week, however, Pinellas County elections officials gave local prosecutors 35 questionable registrations from another group, Work for Progress. 

The GOP accuses ACORN of registration fraud all over the country. In Las Vegas, authorities said the group's petitions included the names of the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys.

"This is part of a widespread and systemic effort … to undermine the election process," says Republican National Committee chief counsel Sean Cairncross, who describes ACORN as a "quasicriminal organization."

No, Kettenring said, it's more like Wal-Mart.

"Some percentage of Wal-Mart workers try to get paid without doing their work or steal from their employer," he said.

Some ACORN workers, he said, have simply made up names.

Maybe, elections officials say, but it's still annoying.

"We did experience a significant amount of problems, enough that we did contact the group to express some of our frustration with their work," said Linda Tanko, Orange County's senior deputy supervisor for voter services.

ACORN's problems included applications with unreadable handwriting, missing information, signatures that didn't match those on file, altered dates of birth or Social Security numbers, applications for people already registered to vote and names that appeared repeatedly, often with different addresses.

ACORN said it terminates canvassers who forge applications. In Broward County, it fired one worker after he turned in applications with similar handwriting and brought the matter to the attention of the Supervisor of Elections Office.

Pay to gather registrations started at $8 an hour, and the goal was 20 signups per day. The organization did not pay by the signature or pay bonuses for volume. The organization also tried to follow up on each registration, calling the person listed to confirm that the form is accurate.

In most states, ACORN must turn in every form that is filled out. "We must turn in every voter registration card by Florida law, even Mickey Mouse," Kettenring said.

Well, not yet, said Jennifer Krell Davis, spokeswoman for the Florida Department of State.

Florida does have a law saying third-party voter registration groups must turn in every form without regard to things like party affiliation, race, ethnicity or gender. So far, however, the state has not written the rules to implement it.

In Florida, ACORN is best known for its 2004 effort to lead a petition drive to raise the minimum wage. The FDLE looked into voter fraud allegations then and found no laws were broken.  ACORN also played a role in the firing of one of nine U.S. attorneys dismissed in 2006.  In New Mexico, U.S. Attorney David Iglesias was fired "because of complaints by elected officials who had a political interest in the outcome" of, among other things, a Republican voter fraud complaint against ACORN, according to an internal Justice Department report last month.  This year, 39 members of the House of Representatives have asked Attorney General Michael Mukasey to investigate ACORN.  One of those, Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Oviedo, also has written to supervisor of elections offices in Central Florida seeking "all ACORN-related registration of voters within the last two years."

Republicans also accuse Sen. Barack Obama of trying to distance himself from ACORN, which he represented in a federal lawsuit in 1995.

ACORN's political action committee has endorsed Obama, but the group says its voter registration efforts are nonpartisan.

And the McCain campaign's complaints now are puzzling, ACORN says, because two years ago McCain was the keynote speaker at an immigration reform rally ACORN co-sponsored in Miami. "In 2006," Kettenring said, "we were working together."

Richard Danielson can be reached at danielson@sptimes.com or (813)269-5311.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 14, 2008, 10:08:30 AM

Quote

And the McCain campaign's complaints now are puzzling, ACORN says, because two years ago McCain was the keynote speaker at an immigration reform rally ACORN co-sponsored in Miami. "In 2006," Kettenring said, "we were working together."

WTF? Is this true?

Oh my...

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/sigh-mccain-and-his-friends-atacorn/

Gang, it's time to stop the finger pointing, blame the other guy, you hang out with the wrong crowd game. Politicians are all in the bag for themselves. They'll pander to whoever it takes to get the win.

What's it going to take for us to wake up and realize it?

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2008, 12:26:29 PM

I disagree strongly with McC on shamnesty and wanna puke when I think about how either candidate will handle this once elected.

That said, BO is deliberately cheating by messing with the integrity of the electoral process itself and McC is not.

Title: PD WSJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2008, 01:46:31 PM

Acorn Feels Its Oats

The liberal anti-poverty group Acorn is fighting back against allegations by the McCain campaign that its habit of filing false voter registrations carries a danger of injecting voter fraud into the election.

Acorn announced today it will ask Senator McCain to call on Republican election officials in battleground states to guarantee that voters who have lost their homes to foreclosure will not lose their right to vote. Acorn also will mischievously release a video of a 2006 Acorn-sponsored event supporting immigration reform that Mr. McCain spoke at. "While in recent weeks your campaign has stooped to engaging in tactics that do not reflect the John McCain who proudly appeared at the 2006 Acorn event, we hold out hope that the 2008 John McCain will do the right thing," says a statement by the group.

Acorn will also ask for a meeting with what it calls Mr. McCain's "front men" who are chairing the campaign's voter integrity committee. It accuses former New Hampshire Senator Warren Rudman, a co-chair of the committee, of having "a well documented opposition to civil rights issues." The only example it cites is Mr. Rudman's 1983 opposition to a national federal holiday honoring Martin Luther King.

But Acorn's counterattack may be blunted today by news out of Ohio showing that fraudulently registered voters are already influencing the election outcome. The New York Post reports that Darnell Nash, one of four people subpoenaed in a Cuyahoga County probe of Acorn's voter-registration activities, "breezed into Ohio election offices" on September 30 and cast an invalid ballot. Mr. Nash did not show up for a hearing scheduled in his case yesterday.

-- John Fund

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 14, 2008, 02:14:22 PM

Quote

...how either candidate will handle this once elected.

I predict that ACORN, Ayers, pitbulls with lipstick, racism, sexism, ageism and all the rest of the election season talking points will "disappear" regardless of the election outcome. Politicians memories only last as long as it serves them. And the public's anger only lasts as long as their attention span between commercials.

I'm disturbed by ACORN and their tactics, but I wonder how you get tens of thousands of non-existent voters/false registrants to the polls?

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on October 14, 2008, 04:18:02 PM

You don't get them to the polls, you fill out absentee ballots. Just like how all the dead people in Chicago always vote.  Absentee and democrat.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 14, 2008, 08:05:34 PM

Where are the ballots sent and who fills them out?

Wouldn't it take a hell of a lot of people a hell of a long time to fill out that many ballots?  :?

Along those lines, it seems like it would take several hundred thousand fake voters to sway a national election or make a statistically measurable dent in the results (unless it was tight race, a la 2000).

Not trying to be a smart ass or say it doesn't happen, I'm just trying to understand the mechanics behind the operation.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on October 14, 2008, 08:19:03 PM

There are multiple battleground states where the electoral votes for the state could come down to a handful of ballots. They could churn out absentee ballots in the same sort of way they have churned out bogus registrations.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on October 15, 2008, 08:26:07 AM

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/15/cnn-thousands-of-fraudulent-acorn-registrations-in-philly/

I've gotta give props to CNN for digging into this story. Milagro!  :-o

Title: PD WSJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 15, 2008, 10:40:48 AM

The Chaos Strategy

A federal appeals court ruled last night that Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner must provide county election boards with state voter registration information so they can check the validity of some 666,000 new voter registrations submitted to Ohio officials in recent months.

The order, which Ms. Brunner vigorously resisted, will mean county boards will be able to stop counting absentee ballots if the registration linked to them doesn't match the name of a real person listed in government databases.

Ms. Brunner's office had argued that the federal Help America Vote Act did not require any such matching, and that delays in processing absentee votes could mean some valid votes wouldn't be counted.

Meanwhile, thousands of additional suspect registrations turned in by activist groups like Acorn have surfaced in Ohio. Local election officials tell me the volume of possibly fraudulent registrations will make it difficult for them to process those that are valid. "It's almost as if groups like Acorn want deliberate chaos in the election system, which they can then exploit on Election Day to demand that suspect votes be given the benefit of the doubt and counted," one county official told me.


-- John Fund

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on October 15, 2008, 05:08:23 PM

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/15/voter-fraud-alert-houseful-of-out-of-state-obama-activists-registered-as-ohio-voters-received-absentee-ballots/

Michelle Malkin is all over the Obama vote fraud machine.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on October 16, 2008, 12:23:17 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/10/16/ap-fbi-launches-investigation-of-acorn-for-voter-fraud/

FBI.

Title: Patriot Post
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2008, 08:17:51 AM

Inside ACORN
The Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) is an organization that is tailor-made for Barack Obama. It is community based, it is ultra-liberal, and it will do and say just about anything to achieve its political ends. ACORN has drawn questions regarding its operating practices since its inception in 1970, but now the 350,000-member (their number) organization has been caught up in a nationwide scandal for its illegal voter registration practices.

In recent weeks there have been myriad charges filed against the organization from all around the country. In Las Vegas, ACORN offices were raided after complaints over thousands of fraudulent registration applications were submitted by ACORN workers and volunteers. The Michigan Secretary of State is on record noting that ACORN submitted “a sizeable number of duplicate and fraudulent applications.” Other states that are taking action against ACORN include New Mexico, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Missouri and Indiana—not coincidentally, these are all battleground states. Furthermore, the FBI has opened an investigation into the group.

The scope of the fraud clearly shows that it is a systematic campaign. And it is no GOP witch-hunt as the knee-jerk leftist reaction fired off by the media suggested in recent days. A look at just who is filing the complaints and pressing the charges readily demonstrates that the outrage is nonpartisan. These crimes are endemic to the organization as a whole and undermine our republic. The ACORN organization must be held accountable from top to bottom.

ACORN often hires urban poor and recently released felons to register voters. In some cases, they don’t even pay minimum wage—yet another example of the grand hypocrisy of the “mother” organization, but that’s another can of worms. Only so many Democrats can be registered in any given area, and when that limit is reached, ACORN’s minions sign up dead people, the Dallas Cowboys’ offensive line and Mickey Mouse. Homeless people are next, and since they stay in various places, they can vote once for each non-home. Given the level of recidivism among felons, we can only assume that ACORN’s felonious fellows do not experience a guilty conscience for committing such a “chump” crime.

Millions of us “simple-minded” citizens wonder how an organization that flouts our sacred right to vote and shamelessly works to undermine our institutions can continue executing costly programs and “getting out the vote.” Who pays for it all? Answer: We do. Liberal politicians like Barack Obama and his Demo colleagues benefit directly from ACORN’s antics, so, of course, they’re going to ensure their public funding. And now Obama—who has trained ACORN staffers, served as the organization’s lawyer, and recently contributed an eye-popping $832,000 to its coffers—wants to disavow their ties. As Bob Dole once asked, “Where’s the outrage?”

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 17, 2008, 09:27:48 AM

Supreme Court rejects:

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93SBC3O0&show_article=1   

 :?

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: JDN on October 17, 2008, 09:38:07 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2008, 08:17:51 AM

Inside ACORN

As Bob Dole once asked, “Where’s the outrage?”

There is none.

I don't the general public cares and obviously the Supreme Court doesn't care.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 17, 2008, 10:24:13 AM

Nuts About ACORN
Believing in vote fraud may be dangerous to a democracy's health.
By Dahlia Lithwick
Posted Thursday, Oct. 16, 2008, at 7:16 PM ET

Last night's presidential debate didn't rise to full-frontal bodice-ripper status until John McCain insisted, "[W]e need to know the full extent of Sen. Obama's relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy." Obama probably shouldn't have guffawed. But it was hard not to. He was probably thinking, "Destroying the fabric of democracy???" Even for McCain that was a little bit of breathless chest-heaving.

As far as "gotcha" stunts go, the right-wing feeding frenzy over the vile vote-fraud treachery of ACORN has yet to yield much fruit. Investigations are indeed under way. But then, they are always under way this time of the year—and as the indefatigable Brad Friedman points out, so what? Evidence of voter-registration wrongdoing is no more a sign of widespread, Obama-sanctioned vote fraud than evidence of minorities being misled and intimidated on Election Day is a sign of official, McCain-sanctioned vote suppression. What's the real point of turning voter-registration shenanigans into "one of the greatest frauds in voter history"? The object here is not criminal indictments. It's to undermine voter confidence in the elections system as a whole. John McCain wants to build a better bogeyman, and he needs your help to do it.

ACORN stands for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. It's a 30-year-old nonprofit that organizes on behalf of poor urban minorities, and it has registered 1.3 million new voters this year. There's no denying that the organization's system of paying workers $8 an hour to gather voter registrations creates screwy incentives. Encyclopedia Brown could have cracked that mystery. That's why ACORN is either obligated by law or opts voluntarily to turn over all its voter-registration cards suggesting that Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and the entire starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys just registered to vote in Nevada. That GOP elections officials started screaming "gotcha" when those registrations were turned in is the real fraud here. Jump back, Encyclopedia Brown! There is wrongdoing afoot in low-paying voter-registrationland.

Last week, media attention focused on a "raid" on ACORN offices in Las Vegas in which voter registration documents that had mostly been voluntarily turned over were dramatically seized by force. Right-wing screeching over nefarious doings in Ohio (where Freddie Johnson of Cleveland testified that ACORN encouraged him to sign 73 voter-registration forms—all in his own name) overlooks the fact that all 73 registrations would still have allowed Freddie to vote just once. The connection between wrongful voter registration and actual polling-place vote fraud is the stuff of GOP mythology. As Rick Hasen has demonstrated, here at Slate and elsewhere, even if Mr. Mouse is registered to vote, he still needs to show up at his polling place, provide a fake ID, and risk a felony conviction to do so.

Large-scale, coordinated vote stealing doesn't happen. The incentives—unlike the incentives for registration fraud—just aren't there. In an interview this week with Salon, Lorraine Minnite of Barnard College, who has studied vote fraud systematically, noted that "between 2002 to 2005 only one person was found guilty of registration fraud. Twenty others were found guilty of voting while ineligible and five were guilty of voting more than once. That's 26 criminal voters." Twenty-six criminal voters despite the fact that U.S. attorneys, like David Iglesias in New Mexico, were fired for searching high and low for vote-fraud cases to prosecute and coming up empty. Twenty-six criminal voters despite the fact that five days before the 2006 election, then-interim U.S. Attorney Bradley Schlozman exuberantly (and futilely) indicted four ACORN workers, even when Justice Department policy barred such prosecutions in the days before elections. RNC General Counsel Sean Cairncross has said he is unaware of a single improper vote cast because of bad cards submitted in the course of a voter-registration effort. Republican campaign consultant Royal Masset says, "n-person voter fraud is nonexistent. It doesn't happen, and ... makes no sense because who's going to take the risk of going to jail on something so blatant that maybe changes one vote?"

There is no such thing as vote fraud. The think tank created to peddle the epidemic has evaporated. A handful of cases have been prosecuted. Then why is Sarah Palin shooting off e-mails contending that "we can't allow leftist groups like ACORN to steal this election?" Why is former Sen. John Danforth announcing, all statesmanlike, that the whole 2008 election "has been tainted?" Why is Ted Olson, the Republican National Lawyers Association lawyer of the year, claiming that "[ACORN] acknowledged having to get rid of a thousand people or more who were participating in voter fraud efforts." These people know the difference between registration fraud and vote fraud. Why continue to suggest they are the same thing?

Consider the fact that, as the Brennan Center reported recently, "[E]lection officials across the country are routinely striking millions of voters from the rolls through a process that is shrouded in secrecy, prone to error, and vulnerable to manipulation." Consider the recent New York Times review of state records and Social Security records, which concluded that "[t]ens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law." Consider the case, now on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, in which 200,000 new Ohio voters stand to be bounced off the rolls because, through no fault of their own, their names don't match error-riddled state databases. Consider the indictment this week of former Republican official James Tobin for his 2002 role in jamming Democratic get-out-the-vote calls. Consider the much-ballyhooed Republican challenge to the eligibility of 6,000 Native American and student voters in Montana that backfired first in court, then with the abrupt resignation this week of the official who spearheaded the effort.

Nobody is suggesting the Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts are perfect. But the suggestion that Barack Obama, through ACORN, is systematically working to get Huey, Dewey, and Louie to steal elections, and that therefore minorities and people of color should be disenfranchised, is cynical beyond belief. Consider the fliers and robo-calls designed to spread false information and threats to Hispanic and African-American voters. (According to the Philadelphia Daily News, fliers in minority neighborhoods warned residents that undercover cops would be lurking around the polls on Election Day, arresting anyone with "outstanding arrest warrants or who have unpaid traffic tickets.") There is wholly implausible vote stealing, and then there is the vote stealing that actually happens. You want to get all crazy-paranoid? I'd worry more about the people who want to rough up their fellow citizen at the polls than people who want to risk jail time for voting twice.

In the end, all roads lead back to John Paul Stevens. He wrote the plurality opinion in last term's Crawford v. Marion County, which upheld Indiana's restrictive voter-ID law. Stevens understood that there is no such thing as polling-place vote fraud, conceding that "[t]he record contains no evidence of any such fraud actually occurring in Indiana at any time in its history." But, continued Stevens, in the manner of someone rationally discussing the likelihood of UFO sightings, "flagrant examples of such fraud in other parts of the country have been documented throughout this nation's history." Like, um, an 1868 mayoral election in New York City, he notes, and a single 2004 incident from Washington. Stevens was more worried about shaky "voter confidence" in elections than actual voting. The message that went out from on high was clear: undermine voter confidence. Even if it's irrational and hysterical and tinged with the worst kinds of racism, keep telling the voters the system is busted.

Each time they spread the word that Democrats (especially poor and minority Democrats) are poised to steal an election, John McCain and his overheated friends deliberately undermine voter confidence. That is the point. It encourages citizens to accede to ever-harsher voter-verification laws—even if they are not needed. It musters support for voter purges that are increasingly draconian. Insist often enough that the other side is cheating, and you may even encourage partisans to take matters into their own hands, leading to the worst forms of polling-place vigilantism—from a cross burning in Louisiana on the eve of a 2006 mayoral election to the hiring of intimidating partisan "poll watchers" to volunteer at inner-city polling places. When McCain goes after ACORN, he's really just asking you to join him in believing that the system is broken. And if you choose to overheat along with McCain, the Supreme Court promises to sign off on any measure that might calm you down later. John McCain might want to be a little more careful about accusing Obama, ACORN, or anyone else, of "destroying the fabric of democracy." In so doing, he's either deliberately or unconsciously encouraging his own supporters to grab a handful of the stuff and start ripping.

Dahlia Lithwick is a Slate senior editor

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2008, 11:00:48 AM

I'll need to read the Supreme's decision-- it may rest more on precedural issues, or federalism issues-- certainly the AP report cited here doesn't even attempt to address more than win/lose.

ACORN has been on my radar screen a LONG time for massive, systemic registration/fraud.

Here's this from PD WSJ

Acorn Crackup

As news that the FBI is launching an investigation of its voter registration activities hit yesterday, the left-wing housing lobby Acorn received another blow. The group's dirty laundry will be aired at a board meeting today in New Orleans as its national board debates the merits of a lawsuit filed against Acorn by two of its own board members.

Karen Inman and Marcel Reid are the Acorn directors demanding that audits and other financial records of Acorn be turned over to them so they can complete an internal management review. They claim the records will show the organization is rife with financial irregularities created during the 38-year leadership of Wade Rathke, its founder.

Mr. Rathke left Acorn earlier this year after it was revealed his brother Dale had embezzled some $1 million from the group and that Mr. Rathke had concealed that scandal from his own board for eight years.

But Ms. Inman says the lawsuit is about far more than gaining access to financial records. She held a news conference yesterday and expressed concern that Wade Rathke continues to run Acorn from behind the scenes even though Acorn's board voted over the summer to sever all ties with him.

The internal divisions inside Acorn have led several organizers to form a dissident group called Speaking Truth To Power. The dissidents called on Barack Obama this week to support their efforts at reforming the organization. Mr. Obama has gone to great lengths to distance himself from the roles he played as a top trainer and attorney for Acorn during the 1990s.

-- John Fund

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Al Lipscomb on October 17, 2008, 12:58:07 PM

When I ran for State level office in the 2002 Florida Libertarian party's "Operation Full Slate" there were a number of us paying attention to voter fraud issues. Being a third party you have a lot to overcome from within the system, fraud is part of that. The entire "hanging chad" issue was explained to me around 1982 by a college professor who told us how punch ballot votes could be manipulated. We saw a large municipal election overturned here in Florida due to ballot fraud.

Now when you consider how close the Florida election was, the areas where prior fraud existed and where the "chad" issue seemed to be focused, you can see how a national election can be impacted. If confidence is lost, there could be larger problems that can't be fixed.

In a secret ballot, who counts the votes is the key.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2008, 01:11:13 PM

Arl:

That is very interesting. IIRC it was Miami that had had its mayoralty election overturned.  Coincidentally enough, Gore's team was headed, coincidentally enough, by Mayor Daley of Chicago ('nuff said) who IIRC came into Miami to see what he could do to help-- or something like that.

I would love to hear about how punch ballots can be manipulated.

Here's this-- I wonder if it was an inside job :wink: :-P
===========

BOSTON (WBZ) ― Police are investigating a burglary at the Boston offices of the community activist group ACORN.

Boston police told WBZ Friday that three Dell laptop computers were stolen from the group's Dorchester office around 10:15 p.m. Wednesday.  According to police, the alarm had also been ripped from the wall and wires had been damaged.  The police report says two downstairs offices also were ransacked, two vending machines were damaged and change stolen from them.

A representative from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now said he did not know if the break-in was politically motivated, but called the timing "suspicious."

The FBI is investigating whether ACORN helped foster voter registration fraud in several states before the presidential election.

ACORN denies any fraud.

(© 2008 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)

Title: Everything Old is New Again
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 20, 2008, 05:51:23 AM

Something New Here
Radical? Check. Tied to ACORN? Check. Redistributionist? Check.

By Stanley Kurtz

During his first campaign for the Illinois state senate in 1995-96, Barack Obama was a member of, and was endorsed by, the far-left New Party. Obama’s New Party ties give the lie to his claim to be a post-partisan, post-ideological pragmatist. Particularly in Chicago, the New Party functioned as the electoral arm of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). So despite repeated attempts to distance himself from ACORN, Obama’s New Party ties raise disturbing questions about his links to those proudly militant leftists. The media’s near-total silence on this critical element of Obama’s past is deeply irresponsible

Socialist?
While a small group of bloggers have productively explored Obama’s New Party ties, discussion has often turned on the New Party’s alleged socialism. Was the New Party actually established by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)? Was the New Party’s platform effectively socialist in content? Although these debates are both interesting and important, we needn’t resolve them to conclude that the New Party was far to the left of the American mainstream. Whether formally socialist or not, the New Party and its ACORN backers favored policies of economic redistribution. As Obama would say, they wanted to spread the wealth around. Bracketing the socialism question and simply taking the New Party on its own terms is sufficient to raise serious questions about Obama’s political commitments — questions that cry out for attention from a responsible press.

In 2002, Micah L. Sifry, a former writer and editor with The Nation magazine, published Spoiling for a Fight: Third-Party Politics in America, a book that contains what is probably our best account of the rise and fall of the New Party. Although Sifry leaves us hanging on the socialism question, his chapter on the New Party is more than enough to raise disturbing questions about Obama’s radicalism, and about his ties to ACORN.

Sifry reports a quip by New Party co-founder, Daniel Cantor: “The shorthand strategy for accomplishing all this is to get the Bruce Springsteen, Lauryn Hill, and Pete Seeger vote united in one party.” The Peter Seeger vote does sound like shorthand for the old-time socialist Left — but also for far-left-leaning baby boomers in general. Bruce Springsteen and Lauryn Hill point to young blacks and whites on the left, perhaps including, but not restricted to, openly socialist sympathizers. In short, the New Party was a mid-1990s effort to build a “progressive” coalition to the left of the Democratic party, uniting left-leaning baby boomers with minorities, relatively militant unionists, and “idealistic” young people.

Party Within a Party
In contrast to Ralph Nader’s recent third-party campaigns, the New Party’s strategy was to work through “fusion.” Fusion parties were popular in the 19th century. Although these small parties had a separate line on the ballot, they often endorsed one of the major party candidates. That meant these third parties didn’t have to act as “spoilers” in close elections. Yet by constituting themselves as separate entities and offering their endorsement as bait, fusion parties tended to push the major parties further to the right or the left. We see remnants of the old fusion-party pattern in New York state, where separate Liberal and Conservative parties sometimes shift elections by endorsing one or another major party candidate.

As the New Party’s founders put it, they were looking for a cross between the “party within the party” strategy favored by leftist Democrats and the “plague on both your houses” stance later adopted by the Naderites. That means Obama’s New Party ties place him on the far left end of the Democratic party, arguably with one foot outside and to the left of the party itself.

Does this make Obama “socialist?” Maybe so, but according to Sifry, the vague “New Party” name was chosen precisely to avoid such ideological pigeonholing. Maybe that vagueness was designed to avoid exposing the party as the socialist sympathizer it was. Or maybe the name was a way of avoiding complex internal struggles between competing ideological factions, some socialist and some not. (The answer is “both of the above,” I tend to think.) In any case, the New Party was clearly far to the left of mainstream Democrats, and according to Sifry, the party explicitly thought of itself as made up of committed “progressives,” rather than conventional “liberals.” That is entirely consistent with a famous 1995 profile of Obama by Hank De Zutter, which portrays him as closely tied to ACORN, and holding a world-view well “beyond” his mother’s conventional liberalism.

To get a sense of where the New Party stood politically, consider some of its early supporters: Barbara Dudley of Greenpeace, Steve Cobble political director of Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coaltion, and prominent academics like Frances Fox Piven coauthor of the “Cloward-Piven strategy” and a leader of the drive for the “motor-voter” legislation Obama later defended in court on behalf of ACORN, economist Juliet Schor, black historian, Manning Marable, historian Howard Zinn, linguist Noam Chomsky, Todd Gitlin, and writers like Gloria Steinem, and Barbara Ehrenreich. Socialist? Readers can draw their own conclusions. At one point, Sifry does describe the party’s goals as “social democratic.” In any case, the New Party clearly stands substantially to the left of the mainstream Democratic party.

ACORN Connection
Unquestionably, ACORN was one of the most important forces behind the creation of the New Party. According to Sifry: “Wade Rathke, ACORN’s lead national organizer, was in on the founding discussions that led to the New Party, and the group’s political director, Zach Polett, also came to play a big role in guiding New Party field organizing for the party [in Chicago and Little Rock].” In fact, Sifry portrays ACORN’s leading role in the New Party as the result of a conscious decision by the organization to move into electoral politics in a more substantial way than they had been able to solely through their political action committee. In addition to Rathke and Polett, a key early supporter of the New Party was Obama’s closest ACORN contact, Madeline Talbott.



While ACORN played an important founding role for the New Party nationally, ACORN was clearly the main force behind the New Party chapter in Chicago. In general, New Party chapters build around an ACORN nucleus were the most disciplined and successful party outposts. Nationally, the New Party’s biggest wins were in Chicago, very much including Obama’s victory in his 1996 run for the Illinois state senate. Chicago’s New Party was actually formed around two core elements, ACORN and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 880. Yet, as Sifry notes, SEIU 880 was itself an ACORN offshoot.

Together ACORN and SEIU 880 were the dominant forces in Chicago’s New Party. True, there was also participation by open socialists, but these were not a majority of New Party organizers. You can certainly argue, as libertarian blogger Trevor Louden has, that whether openly or not, the New Party in Chicago and beyond was effectively socialist. It’s a powerful argument and worthy of consideration. After all, according to Rutgers University political scientist Heidi J. Swarts, ACORN’s leaders see themselves as “a solitary vanguard of principled leftists.” So a party outpost built around ACORN would be a party built around “principled vanguard leftists.” Sounds pretty socialist to me. Yet, as I’ve emphasized, we needn’t resolve the “socialism” question to conclude that the New Party, and particularly its Chicago branch, was far to the left of the Democratic party, and largely under the control of ACORN.

Consider “The People Shall Rule,” a look at some of Chicago ACORN’s electoral efforts co-authored by Madeline Talbott, Obama’s closest ACORN contact and a key New Party supporter. In describing former Chicago ACORN leader Ted Thomas’s successful run for alderman, Talbott stresses that, even after election, Thomas retained his ACORN ties. Thomas was invited to retain his seat on ACORN’s Chicago board, ACORN members continued to treat him as a leader, and Thomas continued to brainstorm and strategize with ACORN’s other organizers. Talbott is so busy detailing Thomas’s continued links to ACORN that she doesn’t even bother to mention that Thomas actually ran on behalf of the New Party. (See “NP Chair elected to Chicago City Council.”)

As so often with ACORN, technically separate organizations are often relatively meaningless designations for different branches of ACORN itself. And in Chicago, the New Party was very much an ACORN-dominated operation. Ted Thomas was a city alderman, de facto ACORN leader, and New Party chair all at once. So Obama’s ties to the New Party represent yet another important, and still unacknowledged, link between Obama and ACORN.

We already know that Obama’s ties to ACORN’s Madeline Talbott ran deep. Less known is that Obama’s links to Chicago ACORN/New Party leader Ted Thomas were also strong. Thomas was one of a handful of aldermen who stood with Obama in his unsuccessful 2000 race for Congress against Bobby Rush. Obama is also had long-standing ties to SEIU Local 880, an ACORN union spin-off and a bulwark of Chicago’s New Party. In his 2004 race for the Democratic Senate nomination, SEIU Local 880 strongly endorsed Obama, citing his long history of support for the group.

Revealing Tie
So the fact that Obama received the New Party’s endorsement in his first run for office in 1995-96 cannot be dismissed as insignificant. On the contrary, Obama’s ties to the New Party, and the New Party’s backers at ACORN (often the very same people), are long-standing, substantial, and reveal a great deal about his personal political allegiances. Because it was a fusion party, the New Party did not require that all the candidates it endorsed be members. Yet the New Party’s endorsements were carefully targeted. There was no attempt to endorse candidates in every race, or even to set up nationwide chapters. Carefully selected races in carefully targeted cities were seized upon — and only when the candidate fit the profile of a decidedly left-leaning progressive Democrat. In this way, the New Party set out to form a hard-left “party within a party” among the Democrats.

More than this, we now have substantial evidence that Obama himself was in fact a New Party member. We even have a photograph of Obama appearing with other successful New Party candidates. Clearly, then, it is more than fair to identify Obama with the hard-left stance of the New Party and its ACORN backers. In her recent study of ACORN and the Gamaliel Foundation, the two groups of community organizers to which Obama was closest, Heidi Swarts describes their core ideology as “redistributionist.” Joe the Plumber take note. Whether formally socialist or not, Obama ties with ACORN and its New Party political arm show that spreading your wealth around has long been his ultimate goal.

All this means that Barack Obama is far from the post-partisan, post-ideological pragmatist he pretends to be. On the contrary, Obama’s ideological home is substantially to the left of the Democratic-party mainstream, so far to the left that he has one foot planted outside the party itself. And since the New Party Chicago was essentially an electoral arm of ACORN, Obama’s New Party tie, is yet another example of his deep links to the far-left militant organizers of that group. Obama’s account of his limited ties to ACORN in the third debate was clearly not truthful. Likewise, his earlier denials of ties to ACORN have fallen apart.

At what point will the press force Obama to own up to the full extent of his ties to ACORN? At what point will the press demand a full accounting of Obama’s ties to the New Party? At what point will the depth of Obama’s redistributionist economic stance be acknowledged? Barack Obama is hiding the truth about his political past, and the press is playing along.

— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

National Review Online - http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTc3NzZkZDYxODZiZjE2OTg5YWRmNDkzM2U0YTIwZGQ=

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 20, 2008, 04:01:45 PM

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/10/19/GOP_registration_collector_arrested/UPI-41871224471617/


GOP registration collector arrested
Published: Oct. 19, 2008 at 11:00 PM

SACRAMENTO, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- The owner of a firm hired to register thousands of Republican voters in California has been arrested for alleged registration fraud, officials said.

The Los Angeles Times reported Sunday that Mark Jacoby was arrested in Ontario, Calif., by state and local investigators late Saturday. California and local investigators charge that Jacoby fraudulently registered himself to vote at a childhood California home, but doesn't live there any longer. They allege he registered fraudulently so he could meet the requirement that signature gatherers be registered in California, the Times said.

The California Republican Party had hired Jacoby's firm, Young Political Majors, to register new GOP voters in the state.

However, dozens of voters said they were duped into registering as Republicans by the firm, saying they were told they were signing a petition to toughen penalties against child molesters. The Times said the firm was paid up to $12 for every state resident registered as a Republican.

The Los Angeles County district attorney's office and several other agencies have begun investigations, the newspaper said. The Times said it was unable to reach Jacoby for comment.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2008, 05:50:21 PM

Well good for the cops!

And, good thing Senator McCain didn't train him and his people, and funnel many hundreds of thousands of dollars to him pretending it was for "lighting". :roll:

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 20, 2008, 08:15:24 PM

Quote

funnel many hundreds of thousands of dollars to him pretending it was for "lighting".

 :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2008, 11:36:40 PM

Debra Bowen used to be my CA Assembly person and now she is Secy of State of CA.  Even though she is a Democrat, overall she has been a decent hardworking one.  So I was disappointed to here that this Republican's arrest may be connected to certain donations she received , , ,  FCUK!!!  Are NONE of them honest?!?  :x

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 21, 2008, 08:43:27 AM

Quote

Are NONE of them honest?!?

I'm going to go with a big NO on that one.

I've long held the belief that once you get past the small town (population 25,000 or so) level, it is impossible to advance in politics without some type of concession, pandering, or backroom dealings .

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 21, 2008, 09:05:07 AM

Kurtz on Obama and the New Party
Part 1
Radical? Check. Tied to ACORN? Check. Redistributionist? Check



Source: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...TIwZGQ=&w= MA==

Stanley Kurtz’s latest attempt to bring Barack Obama’s past to light: Something New Here.

During his first campaign for the Illinois state senate in 1995-96, Barack Obama was a member of, and was endorsed by, the far-left New Party. Obama’s New Party ties give the lie to his claim to be a post-partisan, post-ideological pragmatist. Particularly in Chicago, the New Party functioned as the electoral arm of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). So despite repeated attempts to distance himself from ACORN, Obama’s New Party ties raise disturbing questions about his links to those proudly militant leftists. The media’s near-total silence on this critical element of Obama’s past is deeply irresponsible.

SOCIALIST?
While a small group of bloggers have productively explored Obama’s New Party ties, discussion has often turned on the New Party’s alleged socialism. Was the New Party actually established by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA)? Was the New Party’s platform effectively socialist in content? Although these debates are both interesting and important, we needn’t resolve them to conclude that the New Party was far to the left of the American mainstream. Whether formally socialist or not, the New Party and its ACORN backers favored policies of economic redistribution. As Obama would say, they wanted to spread the wealth around. Bracketing the socialism question and simply taking the New Party on its own terms is sufficient to raise serious questions about Obama’s political commitments — questions that cry out for attention from a responsible press.

In 2002, Micah L. Sifry, a former writer and editor with The Nation magazine, published Spoiling for a Fight: Third-Party Politics in America, a book that contains what is probably our best account of the rise and fall of the New Party. Although Sifry leaves us hanging on the socialism question, his chapter on the New Party is more than enough to raise disturbing questions about Obama’s radicalism, and about his ties to ACORN.

Sifry reports a quip by New Party co-founder, Daniel Cantor: “The shorthand strategy for accomplishing all this is to get the Bruce Springsteen, Lauryn Hill, and Pete Seeger vote united in one party.” The Peter Seeger vote does sound like shorthand for the old-time socialist Left — but also for far-left-leaning baby boomers in general. Bruce Springsteen and Lauryn Hill point to young blacks and whites on the left, perhaps including, but not restricted to, openly socialist sympathizers. In short, the New Party was a mid-1990s effort to build a “progressive” coalition to the left of the Democratic party, uniting left-leaning baby boomers with minorities, relatively militant unionists, and “idealistic” young people.

PARTY WITHIN A PARTY
In contrast to Ralph Nader’s recent third-party campaigns, the New Party’s strategy was to work through “fusion.” Fusion parties were popular in the 19th century. Although these small parties had a separate line on the ballot, they often endorsed one of the major-party candidates. That meant these third parties didn’t have to act as “spoilers” in close elections. Yet by constituting themselves as separate entities and offering their endorsement as bait, fusion parties tended to push the major parties further to the right or the left. We see remnants of the old fusion-party pattern in New York State, where separate Liberal and Conservative parties sometimes shift elections by endorsing one or another major party candidate.

As the New Party’s founders put it, they were looking for a cross between the “party within the party” strategy favored by leftist Democrats and the “plague on both your houses” stance later adopted by the Naderites. That means Obama’s New Party ties place him on the far left end of the Democratic party, arguably with one foot outside and to the left of the party itself.

Does this make Obama “socialist?” Maybe so, but according to Sifry, the vague “New Party” name was chosen precisely to avoid such ideological pigeonholing. Maybe that vagueness was designed to avoid exposing the party as the socialist sympathizer it was. Or maybe the name was a way of avoiding complex internal struggles between competing ideological factions, some socialist and some not. (The answer is “both of the above,” I tend to think.) In any case, the New Party was clearly far to the left of mainstream Democrats, and according to Sifry, the party explicitly thought of itself as made up of committed “progressives,” rather than conventional “liberals.” That is entirely consistent with a famous 1995 profile of Obama by Hank De Zutter, which portrays him as closely tied to ACORN, and holding a world-view well “beyond” his mother’s conventional liberalism.

To get a sense of where the New Party stood politically, consider some of its early supporters: Barbara Dudley of Greenpeace; Steve Cobble, political director of Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow Coaltion; prominent academics like Frances Fox Piven, coauthor of the “Cloward-Piven strategy” and a leader of the drive for the “motor-voter” legislation Obama later defended in court on behalf of ACORN; economist Juliet Schor; black historian Manning Marable; historian Howard Zinn; linguist Noam Chomsky; Todd Gitlin; and writers like Gloria Steinem and Barbara Ehrenreich. Socialist? Readers can draw their own conclusions. At one point, Sifry does describe the party’s goals as “social democratic.” In any case, the New Party clearly stands substantially to the left of the mainstream Democratic party.

ACORN CONNECTION
Unquestionably, ACORN was one of the most important forces behind the creation of the New Party. According to Sifry: “Wade Rathke, ACORN’s lead national organizer, was in on the founding discussions that led to the New Party, and the group’s political director, Zach Polett, also came to play a big role in guiding New Party field organizing for the party [in Chicago and Little Rock].” In fact, Sifry portrays ACORN’s leading role in the New Party as the result of a conscious decision by the organization to move into electoral politics in a more substantial way than they had been able to solely through their political action committee. In addition to Rathke and Polett, a key early supporter of the New Party was Obama’s closest ACORN contact, Madeline Talbott.
 


While ACORN played an important founding role for the New Party nationally, ACORN was clearly the main force behind the New Party chapter in Chicago. In general, New Party chapters built around an ACORN nucleus were the most disciplined and successful party outposts. Nationally, the New Party’s biggest wins were in Chicago, very much including Obama’s victory in his 1996 run for the Illinois state senate. Chicago’s New Party was actually formed around two core elements, ACORN and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 880. Yet, as Sifry notes, SEIU 880 was itself an ACORN offshoot.

Together ACORN and SEIU 880 were the dominant forces in Chicago’s New Party. True, there was also participation by open socialists, but these were not a majority of New Party organizers. You can certainly argue, as libertarian blogger Trevor Louden has, that whether openly or not, the New Party in Chicago and beyond was effectively socialist. It’s a powerful argument and worthy of consideration. After all, according to Rutgers University political scientist Heidi J. Swarts, ACORN’s leaders see themselves as “a solitary vanguard of principled leftists.” So a party outpost built around ACORN would be a party built around “principled vanguard leftists.” Sounds pretty socialist to me. Yet, as I’ve emphasized, we needn’t resolve the “socialism” question to conclude that the New Party, and particularly its Chicago branch, was far to the left of the Democratic party, and largely under the control of ACORN.

Consider “The People Shall Rule,” a look at some of Chicago ACORN’s electoral efforts co-authored by Madeline Talbott, Obama’s closest ACORN contact and a key New Party supporter. In describing former Chicago ACORN leader Ted Thomas’s successful run for alderman, Talbott stresses that, even after election, Thomas retained his ACORN ties. Thomas was invited to retain his seat on ACORN’s Chicago board, ACORN members continued to treat him as a leader, and Thomas continued to brainstorm and strategize with ACORN’s other organizers. Talbott is so busy detailing Thomas’s continued links to ACORN that she doesn’t even bother to mention that Thomas actually ran on behalf of the New Party. (See “NP Chair elected to Chicago City Council.”)

As so often with ACORN, technically separate organizations are often relatively meaningless designations for different branches of ACORN itself. And in Chicago, the New Party was very much an ACORN-dominated operation. Ted Thomas was a city alderman, de facto ACORN leader, and New Party chair all at once. So Obama’s ties to the New Party represent yet another important, and still unacknowledged, link between Obama and ACORN.

We already know that Obama’s ties to ACORN’s Madeline Talbott ran deep. Less known is that Obama’s links to Chicago ACORN/New Party leader Ted Thomas were also strong. Thomas was one of a handful of aldermen who stood with Obama in his unsuccessful 2000 race for Congress against Bobby Rush. Obama is also had long-standing ties to SEIU Local 880, an ACORN union spin-off and a bulwark of Chicago’s New Party. In his 2004 race for the Democratic Senate nomination, SEIU Local 880 strongly endorsed Obama, citing his long history of support for the group.

REVEALING TIE
So the fact that Obama received the New Party’s endorsement in his first run for office in 1995-96 cannot be dismissed as insignificant. On the contrary, Obama’s ties to the New Party, and the New Party’s backers at ACORN (often the very same people), are long-standing, substantial, and reveal a great deal about his personal political allegiances. Because it was a fusion party, the New Party did not require that all the candidates it endorsed be members. Yet the New Party’s endorsements were carefully targeted. There was no attempt to endorse candidates in every race, or even to set up nationwide chapters. Carefully selected races in carefully targeted cities were seized upon — and only when the candidate fit the profile of a decidedly left-leaning progressive Democrat. In this way, the New Party set out to form a hard-left “party within a party” among the Democrats.

More than this, we now have substantial evidence that Obama himself was in fact a New Party member. We even have a photograph of Obama appearing with other successful New Party candidates. Clearly, then, it is more than fair to identify Obama with the hard-left stance of the New Party and its ACORN backers. In her recent study of ACORN and the Gamaliel Foundation, the two groups of community organizers to which Obama was closest, Heidi Swarts describes their core ideology as “redistributionist.” Joe the Plumber take note. Whether formally socialist or not, Obama ties with ACORN and its New Party political arm show that spreading your wealth around has long been his ultimate goal.

All this means that Barack Obama is far from the post-partisan, post-ideological pragmatist he pretends to be. On the contrary, Obama’s ideological home is substantially to the left of the Democratic-party mainstream, so far to the left that he has one foot planted outside the party itself. And since the New Party Chicago was essentially an electoral arm of ACORN, Obama’s New Party tie, is yet another example of his deep links to the far-left militant organizers of that group. Obama’s account of his limited ties to ACORN in the third debate was clearly not truthful. Likewise, his earlier denials of ties to ACORN have fallen apart.

At what point will the press force Obama to own up to the full extent of his ties to ACORN? At what point will the press demand a full accounting of Obama’s ties to the New Party? At what point will the depth of Obama’s redistributionist economic stance be acknowledged? Barack Obama is hiding the truth about his political past, and the press is playing along.

— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
 

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 21, 2008, 01:03:30 PM

WOW! Even CNN is on ACORN's case!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkUKOSnv2zY

Title: Flynn
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 23, 2008, 09:35:41 PM

pasted from the Obama Phen. thread:
===========================

DANIEL J. FLYNN
Obama: The Oak Grown from Acorn
The radical group is front and center when it comes to voter fraud.
16 October 2008
Stealing Elections, Revised and Updated: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy, by John Fund (Encounter, 175 pp., $19.95)

Last week, well before news broke today of an FBI voter-fraud investigation of the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (Acorn), Nevada authorities raided the group’s Las Vegas headquarters. The offices of Nevada’s secretary of state and attorney general, both Democrats, seized computers, voter-registration cards, and employee information after Acorn submitted numerous fraudulent names and addresses as part of its voter-registration drive. “Some of these [forms] were facially fraudulent; we basically had the starting lineup for the Dallas Cowboys,” Ross Miller, Nevada’s secretary of state, explained. “Tony Romo is not registered to vote in Nevada.” Acorn’s Project Vote alleges that the raid is part of a nationally orchestrated effort to suppress voter turnout. “Project Vote has been attacked all over the country because we registered at least 1.2 million voters,” theorizes Nevada Acorn’s Bonnie Smith-Greathouse. “That could sway an election.”

And that’s just the point, argues John Fund in the updated and timely reissue of his Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy. Fund contends that recent changes in election laws have made it easier to “sway an election,” as Smith-Greathouse puts it—through cheating. “The United States has a haphazard, fraud-prone election system befitting a developing nation rather than the globe’s leading democracy,” Fund asserts. At times, Fund’s subject seems more fitting for a magazine exposé than for a book—until one confronts the sheer volume of examples he has compiled. Like a portrait of corruption from a century prior, Lincoln Steffens’s Shame of the Cities, Fund’s Stealing Elections adopts a muckraking style and spotlights a national problem by illuminating it on a city-by-city basis.

In the name of making every vote count, efforts to expand the electorate have resulted in tallying votes that shouldn’t be considered and negating valid votes. Over a century’s worth of reforms designed to protect the concept of “one man, one vote” have been undermined in just a few decades. Fund points out that most states now allow voters to obtain absentee ballots without establishing a need (such as status as a student, soldier, or diplomat, or showing that one would be out of state on Election Day). One state, Oregon, has eliminated polling places entirely. The raison d’être of the secret ballot—to protect the public from having votes bought or coerced—is thus discarded.

Same-day registration, which backers argue further democratizes elections, is, according to Stealing Elections, “not a reform at all but an added opportunity for mischief”—such as vote buying. The comical scheme of an Al Gore–supporting New York socialite offering free cigarettes to homeless Milwaukeeans in exchange for votes could only occur in a state with same-day registration. Voters registering multiple times under the Motor Voter law, some liberals’ hostility toward poll workers checking government-issued identifications, and lawyers invading locales with election disputes—all increase the chances that legitimate votes will wind up cast aside or canceled out by illegitimate ones.

Stealing Elections overflows with examples of electoral shenanigans. The controversial 2004 Democratic primary, for instance, in which Texas Secretary of State Henry Cuellar unseated Congressman Ciro Rodriguez, ran rife with peculiarities that affected the outcome. While Rodriguez boasted a slim 126-vote lead on election night, the recount in Zapata County turned up a missing ballot box with 304 votes, four-fifths of them for Cuellar. “Webb County reported that their recount came up with 115 more votes than they had first reported,” Fund writes. “Cuellar won every one of the newly discovered votes.” In San Antonio, an area the challenger carried decisively, election officials discovered voter-registration applications for 42 dead people.

On election night that same year, Washington State voters elected Republican Dino Rossi over Democrat Christine Gregoire. On Christmas Eve, state lawyers overturned the election after a third recount. “Nearly 2,000 more votes were counted in King County than the number of individual voters who appeared on the list of those who had cast a ballot,” Fund reports. In one Seattle precinct—where most of the voters had curiously registered just that past year—70 percent of voters listed a government administration building as their residential address. Election officials found hundreds of “lost” ballots, accepted the votes of hundreds of ineligible felons, and, in a few instances, counted the votes of those residing in graveyards. One ballot punched for Gregoire but listing Rossi in the “write-in” line was strangely added in the recount to the totals for Gregoire. Given the strange methodology employed by ballot counters, it’s not surprising that Gregoire is now Washington’s governor.

In St. Louis, dogs join the dead on the election rolls. In 2000, voters nationwide let out a collective gasp in the waning hours of Election Day. Lawyers for Jesse Jackson and Al Gore convinced judges in St. Louis to keep polls open in selected African-American neighborhoods, altering election law by extending voting hours for those most likely to support Gore. Along with the discovery of a voting machine in an abandoned lot the day after the election, and the revelation that 56,000 St. Louis voters had registered multiple times, Missouri voters also learned that “Robert Odom”—on whose behalf Gore-Lieberman lawyers had successfully sued to keep the polls open—had voted in the early afternoon, before the court order extending poll-closure times was issued. The lawsuit was clearly premeditated, as the evidence of computerized phone banks, all-too-ready with a get-out-the-vote message, made clear. The exclamation point to the Show Me State’s 2000 horror show was provided by Ritzy, the 13-year-old spaniel who had been on the voter rolls for eight years.

A common thread in many of the cases that Fund spotlights is the shadowy presence of Acorn. Two and a half years after the debacle in Seattle, Washington’s attorney general indicted seven Acorn workers for their role in what he called “the worst case of voter registration fraud” in the state’s history. In St. Louis, eight Acorn workers pled guilty to election fraud this past April. On the other side of Missouri, in 2006, four Kansas City Acorn workers were indicted after officials deemed nearly 15,000 of their 35,000 registrations phony.

In the mid-nineties, Barack Obama ran Acorn’s Project Vote campaign in Illinois. He sued the state of Illinois on the group’s behalf in 1995 to implement the Motor Voter law. “After he joined the board of the Woods Fund,” Stealing Elections notes, “Obama saw to it that substantial grants were given to Acorn.” Senator Obama has championed Acorn’s legislative priorities in Congress. His presidential campaign even donated more than $800,000 to Acorn. Obama is the oak grown from Acorn, a group so proud of its association that it boasts “Obama Organizing Fellows” and runs a “Camp Obama” training event. While Acorn boasts of its Obama association, the candidate, of course, is more reticent. That’s because he well knows that many non-dead, non-animal voters would not find a close association with such a group a desirable quality in a potential president.

“Once a community organizer, then a foundation grant-maker, and now a lobbyist for direct government funding, Barack Obama has been with Acorn throughout his career,” Fund writes. “In return, Acorn is pledging to spend $35 million this year registering voters—both real and fictive. Should Obama become president, look for Acorn to have a vastly more ambitious legislative agenda, and for Obama to be responsive.” Acorn, in other words, has a lot riding on Tony Romo voting early, often, and everywhere.

Daniel J. Flynn is the author of A Conservative History of the American Left. (Crown Forum, 2008).

http://www.city-journal.org/2008/bc1016df.html

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 24, 2008, 11:05:36 AM

Whatever It Takes, Part Two

ACORN, the troubled left-wing activist group, has new headaches. Yesterday Michael Slater, head of its Project Vote, admitted that some 400,000 of its claimed 1.3 million newly registered voters were rejected by election officials as either duplicates or fraudulent -- i.e. it doesn't sound as if ACORN's vaunted "quality control" efforts were all that effective.

Some reasons why may be exposed next week in a lawsuit filed by the Republican Party of Pennsylvania in state court. The Web site PolitickerPA reports that Anita Moncrief, an ACORN worker in Washington D.C. from 2005 to 2008, will testify that the group engaged in "minimal to non-existent" checking of its voter registration work during her time with Project Vote.

The Republican suit, filed by Pittsburgh attorney Heather Heidelbaugh, demands that the Pennsylvania Secretary of State follow federal law requiring that first-time voters using an absentee ballot show some form of identification. It also seeks to have ACORN turn over its voter registration lists, identify registrants who signed up fraudulently and instruct them not to vote.

-- John Fund

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: SB_Mig on October 28, 2008, 01:12:56 PM

Registering Doubt
If we can nationalize banks, why not our election process?
By Richard L. Hasen
Posted Monday, Oct. 27, 2008, at 4:03 PM ET

Like our financial system, our voter registration system needs a federal government bailout. Before the election, while the public and press are still paying attention, we should get both presidential candidates to commit to a more sensible, secure, and universal voter registration process.

When it comes to charges of "voter fraud" and "vote suppression," each election is worse than the last. This year, John McCain has claimed that some fraudulent voter registration cards turned in by ACORN employees threatened the "fabric of democracy." The Obama campaign has sent letters to Attorney General Michael Mukasey accusing Republicans of deliberately trying to suppress the vote. And the Ohio Republican Party is battling the Ohio secretary of state—in litigation that's already made it to the Supreme Court—over mismatches between voter registration and motor-vehicle-department databases. Now House Minority Leader John Boehner wants the Department of Justice to get involved to stop voter fraud. That went so well last time, so why not?

These charges and countercharges are the real danger to the fabric of our democracy. If people are not convinced their votes will be accurately counted, they are more likely to view election results as illegitimate and, therefore, the government less worthy of our respect and willingness to abide by the rule of law.

What can be done about it? Though there are many things that can be done to improve our election system—from nonpartisan election administration, to a uniform ballot design for federal elections, to improvements in our voting machinery—the most urgent fix is needed for our system of voter registration.

Right now, voter registration takes place primarily on the county level, and it requires a lot of effort on the part of outside groups such as ACORN, the political parties, and others. These groups sometimes work with volunteers, but more often than not they pay people to collect voter registration forms.

This is where a lot of the registration fraud comes from. Even for workers not paid by the card, a low-wage worker doing voter registration may be tempted to falsify information to keep his or her job, going so far as to register names in the phone book or cartoon characters. (This is why registration fraud does not lead to actual election fraud: These false names are not part of any effort to get thousands of people to the polls claiming to be someone else to vote for a candidate whose supporters cannot verify how anyone at the polling place has voted.)

The New York Times recently reported that ACORN turned in about 400,000 registration cards that were duplicates, incomplete, or fraudulent. And in California, a Republican-leaning group has been accused of changing Democratic registrants to a Republican affiliation without their permission. Why not, when they were paid $7 to $12 for each Republican registration?

The solution is to take the job of voter registration for federal elections out of the hands of third parties (and out of the hands of the counties and states) and give it to the federal government. The Constitution grants Congress wide authority over congressional elections. The next president should propose legislation to have the Census Bureau, when it conducts the 2010 census, also register all eligible voters who wish to be registered for future federal elections. High-school seniors could be signed up as well so that they would be registered to vote on their 18th birthday. When people submit change-of-address cards to the post office, election officials would also change their registration information.

This change would eliminate most voter registration fraud. Government employees would not have an incentive to pad registration lists with additional people in order to keep their jobs. The system would also eliminate the need for matches between state databases, a problem that has proved so troublesome because of the bad quality of the data. The federal government could assign each person a unique voter-identification number, which would remain the same regardless of where the voter moves. The unique ID would prevent people from voting in two jurisdictions, such as snowbirds who might be tempted to vote in Florida and New York. States would not have to use the system for their state and local elections, but most would choose to do so because of the cost savings.

There's something in this for both Democrats and Republicans. Democrats talk about wanting to expand the franchise, and there's no better way to do it than the way most mature democracies do it: by having the government register voters. For Republicans serious about ballot integrity, this should be a winner as well. No more ACORN registration drives, and no more concerns about Democratic secretaries of state not aggressively matching voters enough to motor vehicle databases.

Finally, universal voter registration is good for the country, not only because it will make it easier for those who wish to vote to do so, but because it should end controversy over ballot integrity that threatens to undermine the legitimacy of our election process. If President McCain or Obama makes this a priority, we can have the system ready in time for the president's re-election.
Richard L. Hasen, the William H. Hannon distinguished professor at Loyola Law School, writes the Election Law Blog.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 30, 2008, 05:19:15 AM

An interesting idea SB.

Here's more on ACORN and BO:

WSJ

Acorn, the liberal "community organizing" group that claims it will deploy 15,000 get-out-the-vote workers on Election Day, can't stay out of the news.

The FBI is investigating its voter registration efforts in several states, amid allegations that almost a third of the 1.3 million cards it turned in are invalid. And yesterday, a former employee of Acorn testified in a Pennsylvania state court that the group's quality-control efforts were "minimal or nonexistent" and largely window dressing. Anita MonCrief also says that Acorn was given lists of potential donors by several Democratic presidential campaigns, including that of Barack Obama, to troll for contributions.

The Obama campaign denies it "has any ties" to Acorn, but Mr. Obama's ties are extensive. In 1992 he headed a registration effort for Project Vote, an Acorn partner at the time. He did so well that he was made a top trainer for Acorn's Chicago conferences. In 1995, he represented Acorn in a key case upholding the constitutionality of the new Motor Voter Act -- the first law passed by the Clinton administration -- which created the mandated, nationwide postcard voter registration system that Acorn workers are using to flood election offices with bogus registrations.

Ms. MonCrief testified that in November 2007 Project Vote development director Karyn Gillette told her she had direct contact with the Obama campaign and had obtained their donor lists. Ms. MonCrief also testified she was given a spreadsheet to use in cultivating Obama donors who had maxed out on donations to the candidate, but who could contribute to voter registration efforts. Project Vote calls the allegation "absolutely false."

She says that when she had trouble with what appeared to be duplicate names on the list, Ms. Gillette told her she would talk with the Obama campaign and get a better version. Ms. MonCrief has given me copies of the donor lists she says were obtained from other Democratic campaigns, as well as the 2004 DNC donor lists.

In her testimony, Ms. MonCrief says she was upset by Acorn's "Muscle for Money" program, which she said intimidated businesses Acorn opposed into paying "protection" money in the form of grants. Acorn's Brian Kettering says the group only wants to change corporate behavior: "Acorn is proud of its corporate campaigns to stop abuses of working families."

Ms. MonCrief, 29, never expected to testify in a case brought by the state's Republican Party seeking the local Acorn affiliate's voter registration lists. An idealistic graduate of the University of Alabama, she joined Project Vote in 2005 because she thought it was empowering poor people. A strategic consultant for Acorn and a development associate with its Project Vote voter registration affiliate, Ms. MonCrief sat in on policy-making meetings with the national staff. She was fired early this year over personal expenses she had put on the group's credit card.

She says she became disillusioned because she saw that Acorn was run as the personal fiefdom of Wade Rathke, who founded the group in 1970 and ran it until he stepped down to take over its international operations this summer. Mr. Rathke's departure as head of Acorn came after revelations he'd employed his brother Dale for a decade while keeping from almost all of Acorn's board members the fact that Dale had embezzled over $1 million from the group a decade ago. (The embezzlement was confirmed to me by an Acorn official.)

"Anyone who questioned what was going on was viewed as the enemy," Ms. MonCrief told me. "Just like the mob, no one leaves Acorn happily." She believes the organization does some good but hopes its current leadership is replaced. She may not be alone.

Last August two of Acorn's eight dissident board members, Marcel Reed and Karen Inman, filed suit demanding access to financial records of Citizens Consulting Inc., the umbrella group through which most of Acorn's money flows. Ms. Inman told a news conference this month Mr. Rathke still exercises power over CCI and Acorn against the board's wishes. Bertha Lewis, the interim head of Acorn, told me Mr. Rathke has no ties to Acorn and that the dissident board members were "obsessed" and "confused."

According to public records, the IRS filed three tax liens totaling almost $1 million against Acorn this spring. Also this spring, CCI was paid $832,000 by the Obama campaign for get-out-the-vote efforts in key primary states. In filings with the Federal Election Commission, the Obama campaign listed the payments as "staging, sound, lighting," only correcting the filings after the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review revealed their true nature.

"Acorn needs a full forensic audit," Ms. MonCrief says, though she doesn't think that's likely. "Everyone wants to paper things over until later," she says. "But it may be too late to reform Acorn then." She strongly supports Barack Obama and hopes his allies can be helpful in cleaning up the group "after the heat of the election is gone."

Acorn's Mr. Kettering says the GOP lawsuit "is designed to suppress legitimate voters," and he says Ms. MonCrief isn't credible, given that she was fired for cause. Ms. MonCrief admits that she left after she began paying back some $3,000 in personal expenses she charged on an Acorn credit card. "I was very sorry, and I was paying it back," she says, but "suddenly Acorn decided that . . . I had to go. Since then I have gotten warnings to 'back off' from people at Acorn."

Acorn insists it operates with strict quality controls, turning in, as required by law, all registration forms "even if the name on them was Donald Duck," as Wade Rathke told me two years ago. Acorn whistleblowers tell a different story.

"There's no quality control on purpose, no checks and balances," says Nate Toler, who worked until 2006 as the head organizer of an Acorn campaign against Wal-Mart in California. And Ms. MonCrief says it is longstanding practice to blame bogus registrations on lower-level employees who then often face criminal charges, a practice she says Acorn internally calls "throwing folks under the bus."

Gregory Hall, a former Acorn employee, says he was told on his very first day in 2006 to engage in deceptive fund-raising tactics. Mr. Hall has founded a group called Speaking Truth to Power to push for a full airing of Acorn's problems "so the group can heal itself from within."

To date, Mr. Obama has declined to criticize Acorn, telling reporters this month he is happy with his own get-out-the-vote efforts and that "we don't need Acorn's help." That may be true. But there is no denying his ties with Acorn helped turbocharge his political career.

Mr. Fund is a columnist for WSJ.com.

Title: More election fraud from the obama clan
Post by: ccp on November 01, 2008, 09:02:39 AM

Well this isn't acorn but it is about election fraud which is synonymous.

BOs aunt not only living here illegally in public housing but as a non citizen she is illegally donating money to his campaign.

Yet Geraldo Rivera is outraged anyone has the discriminatinory nerve to question why we are not kicking out illegals.

***According to Federal Election Commission documents filed by the Obama campaign, Onyango has contributed $260 to Obama over a period of time. Under federal election law, only U.S. citizens or green-card holders are legally permitted to give money to campaigns. Onyango, who listed her employer as the Boston Housing Authority, gave in small increments to the Obama campaign. Her latest contribution was $5 on Sept. 19.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on November 03, 2008, 05:25:33 AM

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=5FF874F9-18FE-70B2-A89977D364B3A669

Falsified registrations become votes
By: John Fund
November 2, 2008 09:38 PM EST

The liberal "community organizing" group ACORN became a campaign issue last month after Nevada's Democratic attorney general and its Democratic secretary of state teamed up to conduct a highly visible raid of the group's Las Vegas offices. They seized files on what could be thousands of fraudulent voter registrations.

After ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, complained the raid was a "stunt" designed to hinder its efforts at minority registration, Larry Lomax, the chief elections officer in Las Vegas, responded that the group's claims it had extensive quality controls to catch fraudulent registrations were "pathetic." He noted that ACORN had hired 59 inmates from a work-release program at a nearby prison and that some inmates who had been convicted of identity theft had been made supervisors. That led some local wags to joke that at least ACORN was hiring specialists to do their work.

ACORN's second line of defense has been that fraudulent registrations can't turn into fraudulent votes, as if the felony of polluting voter lists was somehow not all that serious. But that defense goes only a short distance. "How would you know if people using fake names had cast votes in states without strict ID laws?" says GOP Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita, who this year won a major Supreme Court case upholding his state's photo identification law. "It's almost impossible to detect and once the fraudulent voter leaves the precinct or casts an absentee ballot, that vote is thrown in with other secret ballots there's no way to trace it."

Anita MonCrief, an ACORN whistle-blower who worked for both it and its Project Vote registration affiliate from 2005 until early this year, agrees. "It's ludicrous to say that fake registrations can't become fraudulent votes," she told me. "I assure you that if you can get them on the rolls you can get them to vote, especially using absentee ballots." MonCrief, a 29-year old University of Alabama graduate who wanted to become part of the civil rights movement, worked as a strategic consultant for ACORN as well as a development associate with Project Vote and sat in on meetings with the national staffs of both groups. She has given me documents that back up many of her statements, including one that indicates that the goal of ACORN's New Mexico affiliate was that only 40 percent of its submitted registrations had to be valid.

MonCrief also told me that some ACORN affiliates had a conscious strategy of flooding voter registration offices with suspect last-minute forms in part to create confusion and chaos that would make it more likely suspect voters would be allowed to cast ballots by overworked officials. Nate Toller, who worked on ACORN registration drives and headed an ACORN campaign against Wal-Mart in California until 2006, agrees. "There's no quality control on purpose, no checks and balances," he told me.

There are already documented examples of fraudulent registrations being converted into fraudulent votes in Ohio, where ACORN and other groups were active. Darrell Nash, an ACORN registration worker, submitted an illegal form for himself and then cast a paper ballot during the state's "early voting" period.

Franklin County prosecutor Ron O'Brien also cracked down in the case of 13 out-of-state registrants who came to Ohio to register voters in Columbus for the group Vote From Home. The group all lived out of the same rented 1,175-square-foot house in Ohio, registered to vote and then most of them either cast early voting ballots or submitted applications for absentee ballots before leaving the state. They have agreed to have all of their ballots canceled in exchange for the prosecutor's decision not to file charges.

The Columbus Dispatch reported last month that "none of them seems to have ties to Ohio" — and apparently had no intention of staying there. One has even moved back to England, where he is a student. It is illegal in almost all states to vote somewhere that is not your permanent residence.

The owner of the house the fraudulent voters stayed at is also under investigation. He has voted in Ohio even though he has lived and worked in New York for the past four years.

Many are concerned that other fraudulent votes could be cast in Ohio.

Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner admits that some 200,000 newly registered Ohio voters have been flagged by her office because their names, addresses, driver's license numbers, and/or Social Security numbers don't match other state or federal records. She is refusing to release the information on those registrants to county election boards that have requested them for the purpose of running further checks. Ms. Brunner was elected in 2006 with the support of ACORN, and indeed her campaign consultant that year was Karyn Gillette, who happened to be MonCrief's immediate superior at ACORN's Project Vote.

"I'd be very suspicious of what is going on in Ohio," MonCrief told me.

Other states provide other examples. Marybeth Brehany of Sioux City, Iowa, filed a sworn affidavit stating that she has discovered that several individuals unknown to her had registered to vote at her address. One of them, a David Loepp, had already requested and received an absentee ballot at his new address in, of all places, Rome, Italy. A 2005 Tennessee state Senate race was voided after evidence of voting by felons, nonresidents and the deceased who had been registered illegally. A Washington State Superior Court judge found that the state's 2004 gubernatorial race, which Democrat Christine Gregoire won by 133 votes, had included at least 1,678 illegal votes.

Perhaps the clearest look at how fraudulent registrations can be converted into votes comes from Wisconsin. Earlier this year, the Milwaukee Police Department's Special Investigation Unit released a stunning 67-page report detailing an "illegal organized attempt to influence the outcome" of the 2004 presidential election.

It noted many documented cases of staffers for a presidential campaign and an allied 527 group who illegally voted. Those involved in the scheme "represent multiple levels of both the organizations, from upper management to the street level canvassers." The task force report found many ineligible voters had cast ballots, ineligible felons not only had voted but also worked at the polls, transient college students had cast illegal votes along with day-trippers from nearby Chicago, and homeless voters may well have voted more than once.

The Milwaukee police report explained just how easy it is to cast an illegal vote without ever being detected., "Michael A. Smith can become Mike Smith, M.A. Smith, or Mickey Smith, depending on the person reviewing the Same Day registration card, and unless a specific allegation is made against one of those name variants, the new name would just be added to the overall database. Even if the new system were capable of discerning the differences in recorded names, the finding would not be discovered until after any multiple ballots had been cast and recorded." Indeed, the task force found that 1,100 registration cards filled in by voters were declared invalid or untraceable by election officials.

Another way that fraudulent registrations can be converted into illegal votes is when groups like ACORN either purposely or recklessly sign up visitors from out-of-state or felons who are ineligible to vote. The New York Daily News reported in August, 2004 on how some 46,000 New Yorkers are registered to vote in both the city and Florida, what it called a "shocking finding" because it "found that between 400 and 1,000 registered voters have voted twice in at least one election, a federal offense punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine," and noted that "efforts to prevent people from registering in more than one state rely mostly on the honor system."

Last month, the Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel reported that some 5,000 felons who do not have the right to vote have apparently voted in recent elections in Florida. Their illegal registrations turned into actual votes. The Miami Herald and Palm Beach Post had similar findings in May 2001 on the presidential election held the year previously. Reporters have found that that the number of illegal felon registrations that were cast that year was greater than the number of valid voters dropped from the voter rolls and thus blocked from voting. The Florida presidential vote — and the presidency — was decided in 2000 by only 537 votes.

Even if the problem of voter fraud caused by voter impersonation isn't as serious as some fear, Stuart Taylor of the National Journal notes that "polls show voters increasingly distrust the integrity of the electoral process." He also cites a 2006 NBC/Wall Street Journal nationwide poll which found that, by 80 percent to 7 percent, those surveyed supported voters showing "a valid photo identification." The idea had overwhelming support among all races and income groups.

That sweeping support helps explain why, in 2005, 18 of 21 members of a bipartisan federal commission headed by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker came out in support of photo ID requirements more stringent than Indiana's. "Voters in nearly 100 democracies use a photo identification card without fear of infringement on their rights," the commission stated.

Carter feels strongly about voter fraud. In his book, "Turning Point," he wrote of his race for Georgia state Senate in 1962, which involved a corrupt local sheriff who had cast votes for the dead. It took a recount and court intervention before Carter was declared the winner.

He and other supporters of stricter safeguards to protect voter integrity recognize there are two civil rights in play here. One is the right to cast a ballot without fear or intimidation or artificial barriers. We fought a great struggle in the 1960s to eliminate poll taxes, literacy tests and pass a Voting Rights Act to protect the right to vote. But all Americans have another civil right — the right not to have their ballot canceled out by someone who shouldn't be voting, is voting twice or may not even exist. You can be just as surely disenfranchised by someone canceling out your vote as if someone blocked your entry into a courthouse door where a polling place was located.

As Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, puts it: "From voter fraud to election chicanery of all kinds, America teeters on the edge of scandal every November. Unless we take serious steps at reform, sooner or later we're headed for more disasters as bad or worse than what we saw in Florida in 2000."

That's why the activities of groups like ACORN have to be taken seriously, and why a robust debate needs to be held on how we can protect both the civil right to vote and the civil right to be protected from voter fraud.

John Fund is a columnist with the Wall Street Journal's website and the author of "Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy."

Title: Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2008, 12:28:39 PM

http://townhall.com/blog/g/cf47766b-...7-ce60631bcadc

GOP Election Board members have been tossed out of polling stations in at least half a dozen polling stations in Philadelphia because of their party status.

A Pennsylvania judge previously ruled that court-appointed poll watchers could be NOT removed from their boards by an on-site election judge, but that is exactly what is happening, according to sources on the ground.

It is the duty of election board workers to monitor and guard the integrity of the voting process.

Denying access to the minority (in this case Republican) poll watchers and inspectors is a violation of Pennsylvania state law. Those who violate the law can be punished with a misdemeanor and subjected to a fine of $1,000 and sent to prison between one month and two years.

Those on site are describing the situation as "pandemonium" and there may be video coming of the chaos.

Some of the precincts where Republicans have been removed are: the 44th Ward, 12th and 13th divisions; 6th Ward, 12th division; 32nd Ward, Division 28.

“Election board officials guard the legitimacy of the election process and the idea that Republicans are being intimidated and banned for partisan purposes does not allow for an honest and open election process,” said McCain-Palin spokesman Ben Porritt in a statement to Townhall.

The City of Brotherly Love was roiled in controversy during the 2004 election because of rigged voting machines that showed nearly 2,000 votes for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry before the polls had opened. A man also used a gun to intimidate poll workers at Ward 30, division 11 in 2004.

Update: Fox News just did a report about the controversy. The Democrats are saying that the polling station is crowded and election board members need to cycle through the areas intermittently.

Update 10:53am: Pennsylvania Secretary of State Pedro Cortes says this matter is already being heard in court and should be resolved soon. He says there was a dispute of the names of the poll watchers on record. This is a different story than the Democratic officials told Fox News earlier this morning.
=======

Possible voter intimidation in Philadelphia:

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=213103
==========

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

=======
The police arrive:

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=213313&widget=1

Title: Vote Fraud Cop shut down
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2008, 07:40:16 PM

Milwaukee Puts a Vote-Fraud Cop Out of Business
Local Democrats don't take the issue seriously.By JOHN FUNDArticle
 
Last week Mike Sandvick, head of the Milwaukee Police Department's five-man Special Investigative Unit, was told by superiors not to send anyone to polling places on Election Day. He was also told his unit -- which wrote the book on how fraud could subvert the vote in his hometown -- would be disbanded.

"We know what to look for," he told me, "and that scares some people." In disgust, Mr. Sandvick plans to retire. (A police spokeswoman claims the unit isn't being disbanded and that any changes to the unit "aren't significant.")

In February, Mr. Sandvick's unit released a 67-page report on what it called an "illegal organized attempt to influence the outcome of (the 2004) election in the state of Wisconsin" -- a swing state whose last two presidential races were decided by less than 12,000 votes.

The report found that between 4,600 and 5,300 more votes were counted in Milwaukee than the number of voters recorded as having cast ballots. Absentee ballots were cast by people living elsewhere; ineligible felons not only voted but worked at the polls; transient college students cast improper votes; and homeless voters possibly voted more than once.

Much of the problem resulted from Wisconsin's same-day voter law, which allows anyone to show up at the polls, register and then cast a ballot. ID requirements are minimal. If someone lacks any ID, he can vote so long as someone who lives in the same city vouches for him. The report found that in 2004 a total of 1,305 "same day" voters gave information that was declared "un-enterable" or invalid by election officials.

According to the report, this loophole was abused by many out-of-state workers for the John Kerry campaign. They had "other staff members who were registered voters vouch for them by corroborating their residency."

The investigative unit believed at least 16 workers from the Kerry campaign, and two allied get-out-the-vote groups, "committed felony crimes." But local prosecutors didn't pursue them in part because of a "lack of confidence" in the abysmal record-keeping of the city's Election Commission.

Pat Curley, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett's chief of staff, told me he was very upset by the surprise release of the report. "I don't believe all of the facts are necessarily accurate," he said. Which ones? He only cited the report's interpretation of state policy on homeless voters. He denies the mayor's office had any role in disbanding the unit.

Mr. Sandvick says the problems his unit found in 2004 are "only the tip of the iceberg" of what could happen today. His unit has found out-of-state groups registering their temporary workers, a college dorm with 60 voters who aren't students, and what his unit believes are seven illegal absentee ballots.

In Opinion Journal today
REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Legal Side EffectsHugo Chávez's Bag ManGuantanamo Revelation

TODAY'S COLUMNISTS

Global View – From 9/11 to 11/4Main Street – A Social Democrat Confronts Globalization

COMMENTARY

We Could Be in for a Lurch to the Left – Fred BarnesFive Myths About the Great Depression – Andrew B. WilsonSome Lessons of the Financial Crisis – Stephen SchwarzmanMilwaukee Puts a Vote-Fraud Cop Out of Business – John Fund"The time to stop voter fraud is prior to when the questionable ballot is mixed in with all the valid votes," he says. Former police captain Glenn Frankovis agrees: "This issue could be solved if [the police chief] would assign police officers to the polling locations as was customary about 20 years ago." But election monitors are now viewed as "intimidating" in minority precincts and have been withdrawn.

Mr. Sandvick's report concluded "the one thing that could eliminate a large percentage of the fraud" it found would be elimination of same-day voter registration (which is also in use in seven other states). It also suggested that voters present a photo ID at the polls, a requirement the U.S. Supreme Court declared constitutional this spring.

But weeks after the vote fraud report was released, Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold introduced federal legislation to mandate same-day registration in every state. He claimed the system had worked well in Wisconsin and if "we can bring more people into the process, [it] only strengthens our democracy." Democrats tell me his bill is a top priority of the new Congress.

"They say voter fraud isn't a problem," notes Mr. Sandvick, "but after this election it may be all too clear it is." Now that Mr. Sandvick is resigning from the force after a long, honorable career, let's hope someone else is allowed to follow up on the spadework he's done.

Mr. Fund is a columnist for WSJ.com.

Title: Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2008, 06:18:41 AM

Diebold Finally Admits its Voting Machines Drop Votes



Premier Election Solutions, formerly called Diebold Election Systems,
has finally admitted that a ten-year-old error has caused votes to be
dropped.

It's unclear if this error is random or systematic.  If it's random -- a
small percentage of all votes are dropped -- then it is highly unlikely
that this affected the outcome of any election.  If it's systematic -- a
small percentage of votes for a particular candidate are dropped -- then
it is much more problematic.

Ohio is trying to sue.

In other news, election officials sometimes take voting machines home
for the night.

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082208-e-voting-vendor-programming-errors-caused.html
or http://tinyurl.com/69wzb2
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/26/decade_old_evoting_error/
http://www.engadget.com/2008/08/23/diebold-comes-clean-admits-that-its-e-voting-machines-are-fault/
or http://tinyurl.com/5fxkdp
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/21/ohio_voting_machines_contained.html
or http://tinyurl.com/57ckcu
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/48508.html

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/19/mom-can-my-voting-machine-spend-the-night/index.html
or http://tinyurl.com/6jtxze

My 2004 essay on election technology:
http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0411.html#1

Title: Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al)
Post by: G M on November 06, 2008, 06:55:18 AM

I bet ACORN is pissed that it worked so hard to fix the election when it turns out it didn't have to. 

Title: Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 12, 2008, 09:05:18 AM

Although this is from the NYT, it seems a fair point:
=======================
That’s Two for Me
Published: November 11, 2008

We’ve all heard of close elections. But consider the strange (and outrageous) case of the 2006 City Council election in Anamosa, Iowa.

According to census figures, Anamosa’s Ward 2 has nearly 1,400 residents, about the same as the town’s other three wards. The problem is that 1,300 of the ward’s “residents” are inmates of the Anamosa State Penitentiary. Minus the prisoners, Ward 2 has only 58 actual residents. A councilman won his election to represent the ward with two write-in votes: one from his wife and one from a neighbor.

While Anamosa’s case is extreme, the phenomenon is not. It is called prison-based gerrymandering when politicians draw legislative districts around prisons and count inmates — who are denied the vote in all but two states — as residents.

At the state level, prison-based gerrymandering exaggerates the political power of the mainly rural districts where prisons are built. And it dilutes the power of the mainly urban districts where inmates come from and to which they nearly always return. But as the Anamosa case shows, this kind of gerrymandering is also a problem within cities and towns.

Anamosa’s voters were so outraged that they have passed a referendum that will require its City Council members to be elected at large beginning in 2009. And other states and localities are beginning to wake up to the problem. But a study by the Prison Policy Initiative, an advocacy group, has found 21 counties across the nation where at least one in five people counted as residents were actually prison inmates.

The ideal solution would be for the United States Census Bureau to count prison inmates, not as residents of prisons, but at their actual home addresses. Until the bureau gets around to that, state and local lawmakers should make sure that prisoners are excluded from the population counts when legislative districts are drawn. The current arrangement undermines the most basic democratic principle of one person, one vote.

Title: Al Franken stealing election?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 12, 2008, 09:17:56 AM

Second post:

WSJ

You'd think Democrats would be content with last week's electoral rout. But judging from the odd doings in Minnesota, some in their party wouldn't mind adding to their jackpot by stealing a Senate seat for left-wing joker Al Franken.

 
AP
Al Franken.
When Minnesotans woke up last Wednesday, Republican Senator Norm Coleman led Mr. Franken by 725 votes. By that evening, he was ahead by only 477. As of yesterday, Mr. Coleman's margin stood at 206. This lopsided bleeding of Republican votes is passing strange considering that the official recount hasn't even begun.

The vanishing Coleman vote came during a week in which election officials are obliged to double-check their initial results. Minnesota is required to do these audits, and it isn't unusual for officials to report that they transposed a number here or there. In a normal audit, these mistakes could be expected to cut both ways. Instead, nearly every "fix" has gone for Mr. Franken, in some cases under strange circumstances.

For example, there was Friday night's announcement by Minneapolis's director of elections that she'd forgotten to count 32 absentee ballots in her car. The Coleman campaign scrambled to get a county judge to halt the counting of these absentees, since it was impossible to prove their integrity 72 hours after the polls closed. The judge refused on grounds that she lacked jurisdiction.

Up in Two Harbors, another liberal outpost, Mr. Franken picked up an additional 246 votes. In Partridge Township, he racked up another 100. Election officials in both places claim they initially miscommunicated the numbers. Odd, because in the Two Harbors precinct, none of the other contests recorded any changes in their vote totals.

According to conservative statistician John Lott, Mr. Franken's gains so far are 2.5 times the corrections made for Barack Obama in the state, and nearly three times the gains for Democrats across Minnesota Congressional races. Mr. Lott notes that Mr. Franken's "new" votes equal more than all the changes for all the precincts in the entire state for the Presidential, Congressional and statehouse races combined (482 votes).

This entire process is being overseen by Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, who isn't exactly a nonpartisan observer. One of Mr. Ritchie's financial supporters during his 2006 run for office was a 527 group called the Secretary of State Project, which was co-founded by James Rucker, who came from MoveOn.org. The group says it is devoted to putting Democrats in jobs where they can "protect elections."

Mr. Ritchie is also an ally of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or Acorn, of fraudulent voter-registration fame. That relationship might explain why prior to the election Mr. Ritchie waved off evidence of thousands of irregularities on Minnesota voter rolls, claiming that accusations of fraud were nothing more than "desperateness" from Republicans.

In today's Opinion Journal
REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Obama's Lame Duck OpportunityMischief in Minnesota?Same Old Berlin Wall

TODAY'S COLUMNISTS

Business World: Obama's Car Puzzle
– Holman W. JenkinsThe Tilting Yard: Goodbye to All That
– Thomas Frank

COMMENTARY

Is Now the Time to Buy Stocks?
– John H. CochraneKurdistan Is a Model for Iraq
– Masoud BarzaniThis Election Has Not 'Realigned' the Country
– Jennifer MarsicoMr. Franken and fellow Democrats are already waging a full-scale public pressure campaign to help turn the recount their way. That includes a push to turn what should be a straightforward count of existing legal ballots into a complete do-over -- mau-mauing election officials into accepting tossed ballots. The Franken campaign recently showed up before the Hennepin County canvassing board, demanding that its liberal members count 461 previously rejected ballots. To the board's credit, they unanimously voted no.

The Franken campaign has also been wrapping itself around Barack Obama's popularity to increase its recount potential. Minnesota has a voter intent law, which means that election officials can take a second look at ambiguous ballots. Mr. Franken's people are already arguing that a vote for Mr. Obama certainly indicated a vote for Mr. Franken. This can't possibly be true, however, because nearly every campaign poll showed Mr. Franken lagging Mr. Obama by five to 15 percentage points -- and on Election Day he trailed by 12.2%. Mr. Franken ran a nasty, polarizing campaign, and in any case he was part of a three-man contest.

The Coleman team is demanding the tapes from the voting machines on election night, and that's the least Mr. Ritchie can do. The Secretary of State should also investigate miraculous discoveries like the "forgotten" 32 car ballots. He needs to show voters, the press and the Coleman team that he's running a transparent process that focuses on previously counted votes, rather than changing the rules after the election is over.

With their party only three Senate seats from the 60 needed to break a filibuster (and two still not decided), Democrats have a political incentive to cut corners to steal a seat if they can get away with it. Mr. Franken and his left-wing allies also know that if Mr. Franken couldn't win election in this fabulous Democratic year, then the not-so-funnyman never will. If Minnesota wants to retain its reputation as a state with clean elections, it needs to run an honest recount.

 

Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum.

Title: Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2008, 12:03:54 PM

Not always a reliable site, but the subject matter here resonates with me:
========
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/fec_audit_obama/2008/11/19/153172.html?s=al&promo_code=71A1-1

Elections Officials May Audit Obama's Fundraising
Wednesday, November 19, 2008 6:01 PM
By: Kenneth R. Timmerman 

According to a published report earlier this week, the Federal Election Commission is unlikely to vote to audit the Obama campaign finances, and will sweep aside a formal demand for an full audit that was filed by the Republican National Committee on Oct. 6. But interviews with current and former FEC officials, as well as a review of public statements by FEC commissioners, suggest that the commission could pursue an “audit for cause” of the Obama campaign, based in part on allegations of widespread fraud and illegal donors as reported by Newsmax.com and other publications during the election season.

“There are standards in a bureaucratic sense for who might be eligible for an audit for cause,” said FEC spokesman Bob Biersack. “Those are objective standards. Committees that meet those standards are eligible to be audited.”

Confusion or concern with information in the campaign finance reports submitted by the committees are generally what trigger such an audit, Biersack added. Such concerns can include a significant number of donors who have exceeded the limits of $2,300 per election. According to the Obama campaign’s own disclosures, more than 4,000 of its donors fit that bill. Those concerns can also include receiving money from foreign donors. The FEC compiled a list last month of more than 16,000 contributions from overseas sources. A Newsmax survey of roughly one-fifth of those names found 118 individuals who appeared to be foreign citizens.

The Republican National Committee based its demand for an audit of the Obama campaign on reports from Newsmax and other media organizations that suggested widespread irregularities, including taking money from foreign donors and from donors with fictitious names.

“We’re still awaiting action on our complaint and will press forward,” RNC spokesman Alex Conant told Newsmax on Friday.

Three Republicans and three Democrats now sit on the FEC as commissioners. But until June of this year, the commission was crippled because of partisan wrangling.

Helping to cripple the FEC was the junior senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, who placed a “hold” on a Republican nominee in October 2007.  :x That action had the effect of keeping the commission on the sideline for the entire primary season.  :x :x :x

But will the commission act now? Incoming commissioners Don McGahn, a Republican, and Cynthia Bauerly, a Democrat, insisted that they would hear cases at the FEC in terms of their merits, not party affiliation. Even though they had both worked on partisan campaigns in the past, Bauerly told senators during her confirmation hearing in May that “the most important determination is to be objective and to read the law as objectively and fairly as possible.” McGahn said that in his view, commissioners were no longer partisans. “Ultimately, the commission’s core constituency is the general public,” he said at the May 21 hearing.

Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt dismissed talk of an audit earlier this week. “We have had a first rate compliance operation for an unprecedented national grassroots fundraising effort,” he told reporters.

But the Obama campaign more often than not failed to respond within the statutory 60 day limit to the more than dozen letters it received from the FEC asking for clarification of apparent foreign donors, or the refund of excess contributions, a Newsmax review of the correspondance shows.

For example, on April 15, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to refund or reassign contributions from two brothers in the Gaza Strip, Hosam and Monir Edwan. Together, they had given over $31,000 to the Obama campaign. And yet, three months later, much of the money had yet to be returned.

Most of the contributions from the Edwan brothers were made in October 2007, so the Obama campaign was able to use the money for cash-flow when it needed it the most and when the FEC was down to just two commissioners. In the April 15 letter, the FEC failed to point out that the two brothers had listed their address as “Gaza Strip, Rafah,” and had obviously used a foreign currency credit card to make the donations. On May 6, the FEC questioned excessive contributions from a woman identified as Deborah Heitz of La Canada, Calif. As of Jan. 31, 2008, she had given $17,900 to the campaign, nearly eight times the limit per election. In this case, the Obama campaign began refunding the money soon afterwards. But once again, they had gained precious cash flow at the peak of the primary campaign, without ever paying a price.

On June 25, FEC analysts sent the Obama campaign a sharply worded notice with a 58-page single-spaced list of donors whose contributions were over the limits. The June 25 letter first identified excess contributions from a donor named “Will, Good” from Austin, Texas. The list of Mr. Good Will’s contributions the FEC sent the Obama campaign ran seven pages. And yet, the campaign was slow to start returning the money.

As Newsmax revealed in September, the Obama campaign still showed a positive balance from Mr. Good Will of $8,950 as of their Sept. 20, 2008 report to the FEC, three months after they were warned about these contributions in June.


[Editor's Note: See "Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign."]

The FEC letters all include a stern warning, “Failure to adequately respond by the response date noted above could result in an audit or enforcement action.”   And yet, despite repeated delays or just downright refusals to respond to the FEC letters, the Obama campaign has yet not been audited nor has the FEC announced any enforcement action.


Massie Ritsch, a spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics, saw little reason for an audit. “The assumption is, the more money you raise, the less potential there is for any single individual or groups of individuals to corrupt your campaign.” There had been “a few instances of contributions that shouldn’t have made their way into the Obama campaign or the McCain campaign,” he added. But when it came to Obama, “the corrupting influence of a few contributions here or there that shouldn’t have made it in the door is negligible.”


CPR lobbied heavily for the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform act of 2002, which imposed limits on how much federal candidates could raise and spend in their campaigns. The Washinton, DC based group calls itself “nonpartisan, independent, and nonprofit.”


In case you thought that position would have brought them to criticize the Obama campaign for abandoning the McCain-Feingold campaign finance limits, think again.

“Obama's victory in the general election was aided by his tremendous fundraising success,” the CPR website says. “After becoming his party's nominee, Obama declined public financing and the spending limits that came with it, making him the first major-party candidate since the system was created to reject taxpayers' money for the general election.”

On the day after the election. RNC chairman Mike Duncan told reporters at the National Press Club that public financing of presidential campaigns was dead.

“Presidential campaign finance as we know it died last night,” he said. “No major candidate will ever again submit to public funding restrictions. Less than two election cycles since the passage of campaign finance reform, the system has failed.”

On Thursday, the RNC filed filed two additional complaints, one in Louisiana, and the other in Washington, DC, challenging the constitutionality of key parts of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, the official title of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Title: That Fcuker Al Franken
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2008, 08:53:45 AM

WSJ:

Al Franken's campaign takes exception to our recent description of the curious goings-on in Minnesota's Senate vote count. We're delighted to hear his growing vote total is all routine. But who needs to worry about votes discovered in a car when the Franken campaign is now suing in court to steal the election?

Minnesota this week began its official statewide recount, and Mr. Franken isn't hanging on the outcome. Instead, he's trying to conjure up enough other, previously disqualified, ballots to overturn Mr. Coleman's 215-vote lead. The Democrat needs to invent votes because he knows it will be tough to win a normal recount. Minnesota uses optical scanning machines, which are far more accurate than the punchcard paper ballots of the 2000 Florida recount. Prior recounts in Minnesota have resulted in few vote changes.

So off to court he goes, with Mr. Franken demanding that the state canvassing board delay certifying the initial election results. His campaign claims that absentee votes may have been wrongly rejected by election judges. Team Franken filed a lawsuit in Ramsey County (the state's second largest, and an area Mr. Franken won decisively) demanding a list of these absentee voters, so that the Democrat can contact them, get them to declare their ex post facto preference, and, presto, he wins.

The state attorney general's office ruled against a canvassing board delay, finding that certification was purely an administrative function and that any question of absentee ballots ought to be left to the courts. The problem is that at least one court has entertained this Franken ploy. Ramsey County Judge Dale Lindman this week ordered county officials to give Mr. Franken a list of voters who had cast rejected absentee ballots.

In today's Opinion Journal
REVIEW & OUTLOOK

The Waxman DemocratsAl Franken's MinnesotaAmerica the Popular

TODAY'S COLUMNISTS

Declarations: Keep Gates
– Peggy NoonanPotomac Watch: Obama's Senate Play
– Kimberley A. Strassel

COMMENTARY

Al Qaeda Detainees and Congress's Duty
– Michael B. MukaseyThe Auto Makers Are Already Bankrupt
– Paul IngrassiaLessons in Gross National Happiness
– Emily ParkerWhat Do We Really Know About the Uninsured?
– William SnyderPut aside that these ballots have already been ruled on by trained election judges. Put aside, too, the invasion of voter privacy. The real problem of allowing Mr. Franken to conduct his own voter discovery operation is that this is changing the rules after the election has been held. The gambit introduces subjective judgment and political pressure into a voting process that is supposed to be immune to both.

Opening up the rejected-ballot question is also a recipe for potential fraud. When the Franken campaign filed its initial lawsuit demanding access to the voter lists, it used as an example an 84-year-old woman in Beltrami County whose vote was supposedly rejected because she'd had a stroke, and therefore her signature on her absentee ballot did not match the one on file. After some outside investigation, the Franken campaign admitted that the story was not true, and that her ballot had been rejected for entirely different (and legitimate) reasons.

Mr. Franken is also trying to raise public doubt about an "undervote" -- suggesting that only machine error can explain why he received 12.2 percentage points fewer votes than did Barack Obama. But the Senate race had three serious candidates, not two. Maybe fewer Minnesotans liked a left-wing candidate who ran a nasty campaign. In any case, the same Democrats who claimed Florida was "stolen" by faulty ballot machines are now trying to discredit the optical-scanners that they have demanded -- all in order to sway the human judges who'll rule on Mr. Franken's legal challenges.

The joker's goal is to sow enough doubt about the vote so that if he loses the recount he can attract public support to challenge the final result in court. This is a slap at Minnesota, which, so far at least, appears to be doing all it can to make the recount open and transparent. Minnesota should respond by telling Mr. Franken that even a celebrity has to play by the rules.

 

Title: Oretga & Chavez in Nicaragua
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 24, 2008, 12:16:50 AM

Every crisis presents opportunity. That seems to be the thinking of Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, who is trying to steal an election while much of the world is focused on the financial upheaval threatening the global economy.

 
AP
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega (left) embraces Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez in Caracas, Venezuela, Jan. 25, 2008.

On Nov. 9, Nicaragua held municipal elections in 146 cities and towns. For such a tiny country these races are big, because mayors have a great deal of autonomy and can act as a check on central government power. But this round of balloting was even more important than usual. Consolidating Marxist power in Nicaragua is a prime goal of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez and Mr. Ortega is supposed to carry out the plan. If he fails it will be another setback for the hard-left's 30-year dream of establishing a communist foothold in Central America.

Mr. Ortega ruled the country from 1979-1990 as a Sandinista dictator. Since winning the presidency in 2006 with 37% of the vote, he has demonstrated that, like his friend Mr. Chávez, he finds institutional checks and balances on his power rather inconvenient. Mr. Ortega's popularity rating is down to about 20%, suggesting that although he is the executive in charge, a lot of Nicaraguans now wish it weren't so.

It is within this reality that Mr. Ortega seems to have decided that Sandinista victories in the Nov. 9 municipal elections were a must. The government has proclaimed Sandinista victories in 94 municipalities, but the opposition is claiming fraud. A bitter struggle is under way.

Sandinista shenanigans began long before the polls opened. Not surprisingly, given Mr. Ortega's history as a "revolutionary," violence was a key campaign tactic. But don't take my word for it. No less than the nongovernmental organization known as the Washington Office on Latin America -- renowned for its left-leaning politics -- warned of state-sponsored repression ahead of the vote.

In a Nov. 6 communication, the organization wrote: "We are alarmed by the growing climate of intolerance for those who are perceived as critics of the federal government. The physical attack on a march of opposition party activists, and the apparent unwillingness of the police to restore order, the criminal investigations of several civil society organizations and their leaders, as well as the investigation of international NGOs that have funded some of these organizations, is extremely troubling." The Washington Office on Latin America also referenced "violent acts by government supporters against human rights defenders."

Terror was not the only tool at Mr. Ortega's disposal. As this column discussed several weeks ago, his campaign efforts were underwritten by Mr. Chávez, who sends millions of dollars of oil to Mr. Ortega but asks to be paid for only 50% of it. The balance is a long-term loan. This oil is then sold at market prices and the profit is used to fund a social investment operation called Albanisa and a Sandinista political slush fund called Albacaruna. The director of the Nicaraguan oil company and of Albanisa is also the treasurer of the Sandinista party. The Sandinistas also have control over the judiciary and the Supreme Electoral Council, which disqualified two political parties from even competing on the ballot.

But Mr. Ortega still had lingering doubts about his odds. And perhaps because he has so long been the darling of the international left, he seems to have decided he could improve those odds without scrutiny.

Step one was to block the Organization of American States, the European Union and the Carter Center from receiving credentials to observe the balloting. He even barred Nicaragua's highly respected independent watchdog, Ethics and Transparency -- which had recognized Mr. Ortega's 2006 victory -- from the polling stations.

Despite getting shut out, Ethics and Transparency managed to post observers to watch from outside polling stations. It estimated that one-third of the stations experienced irregularities. There were also reports that in some places opposition-party observers were kicked out of polling stations, and some polling stations closed ahead of schedule.

The post of Managua mayor is one of the most hotly contested races. Constitutionalist Liberal Party (PLC) candidate Eduardo Montealegre is challenging the "victory" of Sandinista Alexis Arguello. Mr. Montealegre, who graciously accepted his defeat to Mr. Ortega in the 2006 presidential election, says that his party made its own vote tallies and that he won. The Catholic Church and the country's two largest business groups are backing his call for a recount. The Supreme Electoral Council has agreed to a recount, but behind closed doors with no observers.

Mr. Montealegre's efforts to lead rallies in favor of a transparent recount have been broken up by Sandinistas wielding bats and lobbing rocks. But he insists that holding firm is about more than the office of mayor. "It's more fundamental," he says. "It's about dictatorship versus democracy."

Write to O'Grady@wsj.com

 

Title: Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al) - Minneapolis recount
Post by: DougMacG on November 24, 2008, 08:25:21 AM

Speaking of pirates, Horn of Africa, Sharia Law, Islam in America and which thread to put things in, I think I'll put this one straight into voter fraud...  Somalis form the largest bloc of African immigrants to the United States and the Twin Cities is home to the largest population of Somali immigrants in the United States. Links in the original to this story report widespread false family tie immigration in the Somali community.  Rather than call in the feds, our congressman Kieth Ellison calls in the real Somali leaders(aka al qaida?) to campaign for Al Franken and get out the vote for the filibuster proof majority for an Obama and Pelosi friendly senate.  One in 5 who voted in Minneapolis registered same day and it is illegal to ask for ID???

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/11/022145.php

 From Mogadishu to Minneapolis
Share Post   Print
November 24, 2008 Posted by Scott at 5:57 AM

The Twin Cities is home to the largest population of Somali immigrants in the United States. In her latest Washington Times column, Diana West reports the discovery of immigration fraud involving the P-3 family designation in the current United States Refugee Admissions Program:

    Within the last week...the State Department confirmed that massive immigration fraud has been perpetrated overwhelmingly by Africans claimed as close kin (parent, spouse, minor child) by legal residents in the United States. (According to a report in the City Pages in Minneapolis, this scam has been netting some unknowns along the food chain up to $10,000 per head.) Given that Somalis form the largest bloc of African immigrants to the United States, this becomes another story with Somalis playing a starring role.

West's column cites this City Pages article and this State Department fact sheet on the fraud. West concludes her column with a look at the ramifications on Minnesota politics:

    Rep. Keith Ellison, Minnesota Democrat, who famously swore his 2007 oath of office on the Koran as the first Muslim elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, routinely declares that his 7,000-vote margin of victory came from Somali Muslims. Last month, Mr. Ellison was campaigning for that same Somali Muslim vote on behalf of Mr. Franken.

    And what's newsworthy about that? In this case, the point is not that Mr. Ellison was campaigning for the Somali vote, but rather with whom he was campaigning. According to AsianTribune.com, after Mr. Ellison made a standard, if Somalii-oriented campaign pitch on behalf of Mr. Franken before a gathering of Minnesota Somalis, another speaker appeared before the crowd.

    Described in the report as a "highly regarded prominent Somali traditional leader" -- i.e., a Somali leader from Somalia, not Minnesota -- Abdullahi Ugas Farah spoke on behalf of the Ellison-Franken cause. "In order for Keith to be helpful to the situation in Somalia, you must also elect Al Franken to the Senate," he said.

    Now, there's something new on the American hustings: a "Somali traditional" leader. Curious, I Googled Mr. Farah and came up with one news story, a 2003 brief from the Asia Africa Intelligence Wire headlined, "New Islamic court opens in Mogadishu." The story reported that Mr. Farah was one of two speakers who presided over the opening ceremony for a new Sharia court in Mogadishu's Shirkole area. From Sharia courts in Mogadishu to an Al Franken rally in Minnesota.

    Only in ... America?

West notes that the State Department is punting the question of what to do with fradulently admitted Somalis over to the Department of Homeland Security. And what is DHS doing with it? My guess is that the fraudulently admitted Somalis have about as much to fear from DHS as does President-elect Obama's deportable auntie Zeutuni. Help is on the way!

Title: Re: Vote Fraud? aka the Al Franken campaign
Post by: DougMacG on December 08, 2008, 10:24:24 PM

Still not knowing where to post this other than under vote fraud, vote discrepancies and ACORN which rules the disputed districts in liberal, urban Minneapolis...

Ahead of the Drudge Report, the StarTribune the MN Sec. of State, I am declaring the recount over and Norm Coleman the winner.  Coleman won the original vote count with 100% of precincts reporting.  He won the recount with 100% of the precincts reporting.  Friends of Franken have found ballots in places that would make Sandy Berger blush, but not enough to close the gap. Now they want counted the votes they canNOT find.  Since these ballots don't exist anywhere for the recount, most likely they were just run twice by the helpful and honest ACORN workers running the polling place on election day.

The 'campaigns' have raised at least another $4 million combined since the campaign ended, just an interesting side note.

Another sidenote is that Obama received almost 30% more votes in Minnesota than the Democrat endorsed senate candidate Al Franken.

What remains now is the challenge of the individual scoring of ballots in the recount.  There is a sample of challenged ballots at the CBS affiliate television station website if you want to try your luck at ruling on them: http://wcco.com/slideshows/senate.race.recount.20.877400.html

Powerline has had good coverage all along on this ongoing story with an update tonight: http://www.powerlineblog.com/

Minneapolis Gives Up On "Missing" Ballots

December 8, 2008 by John Hinderacker at 10:59 PM

The City of Minneapolis announced tonight that it is giving up its search for the 133 "missing" ballots from a Dinkytown precinct near the University of Minnesota. Reactions to the announcement were counter-intuitive; the Al Franken campaign took it calmly, while Norm Coleman's campaign "questioned suspending the search."

The Coleman camp apparently thinks that calling off the search is a prelude to Franken's effort to have the results of the hand recount rejected in favor of the tally shown on the precinct's tape at the end of the day on November 4. I'm sure they're right about that; Franken will argue that the ballots are gone, but the best evidence of how they were cast is the contemporaneous record of the tape from the voting machine.

That position is not without logic, but it raises an obvious question: if we trust the tapes on the voting machines more than the results of a hand recount of paper ballots, why are we doing the recount at all? There is no obvious good answer to that question, although the precinct's record of the number of voters tallies with the higher number.

The 133 ballots at issue apparently netted Franken 46 votes; whether they were legitimately-cast ballots or, perhaps, the result of someone running ballots through the machine twice or some similar shenanigans is the question at issue. The bottom line is that Norm Coleman will emerge from the recount (pending resolution of challenged ballots) by either 192 votes or, if the 133 "missing" ballots are not counted, 238 votes.

Title: Re: Vote Fraud (ACORN et al)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 10, 2008, 06:06:25 PM

Ann Coulter IMHO has become highly erratic in the quality of her work.  That said, this one seems rather lucid.  Here's her take on the shenanigans in Minnesota:
=============
Minnesota Ballots: Land of 10,000 Fakes
by  Ann Coulter

 
What is the point of having a hand recount of ballots in the Minnesota Senate race if the Democratic secretary of state is going to use the election night totals in precincts where it will benefit Democrat Al Franken?
   
Either the hand recount produces a better, more accurate count, or there was no point to the state spending roughly $100,000 to conduct the hand recount in the first place.
   
But that is exactly what the George Soros-supported secretary of state has agreed to do in the case of a Dinkytown precinct near the University of Minnesota. The hand recount of the liberal precinct produced 133 fewer ballots than the original count on election night and, more important, 46 fewer votes for Franken.
   
So he's proposing to defer to the election night total over the recount tally.
   
There are no "missing" ballots in Dinkytown. Ballots were run through the voting machines twice on election night. Last week, Minneapolis elections director Cindy Reichert explained they already knew for a fact that 129 ballots had been run through machines twice on election night, which pretty closely matched the 133 allegedly "missing" ballots.
   
As Reichert said, "There are human errors that are made on Election Day." According to an article in the Dec. 2, 2008, St. Paul Pioneer Press, Reichert was "confident that that's what happened" and that "we have all the ballot envelopes here."   
   
But after relentless badgering by the Franken campaign, now Reichert isn't so sure anymore. So the new plan is for Minneapolis to submit both the election night total from Dinkytown -- which gives Franken an extra 46 votes -- and the meticulous hand recount total, which does not, and allow the canvassing board to decide which to use.
   
The 129 ballots that Reichert said were run through the machines twice on election night could end up being counted twice. 
   
In all other precincts, the initial tallies from election night are treated as highly unreliable rough approximations of the actual vote, while the results from the hand recount are regarded as the absolute truth.
   
Only in the Dinkytown precinct, where the election night total gave Franken an additional 46 votes, does the state treat the hand recount as an error-prone joke compared to the highly accurate election night vote.
   
The Soros-supported Secretary of State Mark Ritchie explains that there is "precedent" for counting election night totals rather than the recount totals. If so, how about using the election night tally from some of the precincts that gave Coleman more votes on election night?
   
Highly implausible, post-election "corrections" in just three Democratic precincts -- Two Harbors, Mountain Iron and Partridge Township -- cost Coleman 446 votes. But I note that Ritchie doesn't propose deferring to the election night totals there.
   
The Minneapolis Star Tribune attributed the 436-vote "correction" in Franken's favor to "exhausted county officials." Were they more exhausted in those three precincts than in Dinkytown?
   
Either the post-election tally is better than the election night tally or it isn't. Cherry-picking only those election night results Ritchie likes isn't an attempt to get an accurate vote-count; it's an attempt to get a Democrat in the U.S. Senate.
   
If Minnesota is going to accept the election night tally from Dinkytown, why not from any of these precincts where Coleman lost votes under far more suspicious circumstances?  And why are guys named "Al" always caught trying to steal elections?
   
Wholly apart from the outrageous inconsistency of deciding that some election night tallies trump the hand recount and some don't, Franken's miraculous acquisition of more than 500 votes from heavily Democratic precincts in post-election "corrections" wasn't believable on its face -- and that's even accounting for the fact that Franken voters tend to be stupider than average and therefore more likely to fill out their ballots incorrectly.
   
Corrections in all other 2008 races combined led to only 482 changes in the entire state of Minnesota. The idea that typo "corrections" in one single contest from only three precincts, out of more than 4,000 precincts, could lead to 436 "corrections" benefiting Franken is manifestly absurd.
   
Ritchie's proposal to accept the election night count from one precinct is a stunning admission that even he doesn't believe a hand recount is any more accurate than the original election night tally. 
   
To be sure, endlessly recounting ballots doesn't yield more accurate results, it just creates different results. There is no reason to think a tabulation is more accurate because it occurred later in time.
   
But then why have a recount at all?  If the state of Minnesota is going to spend $100,000 and endless man-hours to conduct a meticulous hand recount on the grounds that it is more accurate, the state ought to at least pretend to believe in its own recount.
   
Election recounts are never intended to get more accurate results. They are simply opportunities for Democrats to manufacture new votes and steal elections.
   
And once again, Republicans are asleep at the wheel while another close election is being openly stolen by the man whose contributions to western civilization include the "Planet of The Enormous Hooters" sketch on "SNL."

Title: Unsecret donations
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 26, 2008, 05:52:29 AM

By JOHN R. LOTT JR. and BRADLEY SMITH
How would you like elections without secret ballots? To most people, this would be absurd.

We have secret balloting for obvious reasons. Politics frequently generates hot tempers. People can put up yard signs or wear political buttons if they want. But not everyone feels comfortable making his or her positions public -- many worry that their choice might offend or anger someone else. They fear losing their jobs or facing boycotts of their businesses.

And yet the mandatory public disclosure of financial donations to political campaigns in almost every state and at the federal level renders people's fears and vulnerability all too real. Proposition 8 -- California's recently passed constitutional amendment to outlaw gay marriage by ensuring that marriage in that state remains between a man and a woman -- is a dramatic case in point. Its passage has generated retaliation against those who supported it, once their financial support was made public and put online.

For example, when it was discovered that Scott Eckern, director of the nonprofit California Musical Theater in Sacramento, had given $1,000 to Yes on 8, the theater was deluged with criticism from prominent artists. Mr. Eckern was forced to resign.

The Opinion Journal Widget
Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.
Richard Raddon, the director of the L.A. Film Festival, donated $1,500 to Yes on 8. A threatened boycott and picketing of the next festival forced him to resign. Alan Stock, the chief executive of the Cinemark theater chain, gave $9,999. Cinemark is facing a boycott, and so is the gay-friendly Sundance Film Festival because it uses a Cinemark theater to screen some of its films.

A Palo Alto dentist lost patients as a result of his $1,000 donation. A restaurant manager in Los Angeles gave a $100 personal donation, triggering a demonstration and boycott against her restaurant. The pressure was so intense that Marjorie Christoffersen, who had managed the place for 26 years, resigned.

These are just a few instances that have come to light, and the ramifications are still occurring over a month after the election. The larger point of this spectacle is its implications for the future: to intimidate people who donate to controversial campaigns.

The question is not whether Prop. 8 should have passed, but whether its supporters (or opponents) should have their political preferences protected in the same way that voters are protected. Is there any reason to think that the repercussions Mr. Eckern faced for donating to Prop. 8 would be different if it were revealed that instead of donating, he had voted for it?

Indeed, supporters of Prop. 8 engaged in pressure tactics. At least one businessman who donated to "No on 8," Jim Abbott of Abbott & Associates, a real estate firm in San Diego, received a letter from the Prop. 8 Executive Committee threatening to publish his company's name if he didn't also donate to the "Yes on 8" campaign.

In each case, the law required disclosure of these individuals' financial support for Prop. 8. Supposedly, the reason for requiring disclosure of campaign contributions is to allow voters to police politicians who might otherwise become beholden to financiers by letting voters know "who is behind the message." But in a referendum vote such as Prop. 8, there are no office holders to be beholden to big donors.

Does anyone believe that in campaigns costing millions of dollars a donation of $100, or even $1,000 or $10,000 will give the donor "undue" influence? Over whom? Meanwhile, voters learn little by knowing the names and personal information of thousands of small contributors.

Besides, it is not the case that voters would have no recourse when it comes to the financial backers of politicians or initiatives. Even without mandatory disclosure rules, the unwillingness to release donation information can itself become a campaign issue. If voters want to know who donated, there will be pressure to disclose that information. Possibly voters will be most concerned about who the donors are when regulatory issues are being debated. But that is for them to decide. They can always vote "no."

In Today's Opinion Journal
 

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Obama's Secretary of EarmarksBridges to EverywhereStill Oklahoma's Most Wanted

TODAY'S COLUMNIST

Declarations: A Year for the Books
– Peggy Noonan

COMMENTARY

Obama Picks a Moderate on Education
– Collin LevyThe Economic News Isn't All Bleak – Zachary KarabellDonor Disclosure Has Its Downsides
– John R. Lott Jr. and Bradley SmithBush Is a Book Lover
– Karl RoveA Brother's Plea: Remember Burma
– Min ZinIronically, it has long been minorities who have benefited the most from anonymous speech. In the 1950s, for example, Southern states sought to obtain membership lists of the NAACP in the name of the public's "right to know." Such disclosure would have destroyed the NAACP's financial base in the South and opened its supporters to threats and violence. It took a Supreme Court ruling in NAACP v. Alabama (1958) to protect the privacy of the NAACP and its supporters on First Amendment grounds. And more recently, it has usually been supporters of gay rights who have preferred to keep their support quiet.

There is another problem with publicizing donations in political elections: It tends to entrench powerful politicians whom donors fear alienating. If business executives give money to a committee chairman's opponent, they often fear retribution.

Other threats are more personal. For example, in 2004 Gigi Brienza contributed $500 to the John Edwards presidential campaign. An extremist animal rights group used that information to list Ms. Brienza's home address (and similarly, that of dozens of co-workers) on a Web site, under the ominous heading, "Now you know where to find them." Her "offense," also revealed from the campaign finance records, was that she worked for a pharmaceutical company that tested its products on animals.

In the aftermath of Prop. 8 we can glimpse a very ugly future. As anyone who has had their political yard signs torn down can imagine, with today's easy access to donor information on the Internet, any crank or unhinged individual can obtain information on his political opponents, including work and home addresses, all but instantaneously. When even donations as small as $100 trigger demonstrations, it is hard to know how one will feel safe in supporting causes one believes in.

Mr. Lott, a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland, is the author of "Freedomnomics" (Regnery, 2007). Mr. Smith, a former Federal Election Commission commissioner, is chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics and professor of law at Capital University in Columbus, Ohio.

 

Title: WSJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 31, 2008, 01:02:24 AM

For those who thought the new era of Democratic governance would be dull, we present this year's Senate replacement follies. Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich kept the entertainment going yesterday by defying just about everyone and nominating former state Attorney General Roland Burris to the seat being vacated by President-elect Obama.

Recall that federal prosecutors had gone public with their criminal complaint against Mr. Blagojevich earlier this month expressly to deter him from making such an appointment. Mr. Obama had then declared that the Governor should not make an appointment, and Senate Democrats had said they wouldn't seat anyone Mr. Blagojevich did appoint. Majority Leader Harry Reid repeated that pledge yesterday regarding Mr. Burris, who lost to the Governor in a primary in 2002 but then was vice chairman of his transition team.


Democrats who run the state assembly are still trying to impeach Mr. Blagojevich, but meantime they've stepped back from allowing a special election for the seat. Democrats hope to dump the Governor and then have his replacement appoint a different Democrat. No doubt they're afraid Republicans might win given this exquisite display of competent, honest Democratic government.

Meanwhile, Democrats in New York are fighting over Caroline Kennedy's campaign to be appointed to the Senate seat being vacated by Secretary of State nominee Hillary Clinton. Former Democrat and former Republican and now independent Mayor Mike Bloomberg is all for the idea, as reportedly is Mr. Obama, whom the daughter of JFK and niece of Senator Ted Kennedy endorsed at a crucial moment during the Presidential primaries. Not so happy is New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, the son of a former three-term Governor, who would like the seat himself and was once married to a Kennedy.


Caught in the middle is Democrat David Paterson, who will appoint a new Senator but is Governor himself only because Eliot Spitzer flamed out with a prostitute. Ms. Kennedy hasn't helped herself with a recent spate of interviews showing she doesn't know very much about many public issues. But then how much worse could she be than the professional politicians who populate Albany or represent New York in Washington? Democrats will outnumber Republicans in New York's House delegation next year, 26-3, and it speaks volumes about their abilities that Mr. Paterson might choose a dynastic neophyte over any of them.

Lest it be overlooked, there's also the spectacle in Delaware, where the soon-to-depart Joe Biden has arranged to have a crony appointed to take his Senate seat of 36 years. Edward "Ted" Kaufman, a former aide to Mr. Biden, is expected to keep the seat away from a more ambitious Democrat for two years, until Joe's son Beau Biden, the state attorney general, can return from his National Guard tour in Iraq and run in 2010 to maintain the family business.

And don't forget Colorado, where a mooted Senate replacement for Secretary of Interior nominee Ken Salazar is his brother, Congressman John Salazar. Democratic Governor Bill Ritter, who has benefited from the money and organization of the Salazar political machine, will make that appointment.

So to recap all of this change you can believe in: A Kennedy and Cuomo are competing to succeed a Clinton in New York; the skids are greased for a Biden to replace a Biden in Delaware; one Salazar might replace another in Colorado; and a Governor charged with political corruption in Illinois wants one of his cronies to succeed the President-elect. Let's just say we're looking forward to 2009.

Title: WSJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 31, 2008, 01:09:10 AM

Second post:

By TRENT ENGLAND
Olympia, Wash.

Sorry Minnesota, but the sequel is never as good as the original.

For those who watched the Washington State governor's race recounts in 2004, the ongoing recount drama in Minnesota is just another rehash of the same script -- albeit for a U.S. Senate seat that might put Democrats one vote away from a filibuster-proof majority.

Four years ago in Washington, Democratic Party candidate Christine Gregoire lost the first count, lost the recount, and then won a second, highly dubious recount by 133 votes. In Minnesota, where Sen. Norm Coleman is defending his seat against comedian-turned-candidate Al Franken, the first count showed Mr. Coleman up 725 votes. Today, thanks to another dubious recount, Mr. Franken is apparently in the lead.

Razor-thin margins like these put election systems to the test. As the old proverb goes, they are a crisis and an opportunity. Yet the crises keep coming and the opportunities continue to be squandered. It's time to learn the lessons of the recount wars and address the systemic flaws in our election processes. Indeed, the price of a continued decline in voter confidence is too troubling for most Americans to comprehend.

In Washington's 2004 gubernatorial election, at least 1,392 felons illegally voted, 252 provisional ballots were wrongly counted, and 19 votes were cast from beyond the grave, according to Chelan County Superior Court Judge John Bridges's opinion in a case brought by Dino Rossi, Ms. Gregoire's Republican opponent.

The Opinion Journal Widget
Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.
Election workers in King County (where Seattle is located) "enhanced" 55,177 ballots to make it easier for tabulating machines to read them -- even though the county had failed to establish written procedures as required by state law. In some cases, individual election workers modified voted ballots using black felt markers and white-out tape while observers were kept at a distance that prevented meaningful observation. Nine separate times, King County "discovered" and counted unsecured ballots.

Nevertheless, Ms. Gregoire lost to Mr. Rossi by 261 votes.

An automatic recount reduced Mr. Rossi's lead to just 42 votes. The Gregoire campaign demanded a state-wide hand recount, a time-consuming and expensive process that state law says the challenger must pay for (if the result changes, the challenger is reimbursed). Big labor unions joined with far-left groups like MoveOn.org to put up the money for Ms. Gregoire's third-time's-the-charm ballot shuffle.

During the recount process, five counties found new, uncounted, unsecured ballots and added them into their totals. King County officials admitted publicly that ballot reconciliation reports were falsified in an attempt to conceal variations between the number of votes counted and the number of voters who voted (two elections workers were disciplined as a result).

By the end, 3,539 votes more than the number of voters who voted were tabulated. Four other swing counties provided an additional 4,880 mystery ballots. Ms. Gregoire was the victor by a margin of 133 votes.

That margin -- 133 votes -- happens to be the same number of ballots that Minneapolis election officials are currently missing. The initial vote tally in one Democrat-leaning precinct counted 133 more ballots than officials have been able to find for the Senate recounts. The Minnesota canvassing board decided on Dec. 12 to allow Minneapolis simply to ignore the recount and go with the original number. This provided a 46-vote boost for Mr. Franken, about the same as his current projected lead. The board also "requested" that counties reconsider rejected absentee ballots, a new and novel part of the recount procedure that is also expected to favor Mr. Franken.

Something is wrong when a victorious candidate owes more thanks to vote counters than to voters. Such was the case in Washington in 2004, and Minnesota is poised to follow in its footsteps in 2008.

It need not be this way. After 2004, the Evergreen Freedom Foundation produced a 42-page report offering a dozen solutions. While a few were implemented, most were simply ignored by officials content to cross their fingers and hope the next close election is in someone else's jurisdiction.

Some reforms are simply educational and cultural; others are fundamental and essential. Election officials need to understand current federal and state laws and regulations governing the entire election process, including recounts. Those responsible for elections must also inculcate a culture of compliance among election staff, including temporary staff hired at election time.

From the moment they are printed, ballots should be isolated and guarded and their chain of custody recorded. Officials with rule-making authority are responsible for establishing processes that clarify how ballots are to be handled, stored, counted, and, if necessary, recounted.


Most important to maintaining and increasing public faith in elections is improving openness, especially leveraging Internet technology to make anyone a potential election observer. The Minneapolis Star Tribune's project to put all 6,700 contested ballots in the Senate race on the Web, so people can compare their own judgments to those of the canvassing board, is but one example. Election officials who have nothing to hide should be putting as much as possible online as quickly as possible.

Citizens and the media might also take a closer look at some of the individuals and organizations involved in monkeying with and even overturning elections. Both Mr. Franken and Ms. Gregoire were endorsed by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now -- Acorn -- a group under investigation in several states for suspected voter registration chicanery.

The man overseeing the Senate recount, Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, was also endorsed by Acorn, and his election campaign in 2006 was funded in part by something called "The Secretary of State Project." This latter group, founded by MoveOn.org's former grass-roots director, exists solely to install far-left candidates as secretaries of state in swing states.

Close elections will always stir controversy. They will often require recounts to validate the results. Yet the Washington and Minnesota recounts offer cautionary tales. The democratic process is too important to be disregarded until a virtual tie forces us to pay attention. Regardless of which candidates win our elections, the voters -- not the vote counters -- should win every time.

Mr. England is director of the Citizenship and Governance Center at the Evergreen Freedom Foundation.

Title: WSJ: Funny Business in Minnesota
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2009, 01:17:33 AM

Strange things keep happening in Minnesota, where the disputed recount in the Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken may be nearing a dubious outcome. Thanks to the machinations of Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and a meek state Canvassing Board, Mr. Franken may emerge as an illegitimate victor.

 
APMr. Franken started the recount 215 votes behind Senator Coleman, but he now claims a 225-vote lead and suddenly the man who was insisting on "counting every vote" wants to shut the process down. He's getting help from Mr. Ritchie and his four fellow Canvassing Board members, who have delivered inconsistent rulings and are ignoring glaring problems with the tallies.

Under Minnesota law, election officials are required to make a duplicate ballot if the original is damaged during Election Night counting. Officials are supposed to mark these as "duplicate" and segregate the original ballots. But it appears some officials may have failed to mark ballots as duplicates, which are now being counted in addition to the originals. This helps explain why more than 25 precincts now have more ballots than voters who signed in to vote. By some estimates this double counting has yielded Mr. Franken an additional 80 to 100 votes.

This disenfranchises Minnesotans whose vote counted only once. And one Canvassing Board member, State Supreme Court Justice G. Barry Anderson, has acknowledged that "very likely there was a double counting." Yet the board insists that it lacks the authority to question local officials and it is merely adding the inflated numbers to the totals.

In other cases, the board has been flagrantly inconsistent. Last month, Mr. Franken's campaign charged that one Hennepin County (Minneapolis) precinct had "lost" 133 votes, since the hand recount showed fewer ballots than machine votes recorded on Election Night. Though there is no proof to this missing vote charge -- officials may have accidentally run the ballots through the machine twice on Election Night -- the Canvassing Board chose to go with the Election Night total, rather than the actual number of ballots in the recount. That decision gave Mr. Franken a gain of 46 votes.

The Opinion Journal Widget
Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.
Meanwhile, a Ramsey County precinct ended up with 177 more ballots than there were recorded votes on Election Night. In that case, the board decided to go with the extra ballots, rather than the Election Night total, even though the county is now showing more ballots than voters in the precinct. This gave Mr. Franken a net gain of 37 votes, which means he's benefited both ways from the board's inconsistency.

And then there are the absentee ballots. The Franken campaign initially howled that some absentee votes had been erroneously rejected by local officials. Counties were supposed to review their absentees and create a list of those they believed were mistakenly rejected. Many Franken-leaning counties did so, submitting 1,350 ballots to include in the results. But many Coleman-leaning counties have yet to complete a re-examination. Despite this lack of uniformity, and though the state Supreme Court has yet to rule on a Coleman request to standardize this absentee review, Mr. Ritchie's office nonetheless plowed through the incomplete pile of 1,350 absentees this weekend, padding Mr. Franken's edge by a further 176 votes.

Both campaigns have also suggested that Mr. Ritchie's office made mistakes in tabulating votes that had been challenged by either of the campaigns. And the Canvassing Board appears to have applied inconsistent standards in how it decided some of these challenged votes -- in ways that, again on net, have favored Mr. Franken.

The question is how the board can certify a fair and accurate election result given these multiple recount problems. Yet that is precisely what the five members seem prepared to do when they meet today. Some members seem to have concluded that because one of the candidates will challenge the result in any event, why not get on with it and leave it to the courts? Mr. Coleman will certainly have grounds to contest the result in court, but he'll be at a disadvantage given that courts are understandably reluctant to overrule a certified outcome.

Meanwhile, Minnesota's other Senator, Amy Klobuchar, is already saying her fellow Democrats should seat Mr. Franken when the 111th Congress begins this week if the Canvassing Board certifies him as the winner. This contradicts Minnesota law, which says the state cannot award a certificate of election if one party contests the results. Ms. Klobuchar is trying to create the public perception of a fait accompli, all the better to make Mr. Coleman look like a sore loser and build pressure on him to drop his legal challenge despite the funny recount business.

Minnesotans like to think that their state isn't like New Jersey or Louisiana, and typically it isn't. But we can't recall a similar recount involving optical scanning machines that has changed so many votes, and in which nearly every crucial decision worked to the advantage of the same candidate. The Coleman campaign clearly misjudged the politics here, and the apparent willingness of a partisan like Mr. Ritchie to help his preferred candidate, Mr. Franken. If the Canvassing Board certifies Mr. Franken as the winner based on the current count, it will be anointing a tainted and undeserving Senator.

 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al) and more
Post by: ccp on January 05, 2009, 07:54:39 AM

This is exactly the outcome that was predicted.  Franken et al will keep demanding recounts after recounts until they can come up with a total that puts him ahead and then suddenly the process is over and the Democratic machine will declare him the winner.

Lets hear the MSM speaking of "voter disenfranchisement" now.

Title: Burris and Franken
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2009, 09:43:47 AM

PD WSJ

How Burris and Franken Became a Matched Set

There was a reason that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told NBC News yesterday he is willing to "negotiate" a solution to the seating of Roland Burris, the Illinois Democrat appointed to take the vacant Senate seat held by Barack Obama until November.

"I'm an old trial lawyer," Mr. Reid said. "There's always room to negotiate." That's curious, given Mr. Reid's formerly adamant stance that Mr. Burris's appointment is fatally tainted because it was made by disgraced Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

One explanation for Mr. Reid's flexibility may be the political heat Senate Democrats would take for failing to seat an African-American in a body that currently has no blacks as members. But another is that Democrats might face charges of hypocrisy if on the same day they refuse to seat Mr. Burris, they move to seat Democrat Al Franken as the senator from Minnesota. A key argument Democrats are using to justify not seating Mr. Burris is that the Illinois Secretary of State is refusing to issue a certificate of appointment. But Mr. Franken, who currently leads Republican Norm Coleman by 225 votes, will lack a certificate of election from his state's Secretary of State when the Senate convenes tomorrow. While the state's canvassing board will likely declare Mr. Franken the winner today, Minnesota law holds that the Secretary of State can't certify Mr. Franken as the official winner until Mr. Coleman's expected legal challenge of the result is resolved.

But that hasn't stopped leading Democrats from moving to have Mr. Franken seated anyway. "With the Minnesota recount complete, it is now clear that Al Franken won the election. The Canvassing Board will meet tomorrow to wrap up its work and certify him the winner, and while there are still possible legal issues that will run their course, there is no longer any doubt who will be the next Senator from Minnesota," New York Senator Chuck Schumer said yesterday, echoing comments made last week by Minnesota's own Senator Amy Klobuchar.

If Democrats want to seat Mr. Franken despite the cloud hanging over the disputed recount that gave him a narrow lead only last week, they will have trouble explaining why they are denying Mr. Burris his seat, even though he had no role in Governor Blagojevich's alleged attempts to sell a Senate appointment. That's why Senator Reid now says the Senate could accept Mr. Burris if the appointment were made by a new Illinois governor or by Lt. Governor Pat Quinn, who is expected to become governor after Mr. Blagojevich is removed from office.

That says to me Mr. Quinn is being leaned on by Mr. Reid to signal that he would choose Mr. Burris if he becomes governor, thereby giving Democrats an out. But Mr. Quinn would simply be rubber-stamping the same choice that Senate Democrats thought unacceptable just last week. Senate Democrats should not be allowed to wiggle free of their previous position so easily, especially if they simultaneously try to seat Mr. Franken over the objections of Senate Republicans.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al) and more
Post by: DougMacG on January 05, 2009, 10:11:15 AM

"Franken [kept] demanding recounts after recounts until they can come up with a total that puts him ahead and then suddenly the process is over and the Democratic machine [declared] him the winner."

Like Florida, they always look harder for votes in the areas known to be liberal.  They found ballots in trunks of cars and they 'recounted duplicates' where no originals exist.  If they needed more they were ready to look in Sandy Berger's briefs.  All but one update I think had Franken gaining.  Amazingly with all ballots opened, found or read with a crystal ball, there were no additions to the other totals such as third party candidate who had an impressive 15% to begin with, and no corrections or updates on any other race.

Perhaps this race was lost when the voters removed a perfectly good, fair, competent and scandal-free Secretary of State, Mary Kiffmeyer, and put in the move-on-dot-org replacement in an expensive, energetic and needlessly vicious battle on an off-year.  The new Secretary of State made himself the tie-breaking vote on the balanced recount panel.  Go figure.

Now they have the total vote margin just higher than each of the shenanigans that led to the shift in the lead so that any one court ruling will not change the result.
---

My proposal is extreme, but effective.  Since elections are a form of counting heads, in the spirit of sharia law I propose that we behead those guilty of election fraud.  Then when we count again or vote again we won't mistakenly include them.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al) and more
Post by: ccp on January 05, 2009, 10:55:00 AM

It's too bad they won't have another election with the two front runners and without the third party candidate to decide a contested election like this.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al) and more
Post by: DougMacG on January 05, 2009, 04:41:11 PM

Quoting CCP: "It's too bad they won't have another election with the two front runners and without the third party candidate to decide a contested election like this."

I don't favor automatic runoff proposals where the minor party voters can name a second choice for a second count, but in this situation you are right.  The recount panel should have declared with certainty that the errors in this process are greater than the ever-changing lead.

Still I don't agree with leaving out the 3rd guy on a re-vote.  I think his vote percentage and chance of winning only go up as Minnesotans grow tired of both of these New Yorkers.  As I see it, the Coleman vote is mostly an anti-Franken vote and the Franken vote is mostly an anti-Republican vote.  Barkley's message was to blame both parties for the tone of campaigns and the mess that we are in - a message that couldn't be better aimed or timed.  Dean Barkley served as senator in this seat for about a minute - 6 years ago, appointed by Jesse Ventura after Paul Wellstone died, Walter Mondale lost and Norm Coleman waited to be sworn in.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al) and more
Post by: DougMacG on January 08, 2009, 10:37:22 AM

Joe Soucheray, columnist for the St. Paul Pioneer Press on the bizarre, selective recount below.  I said order a re-vote because the errors exceed the margin.  He says flip a coin - a far more fair and even process than the current one.  Now the legal process goes to the MN Supreme Court, former NFL MVP and Democrat activist Alan Page presiding.  We don't just elect wrestlers here, lol.

Soucheray: Recount stew cooked down to a horribly tainted end
By Joe Soucheray  http://www.twincities.com/soucheray

The recount process didn't work or, more accurately, could not reasonably determine a winner. Al Franken no more won the U.S. Senate race than your pet cat, Zuba, who somebody probably voted for as a write-in candidate.

It would have been more plausible had Norm Coleman won the recount, having won on Election Night but by such a slim margin that it was mathematically unacceptable and thus triggered a recount.

In Minnesota, a victory margin of less than one-half of 1 percent triggers a recount. That's ridiculous, because the process that followed resulted in even less than a one-half of 1 percent margin for the victor.

The recount cannot determine a winner because the recount process we just witnessed quite likely produced corruption, however carefully it was massaged. It is difficult to believe, for example, that Franken benefited each time the canvassing board, under the eagle-eyed glare of Mark Ritchie, a secretary of state who it seems was tailor-made for this particular victory by another Democrat, applied different standards to different problems.

A precinct in Minneapolis "lost'' 133 ballots? Well, let's ignore that and just revert to the election night tallies from that precinct. A precinct in Maplewood had 171 more ballots to count than their total from the election? Hmm, we better count those. Not to mention quite probably double-counted votes and the generosity that was shown to many of the absentee voters whose errors in following instructions
were thought to be only "minor.''

The corruption we just witnessed is ideological in nature, a corruption of privilege and responsibility. Secretaries of state, like Ritchie, have become powerful players in elections. By encouraging more voting and making it sound virtuous and noble to do so, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, for example, brought into the fold more and more uninterested and disengaged bodies, cheapening the votes of the legitimate lot of us who vote correctly and responsibly. Joe Mansky, the chief election officer in Ramsey County, said the other day that when he asked the long line of absentee voters who were outside his offices the Monday before the election why they were there, he heard from many, "The Obama campaign sent us.''

Now, of course, the Obama campaign can obviously encourage the strongest possible voter turnout, but when voting activists drag a net through the state and dump every possible human being who can fog a mirror and don't need much identification at the polling places or have them fill out absentee ballots, you are simply providing all the ingredients necessary to cook a recount stew that resulted in, well, the way it was supposed to result this time.

The result is horribly tainted. It will probably hold, despite impending court proceedings, but it will be no less tainted. And yes, the same would be true had Coleman emerged with a 225-vote victory. The margin for error is too glaring to be ignored by the other side.

What we need is a margin of victory that is mathematically bulletproof, not one-half of 1 percent. I don't know what that margin is, but a mathematician could come up with it based on vote totals. Out of 2.9 million votes cast, there would have to be a margin of victory that could not be automatically challenged as questionable. One vote below that number would call for the coin flip — yes, a coin flip.

A coin flip would have been more honest and contained more dignity than this slop we just endured. It takes all mischief off the table. Ceremonial coins could have been minted with Norm's face on one side and Al's face on the other. The coin would be showed to the television cameras before the toss. The candidates wouldn't even have to call it. If their face survives the flip, they win.

Then, they shake hands, and the state sells off the 10,000 or so minted special coins and dedicates the proceeds to the arts or wetland restoration or, the way we are going, to providing more buses to bring numskulls to the polls. You just can't make a good recount stew without those questionable ballots.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al) and more
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 14, 2009, 02:44:26 PM

I haven't encountered this blog before, but this well linked piece seems a good survey of ACORN:

The Inside Story of ACORN

ACORN (American Community Organizations for Reform Now) is among the most misunderstood and most powerful organizations in the country. It's structure is extremely sophisticated and often terribly secretive and it's likely this is done on purpose in order to hide or misdirect from many questionable and often illegal activities. While this last campaign brought to light a series of accusations of voter fraud, the reality is that the malfeasance that goes on at ACORN only scratches the surface when talking about voter fraud. The most significant case of malfeasance so far brought to light was the case of Dale Rathke who embezzled millions from ACORN. This case is important mainly because Rathke is the brother of Wade Rathke, one of the founders of ACORN. When someone so close to the top commits such a brazen act of criminality, questions should be raised. More troubling still is that the embezzlement occurred in 2001 but didn't come to light till months ago, just after the statute of limitations had expired.

ACORN is in fact not really one organization but rather a collection of many affiliates. These affiliates are all classified in a number of different ways. For instance, some are 501 (C)3's. A 501 (C)3 gets special treatment from the government and as such, it also must remain non partisan. Other affiliates are 501 (C)4's. This is a different classification of the tax code and such an organization can be partisan. The flagship, ACORN itself, is a 501 (C)4. It's get out the vote arm, Project Vote, is a 501 (C) 3.

Much of the malfeasance of ACORN comes from its nebulous relationship with a private company called Citizen's Consulting Inc. CCI is a sort of accounting and financial services firm. CCI also only has one client, or shall I say a series of clients...ACORN and all its affiliates. Whenever ACORN receives any money, be it from the federal governmnent or other resources, it first goes to CCI. Then, CCI filters that money to anyone of ACORN's affiliates. Of course, this creates all sorts of room for malfeasance. If the government were to give money to say Health Care for America Now to provide health care services in poor neighborhoods, that money will first wind up at CCI. Where that money ends up is anyone's guess. Why? That's because CCI is a private company and so getting a look at its books is no easy task. In fact, I doubt more than a handful of politicians even know the relationship between ACORN and CCI.

In fact, ACORN is such a sophisticated organization that often politicians will get on the floor of the legislature to rail against ACORN and then turn around and meet with one of their affiliates and authorize funding. That's because more times than not a politician has no idea that they are dealing with an ACORN affiliate.

The structure of ACORN is also rather sophisticated. ACORN has a board of directors but these folks have largely ceremonial titles. Most of the board are zealots of the cause. They rose through the ranks of ACORN often starting as foot soldiers fighting for causes near and dear to them. Since ACORN is often associated with causes for poor, most of the board are themselves poor. As such, they are often rather unsophisticated and thus will be overwhelmed by the sophisticated nature of the organization itself. In fact, the real power at ACORN lies in it executive committee. The executive committee is currently made up of Maude Hurd, Alton Bennett, Maxine Nelson, Carol Hemmingway, Alicia Russell, Pedra Reavis, and Marie Pierre.

There is no question that ACORN is ideological, however in reality ACORN is really driven by something much different than ideology. That drive is greed. ACORN's real goals aren't necessarily any sort of change but rather to create a plethora of constant campaigns. The work on such campaigns as living wage, universal health care, and providing housing for the poor. As such, whatever accomplishments like the Community Reinvestment Act had in influencing society, what they really did was provide ACORN with a nearly never ending platform.

The Community Reinvestment Act

United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings
associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.[1][2][3] The Act was intended to reduce discriminatory credit practices against such neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.[4] The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound
operation. (See full text of Act and current regulations.[1]) To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions.[5]

allowed ACORN a never ending campaign in which ACORN would "enforce it". Enforce it they did and often with heavy handed tactics. They would picket banks, show up at homes of bank managers, and often demand boycotts of those banks they felt weren't complying with CRA. Because enforcing something like CRA is perpetual, CRA became a perpetual campaign. Worse yet, often ACORN would go directly to the federal government, through HUD, for funding. In other words, their heavy handed tactics were being subsidized by the tax payers. Of course, we'll never know how much money these campaigns got because all of it first started at CCI and then who knows where it wound up.

The mac daddy of ACORN, if you will, is Project VOTE. Project VOTE is their voter registration arm. It is also where their biggest malfeasance occurs. Because Project VOTE is a 501 (c) 3, it cannot support anyone candidate. What Project Vote is supposed to do is register voters anywhere anytime. Here's what really happens. ACORN, the 501 (C) 3, will back some candidates, often in local, county, and state elections, then they will disperse Project VOTE only in those areas where the candidates they support have a significant voter advantage. This sort of cherry picking is completely against the law. It also allows a 501 (c)3 to get around their supposed non partisan status. Do they register voters? Absolutely, except the overwhelming majority of the voters registered favor one candidate, the one that ACORN is backing. They get away with this because most politicians don't even know that Project VOTE is affiliated with ACORN let alone the scheme they run.

ACORN has hundreds of affiliates though no one, outside the insiders, knows exactly how many. It likely receives hundreds of millions of Dollars from the government. Though again, no one is sure because all of it is hidden by using the private CCI as an initial weigh station. It works with HUD, HHS, and the Department of Labor along with a host of philanthropies in order to continue its operations. All of it is done in the shadows through a very sophisticated network of affiliates and one private company, CCI, doling out the money. By doing this, it becomes nearly impossible to track its activities. What I have brought to light is only scratching the surface but should give everyone an idea of just how powerful and dangerous ACORN is.
Posted by mike volpe at 7:47 AM
Labels: acorn, Corruption, domestic policy, universal health care

http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2009/01/inside-story-of-acorn.html

Title: WSJ: MINN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 15, 2009, 09:25:40 AM

 MICHAEL STOKES PAULSEN
You would think people would learn. The recount in the contest between Norm Coleman and Al Franken for a seat in the U.S. Senate isn't just embarrassing. It is unconstitutional.


This is Florida 2000 all over again, but with colder weather. Like that fiasco, Minnesota's muck of a process violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Indeed, the controlling Supreme Court decision is none other than Bush v. Gore.

Remember Florida? Local officials conducting recounts could not decide what counted as a legal vote. Hanging chads? Dimpled chads? Should "undervotes" count (where a machine failed to read an incompletely-punched card)? What about "overvotes" (where voters punched more than one hole)? Different counties used different standards; different precincts within counties were inconsistent.

The Florida Supreme Court intervened and made things worse, ordering a statewide recount of some types of rejected ballots but not others. It specified no standards for what should count as a valid vote, leaving the judgment to each county. And it ordered partial recounts already conducted in some counties (but not others) included in the final tabulation. The result was chaos.

The Opinion Journal Widget
Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.
By a vote of 7-2, Bush v. Gore (2000) ruled that Florida's recount violated the principle that all votes must be treated uniformly. Applying precedents dating to the 1960s, the Court found that the Equal Protection Clause meant that ballots must be treated so as to give every vote equal weight. A state may not, by "arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another." Florida's lack of standards produced "unequal evaluation of ballots in several respects." The state's supreme court "ratified this uneven treatment" and created more of its own, and was unconstitutional.

Bush v. Gore is rightly regarded as controversial -- but not because of its holding regarding the Equal Protection Clause, which commanded broad agreement among the justices. The controversy arose because of the remedy the Court chose for Florida's violation, which was to end the recount entirely. The majority thought that time was up under Florida law requiring that its results be submitted in time to be included in the Electoral College count. That aspect of Bush v. Gore commanded only five votes. Two justices thought Florida should get more time and another chance.

The problem with the remedy was that it arguably violated the same principle that led the Court to invalidate the recount: the need to treat all votes equally. It had the practical effect of awarding the election to Bush (though subsequent media counts confirmed that Bush won anyway, under any uniform standard). This has led to enduring partisan criticism of the case, some fair and some unfair.

But no matter: Bush v. Gore is the law of the land. On the question of how the Equal Protection Clause applies to state recounts, the ruling, which reflected a 7-2 majority, controls.

Minnesota is Bush v. Gore reloaded. The details differ, but not in terms of arbitrariness, lack of uniform standards, inconsistency in how local recounts were conducted and counted, and strange state court decisions.

Consider the inconsistencies: One county "found" 100 new votes for Mr. Franken, due to an asserted clerical error. Decision? Add them. Ramsey County (St. Paul) ended up with 177 more votes than were recorded election day. Decision? Count them. Hennepin County (Minneapolis, where I voted -- once, to my knowledge) came up with 133 fewer votes than were recorded by the machines. Decision? Go with the machines' tally. All told, the recount in 25 precincts ended up producing more votes than voters who signed in that day.

Then there's Minnesota's (first, so far) state Supreme Court decision, Coleman v. Ritchie, decided by a vote of 3-2 on Dec. 18. (Two justices recused themselves because they were members of the state canvassing board.) While not as bad as Florida's interventions, the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered local boards to count some previously excluded absentee ballots but not others. Astonishingly, the court left the decision as to which votes to count to the two competing campaigns and forbade local election officials to correct errors on their own.

If Messrs. Franken and Coleman agreed, an absentee ballot could be counted. Either campaign could veto a vote. Dean Barkley of the Independence Party, who ran third, was not included in this process.

Thus, citizens' right to vote -- the right to vote! -- was made subject to political parties' gaming strategies. Insiders agree that Mr. Franken's team played a far more savvy game than Mr. Coleman's. The margin of Mr. Franken's current lead is partly the product of a successful what's-mine-is-mine-what's-yours-is-vetoed strategy, and of the Coleman team's failure to counter it.

The process is not over yet, since the state court decision in effect kicked the can down the road. The candidates can revisit these issues by contesting the legal validity of the election under state law -- which Mr. Coleman's team did last week.

But as matters stand now, the Minnesota recount is a legal train wreck. The result, a narrow Franken lead, is plainly invalid. Just as in Bush v. Gore, the recount has involved "unequal evaluation of ballots in several respect" and failed to provide "minimal procedural safeguards" of equal treatment of all ballots. Legally, it does not matter which candidate benefited from all these differences in treatment. (Mr. Franken did.) The different treatment makes the results not only unreliable (and suspicious), but unconstitutional.

What is the remedy? Unlike Bush v. Gore, there is no looming national deadline. Minnesota can take its time and do things right.

This means two things: First, the process must conform to Minnesota election law. Second, it must conform to Bush v. Gore. Whatever standards Minnesota uses must be applied uniformly, consistently, and under clear standards not admitting of local variation. Discrepancies between machine counts and hand recounts, and between numbers of recorded votes and signed-in voters, however resolved, must be resolved the same way throughout the state.

The standards for evaluating rejected absentee ballots likewise must be uniform, with decisions made according to legal standards, not by partisan campaigns. If the Minnesota Supreme Court fails to assure these things, the matter could go right up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In Today's Opinion Journal
 

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

Leadership and PanicsA Geithner Tax AmnestyStimulus for Tax Collectors

TODAY'S COLUMNISTS

Wonder Land: Bush and the Libby Pardon
– Daniel HenningerWelcome to the White House, Mr. Obama
– Karl Rove

COMMENTARY

Even Businessmen Deserve a Lawyer
– Arlen Specter and Edwin Meese IIIBush Destroyed a Dictator. Clinton Installed One.
– Ruth R. WisseAnd what if there is no reliable way to determine in a recount who won, consistent with Bush v. Gore's requirements?

The Constitution's answer is a do-over. The 17th Amendment provides: "When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct."

In a sense, a vacancy has already "happened." The U.S. Senate convened on Jan. 6 with only one senator from Minnesota. Still, the seat is perhaps not "vacant," just unfilled. But if the contest proceeding does not produce a clear winner that passes constitutional muster, a special election -- and a temporary appointment by Gov. Tim Pawlenty -- may be the only answer.

For now, the only thing certain is that the present "certified" result -- which is that Mr. Franken won by 225 votes out of more than 2.9 million cast -- is an obvious, embarrassing violation of the Constitution.

Mr. Paulsen is professor of law at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, Minn. He is formerly associate dean of the University of Minnesota Law School.

Title: WSJ: Voter ID laws successful
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 30, 2009, 06:39:17 AM

By HANS VON SPAKOVSKY
Remember the storm that arose on the political left after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Indiana's voter ID law last April? According to the left, voter ID was a dastardly Republican plot to prevent Democrats from winning elections by suppressing the votes of minorities, particularly African-Americans.

 
Since the election of Barack Obama, we haven't heard a word about such claims. On Jan. 14, the federal appeals court in Atlanta upheld Georgia's voter ID law.

The reasons for the silence about alleged voter suppression is plain. In the first place, numerous academic studies show that voter ID had no effect on the turnout of voters in prior elections. The plaintiffs in every unsuccessful lawsuit filed against such state requirements could not produce a single individual who didn't either already have an ID or couldn't easily get one.

Second are the figures emerging from the November election. If what liberals claimed was true, Democratic voters in states with strict photo ID requirements would presumably have had a much more difficult time voting, and their turnout dampened in comparison to other states. Well, that myth can finally be laid to rest.

The two states with the strictest voter ID requirements are Indiana and Georgia. Both require a government-issued photo ID. According to figures released by Prof. Michael McDonald of George Mason University, the overall national turnout of eligible voters was 61.6%, the highest turnout since the 1964 election.

The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies (JCPES) found that black turnout in the 2008 election was at a historic high, having increased substantially from 2004. The total share of black voters in the national vote increased from 11% to 13% according to exit polls, with 95% of blacks voting for Mr. Obama.

So what happened in Georgia where the ACLU, the NAACP and other such groups claimed the state's photo ID law was intended to depress black turnout? According to figures released by Curtis Gans at American University, Georgia had the largest turnout in its history, with nearly four million voters. The Republican turnout was up only 0.22 percentage points; the Democratic turnout was up an astonishing 6.1 percentage points, rising from 22.66% of the eligible voting population to 28.74% of the eligible population.

The overall turnout in Georgia increased 6.7 percentage points from the 2004 election -- the second highest increase in turnout of any state in the country. According to the JCPES, the black share of the statewide vote increased in Georgia from 25% in the 2004 election, when the photo ID law was not in effect, to 30% in the 2008 election, when the photo ID law was in effect.

By contrast, the Democratic turnout in the neighboring state of Mississippi -- which has no voter ID requirement but also has a large black population similar to Georgia's -- increased by only 2.35 percentage points.

In Indiana, which the Supreme Court said had the strictest voter ID law in the country, the turnout of Democratic voters in the November election increased by 8.32 percentage points. That was the largest increase in Democratic turnout of any state in the country. The increase in overall turnout in Indiana was the fifth highest in the country, but only because the turnout of Republican voters actually went down 3.57 percentage points. The nearby state of Illinois (no photo ID requirement) had an increase in Democratic turnout of only 4.4 percentage points -- nearly half Indiana's increase.

Of course, the decline in Republican turnout and huge increase in Democratic turnout in Indiana matched what happened elsewhere, and explains why Mr. Obama won. Republican turnout nationwide declined 1.3 percentage points from the 2004 election, while Democratic turnout increased 2.6 percentage points.

The JCPES predicts that when the final turnout numbers are in for the 2008 election, black turnout will probably reach a historic high of almost 67% and likely surpass white turnout for the first time. All at a time when about half of the states have passed various forms of voter ID requirements, including two states with strict photo ID laws.

The claim that Republican legislatures in Georgia and Indiana passed voter ID to depress Democratic turnout is demonstrably false. But even if it were true, they obviously failed miserably to achieve that objective given the huge increases in Democratic and minority turnout in both states.

I guess liberals will now claim that their historic increases in turnout would have been even higher if not for voter ID laws. But that would be an absurd argument, given the states' performance in comparison to other states without voter ID laws.

With every election that has occurred since states have begun to implement voter ID, the evidence is overwhelming that it does not depress the turnout of voters. Indeed, it may actually increase the public's confidence that their votes will count.

That won't stop the ACLU or the League of Women Voters from filing more frivolous lawsuits against such state laws and continuing to waste taxpayer money. But ultimately they will lose, and our ability to protect the security and integrity of our elections will be preserved.

Mr. von Spakovsky, a visiting legal scholar at The Heritage Foundation, is a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission and a former Justice Department official.

Title: Minnesota Machinations, I
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 30, 2009, 06:15:19 PM

January 30, 2009
Ensuring "Equal Treatment" in the Minnesota Recount: Bush v. Gore Redux
by Hans A. von Spakovsky
Legal Memorandum #36
Having once granted the right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person's vote over that of another.

--U.S. Supreme Court, Bush v. Gore[1]

We actually have a chance in Minnesota to reverse some of the damage that Florida 2000 did to the trust that Americans overall have in our system. Recounts are normal. They are very important, they happen all the time. In Minnesota, we do them and we do them well.

--Mark Ritchie, Minnesota Secretary of State[2]

In contrast to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie's claim that Minnesota would do a good job conducting the recount in the election contest between incumbent Republican Senator Norm Coleman and Democratic challenger Al Franken, the carelessness of local election officials, the arbitrary and capricious decisions of the Minnesota Canvassing Board, and the strange decisions of the Minnesota Supreme Court likely have caused the state to violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Unless the Minnesota Supreme Court corrects these mistakes in the ongoing election contest, there is little question that Senator Coleman would have a viable federal case under the precepts of the Bush v. Gore decision[3] and the similar mistakes made by Florida election officials in the 2000 presidential election.

The Legal Doctrine of Bush v. Gore

The question before the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore was whether the recount procedures adopted by Florida in the aftermath of the November 2000 general election were "consistent with its obligation to avoid arbitrary and disparate treatment of the members of its electorate."[4] The Florida Supreme Court had ordered that the "intent" of Florida voters be discerned by local election officials from punch-card ballots that, either through error or through deliberate omission, had not been perforated sufficiently for a counting machine to register a vote.

Trying to discern voters' intent was not objectionable, but the "absence of specific standards to ensure its equal application" was a problem.[5] In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court noted that it was acknowledged at oral argument that "the standards for accepting or rejecting contested ballots might vary not only from county to county but indeed within a single county from one recount team to another."[6]

Some of the examples of this disparate treatment included three members of the Miami-Dade County canvassing board each applying different standards defining a legal vote, Palm Beach County changing its standards in the middle of the counting process, and Broward County using "a more forgiving standard than Palm Beach County."[7] The Florida Supreme Court then magnified these errors by ratifying this uneven treatment and mandating that the recount totals from these counties be included in the certified statewide total, as well as approving partial recounts from some counties.

Seven Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court agreed that this unequal treatment was unconstitutional; the only disagreement among them was on the remedy.[8] In their concurring opinion, Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas also pointed out the Florida Supreme Court's interference with the detailed legislative structure governing the election process established by the Florida legislature.

Normally, the distribution of power among the different branches of a state's government raises no federal issue, except for the requirement that "the government be republican in character."[9] Thus, federal courts normally defer "to the decisions of state courts on issues of state law."[10] However, since the Constitution conveys broad power to state legislatures to define the method of appointment of presidential electors, "[a] significant departure from the legislative scheme...presents a federal constitutional question."[11] It is state legislatures that have the exclusive right to define the method of appointment of presidential electors.

The orders of the Florida Supreme Court departed from the state's legislative structure by taking such actions as extending the seven-day statutory certification deadline established by the legislature and defining a "legal vote" in a way that plainly departed from the legislative scheme. This could not be deemed "appropriate" constitutionally and was an additional reason to reverse the state court.[12]

The Minnesota Recount

Minnesota uses opti-scan paper ballots. Voters, in a procedure similar to the one used in completing answer sheets for standardized tests like the SAT, complete a paper ballot by filling in an oval next to the name of the candidate for whom they want to vote. The ballot is then fed through a computer scanner before the voter leaves the polling place so that the votes can be tallied by the computer.

On election day, Coleman won reelection by a margin of 725 votes out of 2.9 million cast.[13] After the initial canvass, which is the process by which counties resubmit to the Secretary of State the vote totals of local precincts from election day, Coleman's lead shrank to 221 votes because almost all of the "corrections" sent in by local election officials benefited Franken.[14] A hand recount of the paper ballots was then initiated, and after a series of dubious decisions by local election officials and the Minnesota Canvassing Board overseeing the recount, Franken was certified as the winner by 225 votes.[15] Senator Coleman then filed suit contesting the certification.[16]

As in most states, Minnesota allows election officials to make an exact duplicate of a ballot if it "is damaged or defective so that it cannot be counted properly by the automatic tabulating equipment."[17] Opti-scan paper ballots that have been properly filled out by a voter but folded, for example, sometimes cannot be read by the computer scanner because of the fold. A copy of the damaged ballot is made in the presence of two judges from different political parties by filling in the same circles for the same candidates as on the original card. Duplicate ballots must be clearly labeled as "‘duplicates,' indicate the precinct in which the corresponding damaged or defective ballot was cast, bear a serial number which must be recorded on the damaged or defective ballot card, and be counted in lieu of the damaged or defective ballot card."[18] The defective original ballots must be segregated from the other counted ballots and "placed in envelopes marked or printed to distinguish" the number and type of ballots in the envelope.[19]

In this case, however, local election officials in 26 counties apparently did not follow this Minnesota requirement and did not properly mark or segregate the duplicate ballots to distinguish them from the originals. As a result, duplicate ballots were hand-counted along with the original ballots, resulting in more votes being recorded than there were voters who showed up on election day.[20] Thus, some voters in at least 26 counties had their votes counted twice, while voters in Minnesota's other 61 counties had their votes counted only once--a clear and obvious example of unequal and disparate treatment.

One of the members of the Minnesota Canvassing Board admitted that there was "a very good likelihood that there is double counting here," yet the Board allowed these vote totals that violated Minnesota law to be included in the recount, benefiting Franken by an additional 80 to 100 votes.[21] One of the members of the board, Judge Kathleen Gearin, dismissed the concern over double counting, saying it was not a problem "because there was very little of it."[22]

When conducting its recount, Ramsey County found 177 more ballots than were recorded by the precinct computer scanners on election day.[23] Election officials ignored the electronic total and included the extra 177 ballots in the vote total of their hand recount, netting Franken an additional 37 votes.[24]

Yet when Hennepin County conducted its recount, there were 133 fewer ballots in Minneapolis than were recorded by precinct computer scanners on election day.[25] In direct conflict with what occurred in Ramsey County, Hennepin election officials ignored the missing ballots and used the electronic vote total from election day for their recount total, providing Franken with an additional 46 votes.[26] This despite the fact that Minneapolis's election director, Cindy Reichert, said that these ballots "likely were a result of ballots with write-in candidates being run through a counting machine twice."[27]

In other words, the "missing" ballots may never have existed in the first place. All of these actions were approved by the Canvassing Board.

Minnesota law requires that a "ballot shall not be rejected for a technical error that does not make it impossible to determine the voter's intent."[28] The specific rules governing how to determine a voter's intent were defined by the legislature. One of those rules is that if "the names of two candidates have been marked, and an attempt has been made to erase or obliterate one of the marks, a vote shall be counted for the remaining marked candidate."[29]

Yet when it was determining voter intent on ballots with such technical errors, the Minnesota Canvassing Board applied those rules inconsistently. For example:

It has been reported that on some ballots where voters had completely filled in the oval for Coleman and then put an "x" through the oval, the board determined that there was no vote for Coleman.
However, on other ballots where the exact same type of markings were made for Franken, the board determined that they were valid votes for Franken.[30]
On a ballot where the voter had placed an "x" next to the Constitution Party candidate but had filled in the oval for Coleman, the board determined that there was no vote for anyone.
On another ballot where the oval next to Coleman was filled in but an "x" had been place next to Franken, the board determined this was a vote for Franken.[31]
There was no consistency in the board's determinations of intent other than the fact that their inconsistent decisions overall seemed to benefit Al Franken.

Another problem in the recount was the 12,000 absentee ballots that were not counted on election day after they were rejected by local election officials for not complying with Minnesota law.[32] Many of the ballots that were rejected were reexamined, and 933 were included in the recount. [33]

Under Minnesota law, the only ballots that should have been included in the recount were those that were actually cast in the election. As Minnesota Assistant Attorney General Kenneth E. Raschke, Jr., told Secretary of State Richie on November 17, 2008, rejected absentee ballots are not considered as "cast" in an election.[34] Section 204C.35, subd. 3 of the Minnesota Code specifies that "

• nly the ballots cast in the election and the summary statements certified by the election judges may be considered in the recount process."

In fact, Ritchie's own administrative rules (which he ignored) as outlined in the Hand Count instructions of his 2008 Recount Guide explained that:

[A]n administrative recount...is not to determine who was eligible to vote. It is not to determine if campaign laws were violated. It is not to determine if absentee ballots were properly accepted. It is not-- except for recounting the ballots--to determine if [election] judges did things right. It is simply to physically recount the ballots for this race![35]

As Assistant Attorney General Raschke said, the proper forum to remedy the claimed wrongful rejection of any absentee ballots was "a judicial election contest." However, a second letter submitted to the Canvassing Board in December, this time from the Minnesota Solicitor General, took the opposite view. He provided an opinion that "a reviewing court would likely uphold a determination by the State Canvassing Board to accept amended reports...that include absentee ballots of voters...whose votes were improperly rejected by election officials due to administrative errors" even though such actions are "not necessarily contemplated under a strict reading of the statutes.[36]

Despite Minnesota law, the instructions issued by the Secretary of State for recounts, and the conflicting opinions from the office of the state Attorney General, the Minnesota Canvassing Board recommended that counties sort and count absentee ballots that were "mistakenly" rejected on election day.[37] When Senator Coleman filed a petition with the Minnesota Supreme Court to stop this procedure, the court inexplicably ruled that such absentee ballots could be counted if "local election officials and the parties agree that an absentee ballot envelope was improperly rejected."[38]

Minnesota law does provide that obvious errors of election judges and county canvassing boards "in the counting or recording" of votes can be corrected if the candidates for that office unanimously agree in writing that an error occurred.[39] However, the Minnesota Supreme Court specifically held that the "improper rejection of an absentee ballot envelope is not within the scope of errors subject to correction" under this law.[40]

Despite that determination, the court allowed competing candidates and local election officials to waive the applicable law established by the Minnesota legislature on absentee ballots and make decisions on which votes should count. As a professor of election law at Hamline University in St. Paul said, this basically gave the "campaigns a veto over the counting."[41] In his dissent, Justice Page pointed out that this holding would "arbitrarily disqualify enfranchised votes on the whim of the candidates and political parties without the benefit of the legislatively authorized procedures" of Minnesota law.[42]

Secretary of State Ritchie also stopped this review of disputed absentee ballots "before many Coleman-leaning counties had provided theirs."[43] The dissent noted that there were "at least 600 absentee ballots" that were improperly rejected and might never be counted[44] and the Coleman campaign claimed there were 654 improperly rejected ballots that should have been examined by the Canvassing Board.[45]

Applying Bush v. Gore to the Recount

Regrettably, we have an entire series of actions in the Minnesota recount that fit squarely within the unequal treatment problems that ensnared Florida officials in 2000 and led directly to the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore. These problems range from allowing double votes in some counties to allowing votes that violated state law.

The disparate treatment of votes was clearly present in the Minnesota recount. Because of the failure of local election officials to properly mark and segregate the original, defective ballots that could not be counted by precinct computer scanners and the duplicate ballots created as substitutes, both the original and duplicate ballots were hand-counted in a number of counties. Thus, the value placed on the ballots of some persons was greater than the value placed on ballots of other Minnesota voters, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause.[46]

The fact that the total vote count from one county was based on the election-day electronic total and apparently included nonexistent ballots, while the vote totals from other counties were based on the hand count, is another example of the application of a disparate standard. The arbitrary and inconsistent application of the "intent" standard by the Canvassing Board is also too similar to the problems the U.S. Supreme Court noted in Florida in 2000, when different counties applied different and varying rules to what would be considered a vote with punch-card ballots, to survive scrutiny by the federal courts.

Under the Constitution, "[t]he times, Places and Manner of holding election for Senators...shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations."[47] This clause "is a default provision; it invests the States with responsibility for the mechanics of congressional elections" unless Congress preempts states' legislative choices.[48]

As in Florida, the Minnesota legislature set out a detailed legislative structure for recounts and the requirements for absentee ballots, and Congress has not preempted the state's "legislative choices." Before the election, the Secretary of State issued rules pursuant to authority delegated by the legislature[49] on how recounts would be conducted if one became necessary. Yet the Canvassing Board, of which the Secretary of State is a member, with the seeming approval of the Minnesota Supreme Court, did not adhere to the legislative structure or the Secretary's own recount rules promulgated prior to the election in its consideration of absentee ballots.

In fact, the court decided to waive the application of the rule that specifies that recounts shall consist only of the ballots actually cast on election day. It also gave competing political candidates the ability to make decisions about whether specific absentee ballots should be counted regardless of applicable law, giving the candidates virtual veto power over the legislative requirements. This would likely be considered an "inappropriate" departure from the legislative structure and therefore unconstitutional under the concurring opinions in the Bush v. Gore decision, since states regulate congressional elections pursuant to a constitutional "delegation of power under the Elections Clause."[50] There is also an indication that certain counties, just as in Florida, had "a more forgiving standard" when reviewing previously rejected absentee ballots.

Unless either the three-judge panel that is currently hearing the election dispute or the Minnesota Supreme Court can correct all of these problems, there is little question that Senator Coleman would be able to argue successfully in federal court that the recount process violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. As the Supreme Court said in Bush v. Gore, "it is obvious that the recount cannot be conducted in compliance with the requirements of equal protection and due process without substantial additional work."[51]

However, one problem that may not be capable of correction no matter how much additional work is done by the state is the intermingling by some counties of duplicate and original ballots. If duplicate votes cannot be identified and removed from the vote totals, then it will not be possible for Minnesota to conduct a recount that values every person's vote equally.

Under such circumstances, the state would be forced to stand by the original electronic count from election day along with (1) any corrections in the absentee ballot count (which may properly be considered under Minnesota law at the "contest" phase) and (2) new and consistent determinations of voter intent on defective ballots--both as determined by the court in full compliance with Minnesota law. Otherwise, the only constitutionally acceptable remedy will be to conduct a new, special election for the vacancy in the position of the United States Senator from Minnesota.

Hans A. von Spakovsky is a Visiting Legal Scholar in the Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation. He is a former Commissioner on the Federal Election Commission and a former Justice Department official.

Title: Minnesota Machinations, II (Notes)
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 30, 2009, 06:15:55 PM

[1]Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 104-105 (2000).

[2]No Model for U.S.: Minnesota's Senate Recount Deeply Suspect, San Diego Union-Trib., Jan. 6, 2009 [hereinafter No Model for U.S.].

[3]There has been considerable academic debate about the soundness of this decision. See, e.g., Election 2001 Symposium, 68 U. Chi. L. Rev. (2001), with articles by Richard A. Epstein, Samuel Issacharoff, Cass R. Sunstein, and John C. Yoo, among others. Whatever the debate, however, the decision stands and seems particularly to apply in this recount.

[4]531 U.S. at 105.

[5]Id. at 106.

[6]Id.

[7]Id. at 106-107.

[8]Id. at 111.

[9]Id. at 112.

[10]Id.

[11]Id.at 113.

[12]Id.at 122.

[13]Tensions High in Minnesota Ahead of Senate Recount, FOXNews.com, Nov. 11, 2008.

[14]John Lott has questioned the dubious statistical probability of this one-sided improvement in Franken's vote totals, pointing out that virtually all of his new votes came from just three out of 4,130 precincts, almost half of them in a heavily Democratic precinct in Two Harbors, Minnesota. None of the other races had any changes in their vote totals in that precinct. See John R. Lott, Jr., Minnesota Ripe for Election Fraud, FOXNews.com, Nov. 10, 2008.

[15]Pat Doyle & Kevin Duchschere, Coleman Goes to Court Over Senate Recount, StarTribune.com, Jan. 7, 2009; State Canvassing Board, Certificate of Recount of the Votes Case for United States Senator, available at http://www.sos.state.mn.us/docs/us_senatorrecountcanvas
singdraft1__2_.pdf (last visited Jan. 30, 2009).

[16]Notice of Contest, Coleman v. Franken, No. 62-CV-09-56 (Ramsey Cty. Dist. Ct. Jan. 6, 2009).

[17]Minn. Stat. § 206.86.

[18]Id.

[19]Minn. Stat. § 204C.25.

[20]No Model for U.S., supra note 2.

[21]Editorial, Funny Business in Minnesota, Wall St. J., Jan. 5, 2009 [hereinafter Funny Business].

[22]Minutes of State Canvassing Board, Dec. 16-19, 2008, p. 12.

[23]Curt Brown, Minnesota's Vote: Cast Into Doubt, StarTribune.com, Dec. 14, 2008.

[24]Funny Business, supra note 21.

[25]Kevin Duchschere & Mark Brunswick, Senate Recount: 133+5÷87=1 Big Muddle, StarTribune.com, Dec. 12, 2008.

[26]Funny Business, supra note 21.

[27]Rachel E. Stassen-Berger & Jason Hoppin, Minnesota U.S. Senate Race: Glut of Ballot Challenges Chokes Recount, Pioneer Press, Dec. 4, 2008. When Ms. Reichert appeared before the Canvassing Board, she changed her story and denied that ballots had been counted twice even though a search had failed to find any missing ballots. Minutes of State Canvassing Board Meeting of Dec. 12, 2008, pp. 3-6. In a bizarre development, the Board later claimed that Ms. Reichert "was not providing testimony when she appeared before the board" since the Canvassing Board cannot hear testimony or hold evidentiary hearings. Id. at 5.

[28]Minn. Stat. § 204C.22.

[29]Minn. Stat. § 204C.22(11).

[30]For the ballots and the decisions of the Minnesota Canvassing Board, see Minnesota Senate Recount: Latest Coleman-Franken Results, StarTribune.com, http://senaterecount.startribune.com/ballots/index.php?
review_date=2008-12-18&index=9 (last visited Jan. 30, 2009). See also John R. Lott, Jr., & Ryan S. Lott, Ballot Madness: Tipping the Scales in Minnesota's Senate Recount, FOXNews.com, Dec. 22, 2008.

[31]Minnesota Senate Recount: Latest Coleman-Franken Results, supra note 30.

[32]There are four grounds given for rejecting an absentee ballot, including the lack of a signature. See Minn. Stat. § 203B.12(2).

[33]Mark Brunswick & Pat Doyle, Senate Recount Trial Underway, StarTribune.com, Jan. 26, 2009.

[34]Letter from Kenneth E. Raschke, Jr., Asst. Attorney General, to Mark Ritchie, Secretary of State, on Canvass of Rejected Absentee Ballots (Nov. 17, 2008).

[35]Id. (emphasis in original).

[36]Letter from Alan I. Gilbert, Solicitor General, to the State Canvassing Board (Dec. 10, 2008).

[37]Duchschere & Brunswick, Senate Recount: 133+5÷87=1 Big Muddle, supra note 25.

[38]Coleman v. Ritchie, No. A08-2169, slip op. at 2 (Minn. Dec. 18, 2008).

[39]Minn. Stat. § 204C.38 (emphasis added).

[40]Coleman, slip op. at 2. "Counting" or "recording" errors are arithmetic errors in the vote totals.

[41]Editorial, Recount Will Get Worse Before It Gets Better, Rochester Post-Bull., Jan. 7, 2009.

[42]Coleman, slip op. at D-2.

[43]No Model for U.S., supra note 2.

[44]Coleman, slip op. at D-5.

[45]Coleman v. Ritchie, No. A08-2169, slip op. at 5 (Minn. Jan. 5, 2009). In the litigation filed contesting the election and the decisions of the Canvassing Board, Coleman claims there are 5,000 wrongly rejected absentee ballots. Alex Robinson & Karlee Weinmann, Subpoenas to Stall Senate Trial, Minn. Daily, Jan. 27, 2009.

[46]531 U.S. at 104-105 (citing Harper v. Virginia Bd. of Elections, 383 U.S. 663, 665 (1966) and Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533, 555 (1964)).

[47]U.S. Const., Art. I, § 4.

[48]Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67, 69 (1997).

[49]Minn. Stat. § 204C.361.

[50]Cook v. Gralike, 531 U.S. 510, 523 (2001).

[51]531 U.S. at 110.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/lm36.cfm

Title: How much?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 08, 2009, 07:36:09 PM

Any one know how much ACORN is being stimulated by His Glibness's syphillis , , , I mean stimulus bill?

Title: WSJ: Census
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 09, 2009, 10:33:04 PM

By JOHN FUND

President Obama said in his inaugural address that he planned to "restore science to its rightful place" in government. That's a worthy goal. But statisticians at the Commerce Department didn't think it would mean having the director of next year's Census report directly to the White House rather than to the Commerce secretary, as is customary. "There's only one reason to have that high level of White House involvement," a career professional at the Census Bureau tells me. "And it's called politics, not science."

The decision was made last week after California Rep. Barbara Lee, chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, and Hispanic groups complained to the White House that Judd Gregg, the Republican senator from New Hampshire slated to head Commerce, couldn't be trusted to conduct a complete Census. The National Association of Latino Officials said it had "serious questions about his willingness to ensure that the 2010 Census produces the most accurate possible count."

Anything that threatens the integrity of the Census has profound implications. Not only is it the basis for congressional redistricting, it provides the raw data by which government spending is allocated on everything from roads to schools. The Bureau of Labor Statistics also uses the Census to prepare the economic data that so much of business relies upon. "If the original numbers aren't as hard as possible, the uses they're put to get fuzzier and fuzzier," says Bruce Chapman, who was director of the Census in the 1980s.

Mr. Chapman worries about a revival of the effort led by minority groups after the 2000 Census to adjust the totals for states and cities using statistical sampling and computer models. In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Department of Commerce v. U.S. House that sampling could not be used to reapportion congressional seats. But it left open the possibility that sampling could be used to redraw political boundaries within the states.

Such a move would prove controversial. "Sampling potentially has the kind of margin of error an opinion poll has and the same subjectivity a voter-intent standard in a recount has," says Mr. Chapman.

Starting in 2000, the Census Bureau conducted three years of studies with the help of many outside statistical experts. According to then Census director Louis Kincannon, the Bureau concluded that "adjustment based on sampling didn't produce improved figures" and could damage Census credibility.

The reason? In theory, statisticians can identify general numbers of people missed in a head count. But it cannot then place those abstract "missing people" into specific neighborhoods, let alone blocks. And anyone could go door to door and find out such people don't exist. There can be other anomalies. "The adjusted numbers told us the head count had overcounted the number of Indians on reservations," Mr. Kincannon told me. "That made no sense."

The problem of counting minorities and the homeless has long been known. Census Bureau statisticians believe that a vigorous hard count, supplemented by adding in the names of actual people missed by head counters but still found in public records, is likely to lead to a far more defensible count than sampling-based adjustment.

The larger debate prompted seven former Census directors -- serving every president from Nixon to George W. Bush -- to sign a letter last year supporting a bill to turn the Census Bureau into an independent agency after the 2010 Census. "It is vitally important that the American public have confidence that the census results have been produced by an independent, non-partisan, apolitical, and scientific Census Bureau," it read.

The directors also noted that "each of us experienced times when we could have made much more timely and thorough responses to Congressional requests and oversight if we had dealt directly with Congress." The bill's chief sponsor is New York Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney, who represents Manhattan's Upper East Side.

"The real issue is who directs the Census, the pros or the pols," says Mr. Chapman. "You would think an administration that's thumping its chest about respecting science would show a little respect for scientists in the statistical field." He worries that a Census director reporting to a hyperpartisan such as White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel increases the chances of a presidential order that would override the consensus of statisticians.

The Obama administration is downplaying how closely the White House will oversee the Census Bureau. But Press Secretary Robert Gibbs insists there is "historical precedent" for the Census director to be "working closely with the White House."

It would be nice to know what Sen. Gregg thinks about all this, but he's refusing comment. And that, says Mr. Chapman, the former Census director, is damaging his credibility. "He will look neutered with oversight of the most important function of his department over the next two years shipped over to the West Wing," he says. "If I were him, I wouldn't take the job unless I had that changed."

Title: White House grabs census power!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 12, 2009, 07:42:01 PM

OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
White House grabs 2010 census power
GOP warns Democrats attempting unconstitutional vote manipulation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 07, 2009
11:15 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
In a move with major political implications for voting, districting and representation in future elections, the Obama administration has demanded oversight of the 2010 U.S. census.

The move has Republicans crying foul, alleging that transferring the power of census-taking from the Commerce Department, which normally oversees the U.S. Census Bureau, to the White House is an attempt to manipulate redistricting of congressional seats.

"This action appears to be motivated by politics, rather than the interests of our country," House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, said in a statement. "The United States Census should remain independent of politics; it should not be directed by political operatives working out of the White House."

The Washington Post's Mary Ann Akers reports a senior Republican aide telling her that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel has no business overseeing the headcount that will shape the future of U.S. elections.

"With all of its political implications," the aide reportedly said, "hijacking the census from the Commerce Department and letting it be run out of Rahm's office is like putting PETA in charge of issuing hunting permits."

Discover how we can break the hammerlock of statism and reestablish our freedom in Joseph Farah's "Taking America Back" from WND Books!

Congressional Quarterly reports that Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the top Republican on the House Government Reform Committee, said the proposed move may even be in violation of federal law.

"Any attempt by the Obama administration to circumvent the census process for their political benefit will be met with fierce opposition," said Issa. "This ill-conceived proposal undermines a constitutionally obligated process that speaks to the very heart of our democracy."

Bruce Chapman, director of the U.S. Census Bureau under President Reagan, explains the Republican objection and why the census is so important in his Discovery blog:

"Everyone knows that it is possible to organize a decennial census in a way that benefits one party or another politically," Chapman writes. "One way to effectuate this otherwise unpalatable departure from the Census Bureau's 200-year history of non-partisanship is to put the Bureau administratively under direction of the politicos in the White House. In reality, that would be a sure invitation to cook the books on the highly consequential count of Americans."

Chapman also claims, "The only reason the White House would want to be involved is in figuring out how to add more voting power to certain states and groups within states."

The decennial census, taken every 10 years, generates maps and numbers then used to draw congressional districts. Ideally the census director conducts the count in a non-partisan manner under the authority granted by U.S. code to the secretary of Commerce.

Congressional Quarterly, however, announced earlier this week that a senior White House official reported the director of the Census Bureau will now report directly to the White House and not the secretary of Commerce.

CQ later updated its report, stating that the White House "took a small step back from what the senior official told CQ" by announcing that the director of the Census Bureau would "work with the high-level officials rather than report directly to them."

Secretary of Commerce nominee, Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H.

Several news outlets speculated that the White House power play was prompted by objections from minority group leaders over Obama's nomination of Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., to be secretary of Commerce, the office responsible for the census. Many of the groups are concerned about how particularly Hispanics will be counted in the next census, since the numbers affect both redistricting and federal funding based on demographic changes over the past decade.

Several minority leaders have expressed dismay over Obama's nomination of a Republican with a questionable track record on the census.

Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said in a statement, "Sen. Gregg's record of previously voting to abolish the Commerce Department and his attempts to block President Bill Clinton's efforts to secure adequate funding for the 2000 census raise troubling concerns."

A National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials spokesman told Politico, "Secretary of Commerce-designate Judd Gregg's record raises serious questions about his willingness to ensure that the 2010 census produces the most accurate possible count of the nation's population."

An editorial in the Hispanic newspaper La Opinion went further, emphasizing a fear that Gregg may not place a high enough priority on getting an accurate count.

"We cannot afford this risk," the paper opined.

At a White House briefing, however, spokesman Robert Gibbs denied that the change was linked to worries over Gregg's nomination.

MSNBC reports a White House spokesman further arguing that Obama's action actually has historical precedent.

"From the first days of the transition the census has been a priority for the president, and a process he wanted to reevaluate," the spokesman reportedly said. "There is historic precedent for the director of the census, who works for the Commerce Secretary and the president, to work closely with White House senior management – given the number of decisions that will have to be put before the president. We plan to return to that model in this administration."

Former Census Bureau Chief Chapman, however, disagrees.

"Simply put, there is no excuse for this idea," Chapman writes. "It is not true that the Census Bureau has ever been under the direct management of the White House, and for good reason. Even if angels were in charge of the executive mansion, if the nation's premier statistical agency were placed under White House direction, the danger to public trust would be enormous. The Decennial count is one of the few federal functions specifically described in the Constitution itself and must be operated above suspicion of politics."

Chapman added, "Power flows from an accurate census count. Everyone involved for years has seen the count therefore as a sacred trust. It must not be polluted with even a semblance of presidential meddling."

Title: RAT
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 19, 2009, 09:32:42 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/19/smelling-a-rat/

Smelling a RAT
posted at 10:11 am on February 19, 2009 by Ed Morrissey   


Byron York smells a RAT.  Charles Grassley smelled a RAT right before the Senate vote on Porkulus, but couldn’t get his statement to the floor on time.  You’ll smell a rat, too, when you’re done reading this post, and it won’t just be the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, either:

You’ve heard a lot about the astonishing spending in the $787 billion economic stimulus bill, signed into law this week by President Barack Obama. But you probably haven’t heard about a provision in the bill that threatens to politicize the way allegations of fraud and corruption are investigated — or not investigated — throughout the federal government.

The provision, which attracted virtually no attention in the debate over the 1,073-page stimulus bill, creates something called the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board — the RAT Board, as it’s known by the few insiders who are aware of it. The board would oversee the in-house watchdogs, known as inspectors general, whose job is to independently investigate allegations of wrongdoing at various federal agencies, without fear of interference by political appointees or the White House.

In the name of accountability and transparency, Congress has given the RAT Board the authority to ask “that an inspector general conduct or refrain from conducting an audit or investigation.” If the inspector general doesn’t want to follow the wishes of the RAT Board, he’ll have to write a report explaining his decision to the board, as well as to the head of his agency (from whom he is supposedly independent) and to Congress. In the end, a determined inspector general can probably get his way, but only after jumping through bureaucratic hoops that will inevitably make him hesitate to go forward.

First, let’s ask ourselves how this stimulates the economy.  Why include this in an emergency stimulus bill when it has nothing to do with stimulus or economics?  This rule change should have come in separate debate in Congress — like so many other portions of Porkulus.

It does, however, have everything to do with Hope and Change.  What the RAT Board can do, as York points out, is direct or quash investigations by Inspectors General throughout the federal bureaucracy.  Until now, IGs have had independence of action in order to avoid charges of politicization (remember that word?) and to conduct probes without interference from the Department of Justice, the White House, or Congress.  Now they will answer to Congress not on general performance, but on the specifics of their probes.

How did it get into Porkulus?  Grassley says it wasn’t in the original bill passed in the Senate, and it suddenly appeared in the conference version.  No one has claimed ownership of the RAT Board yet, but clearly the Democratic majority wants full control over oversight in the bureaucracy — which more or less means an end to effective oversight over the majority, which is the entire point of the IG position.  After all, if we could rely on politicians and bureaucrats to police themselves, we wouldn’t need Constitutional checks and balances at all.

The name of the RAT Board is Orwellian, as is its appearance in the administration that claimed it would have the most transparency in American history.  Putting IGs under Nancy Pelosi’s thumb eliminates transparency and accountability, and calling it an Accountability and Transparency Board is a grim joke.  It’s simply a mechanism to shut down potentially embarrassing (or worse) IG investigations while commanding others against political foes.

Put simply, it brings the worst aspects of the Chicago Machine to Washington DC — a result which we repeatedly warned would happen with Obama’s election.

Title: WSJ: The C. vs. seats for DC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2009, 01:14:45 PM

The House of Representatives seems set to grow by two Members, to 437, after next year's election. Yesterday the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act passed a key procedural vote in the Senate, making passage of the legislation, which President Obama supports, all but certain. The only thing standing in the way may be the Constitution.

The District of Columbia is reliably and overwhelmingly Democratic, and most of the bill's sponsors are Democrats. But one Republican is conspicuous among its sponsors: Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah. That is because the legislation also creates a new House seat for Mr. Hatch's state, which in 2000 lost out to North Carolina for the 435th seat because the Census Bureau declined to count Mormon missionaries temporarily overseas as Utah residents.


Utah is one of the most Republican states in the country, but this is still a bad trade for the GOP. Whereas the new District of Columbia seat is permanent, and Democratic dominance in D.C. is as permanent as such things can be, the other new seat will be Utah's for only two years. Thereafter, like all other Congressional seats, it will be reassigned every 10 years as part of reapportionment. It could just as easily go to a Democratic state as to a Republican one.

More important, the legislation runs afoul of the plain language of the Constitution, which provides that House members shall be chosen "by the People of the several States" and stipulates that the District of Columbia is not a state.

In 1960, Congress proposed a Constitutional amendment giving residents of the capital the right to vote for President. The 23rd Amendment was ratified the following year. The District already sends a nonvoting delegate to the House, but if Congress wishes to grant it full representation, it should do so by amending, not ignoring, the Constitution.

Title: The Senator from DC? Screw the C.!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 26, 2009, 04:25:28 PM

Associated Press Writer Jim Abrams, Associated Press Writer – 25 mins ago
Featured Topics: Barack Obama Presidential Transition WASHINGTON(AP — The right to a vote in Congress denied the District of Columbia when it became the nation's capital two centuries ago would be granted under legislation the Senate passed Thursday.

Congress is "moving to right a centuries-old wrong," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid shortly before the 61-37 vote.

The House is expected to pass the measure with a strong majority next week and President Barack Obama, a co-sponsor when the bill failed to clear the Senate two years ago, has promised to sign it.

The measure is likely to face a court challenge immediately after becoming law; opponents argue that it is unconstitutional because D.C. is not a state and does not qualify for representation.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, who sponsored the bill with Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, expressed confidence that they could win the legal argument and noted that the bill contained an expedited appeals process to ensure a quick court decision.

The real issue, he said, is that the disenfranchisement of 600,000 residents of the nation's capital "is patently unjust and un-American in a sense of the best principles of this country."

"This is a historic moment," said Ilir Zherka, head of the advocacy group DC Vote. "In 2007 we were gaining tremendous momentum," he said. "The huge difference this year is that we have an advocate in the White House."

Two years ago, with Democrats holding a smaller majority in the Senate and then-President George W. Bush threatening a veto on constitutional grounds, the Senate fell three votes short of overcoming a GOP-led filibuster.

Under the rules of debate Thursday, supporters needed 60 votes to win passage. Six Republicans voted for the measure while two Democrats opposed it.

Utah's Hatch was a co-sponsor in part because the legislation, to offset the certain Democratic gain from D.C., adds a fourth district to Republican-leaning Utah. That would increase House voting membership by two, to 437.

The two representatives would be seated at the start of the next session in January 2011. Utah's maintaining that fourth seat would depend on the outcome of the 2010 census. Utah barely missed out on picking up an extra seat after the 2000 census.

The final Senate vote came after supporters turned back a constitutional challenge and another amendment that would have effectively returned the nonfederal areas of the district to Maryland.

Senators did approve, 62-36, a controversial amendment pushed by pro-gun advocates that overturns most of the district's tough gun control laws. That provision would still have to be approved when the House and Senate meet to reconcile differences in their bills.

Opponents of the legislation pointed to Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, which says members of the House should be chosen "by the people of the several states."

The Constitution is clear, said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, that "only states elect members of Congress. And according to the same article, the seat of the federal government is not to be considered a state."

Congress in 1978 did approve a constitutional amendment giving the district a full voice in Congress, but it was unable to win ratification of three-fourths of state legislatures.

Those on the other side cited Article I, Section 8, which empowers Congress to "exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever" over the district chosen to be the national capital. Constitutional scholars, they say, agree that gives Congress the right to give the district a vote. They add that D.C. residents pay federal taxes and serve in the military and that the courts have long considered the district equivalent to a state in matters such as interstate commerce, taxation and criminal matters.

D.C. residents have had the right to vote in presidential elections since the 23rd Amendment was ratified in 1961.

Title: What ACORN is Spouting Next
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 17, 2009, 03:56:54 PM

ACORN to Play Role in 2010 Census
The U.S. Census Bureau is working with several national organizations to help recruit 1.4 million workers to produce the country's 2010 census, including one with a history of voter fraud charges: ACORN.

FOXNews.com
Tuesday, March 17, 2009


The U.S. Census is supposed to be free of politics, but one group with a history of voter fraud, ACORN, is participating in next year's count, raising concerns about the politicization of the decennial survey.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now signed on as a national partner with the U.S. Census Bureau in February 2009 to assist with the recruitment of the 1.4 million temporary workers needed to go door-to-door to count every person in the United States -- currently believed to be more than 306 million people.

A U.S. Census "sell sheet," an advertisement used to recruit national partners, says partnerships with groups like ACORN "play an important role in making the 2010 Census successful," including by "help[ing] recruit census workers."

The bureau is currently employing help from more than 250 national partners, including TARGET and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), to assist in the hiring effort.

But ACORN's partnership with the 2010 Census is worrisome to lawmakers who say past allegations of fraud should raise concerns about the organization.

"It's a concern, especially when you look at all the different charges of voter fraud. And it's not just the lawmakers' concern. It should be the concern of every citizen in the country," Rep. Lynn A. Westmoreland, R-Ga., vice ranking member of the subcommittee for the U.S. Census, told FOXNews.com. "We want an enumeration. We don't want to have any false numbers."

ACORN, which claims to be a non-partisan grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people, came under fire in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 phony voter registration forms. The group's activities were frequently questioned in the 2008 presidential election.

ACORN spokesman Scott Levenson told FOXNews.com that "ACORN as an organization has not been charged with any crime." He added that fears that the organization will unfairly influence the census are unfounded.

"It will be the Census Bureau that determines the role and scope of its 300 national partners. ACORN is committed to a fair and accurate count," Levenson said.

The census is an official count of the country's population mandated by the U.S. Constitution. It is used to determine distribution of taxpayer money through grants and appropriations and the apportionment of the 435 seats in the House of Representatives. Every U.S. household unit, including those occupied by non-citizens and illegal immigrants, must be counted.

Westmoreland and Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a member of the House census subcommittee, said the panel has held hearings to make sure the penalties for census takers committing fraud are clearly defined.

"I feel fairly confident that the penalties for an individual manipulating the count are pretty severe," Chaffetz said. The penalty for any fraudulent activity can be up to five years in jail.

Westmoreland said he hopes the Census Bureau will maintain its measures to ensure an accurate report.

"I feel comfortable right now with the people at the census department that they're going to put forth their best effort to have a fair count," he said.

The U.S. Census Bureau has refuted any suggestions that ACORN or any other groups will fraudulently and unduly influence the results of the census.

"The Census (Bureau) is a nonpartisan, non-political agency and we're very dedicated to an accurate account," bureau spokesman Stephen Buckner told FOXNews.com. "We have a lot of quality controls in place to keep any kind of systemic error or fraudulent behavior to affect the counts."

Buckner said the bureau received an overwhelming number of qualified applicants -- more than 1 million -- for the 140,000 census taker jobs filled to complete the first phase of the effort. Each applicant, he said, must take a basic skills exam, which includes reading a map and entering data into a handheld computer. Applicants are also subject to an FBI background check, he said.

But Buckner acknowledged that it is difficult to track an applicant's political background.

"I have no way of tracking any of that information," he said. "If somebody comes in to a position with a political agenda and their work exhibits that, there are rules against that," he said.

Buckner stressed the need for organizations like ACORN to assist in the effort, saying that "any group that has a grassroots organization that can help get the word out that we have jobs" is helpful.

In 2000, the U.S. Census Bureau had 140,000 partnerships from "national organizations to local and community organizations to elected officials," he said. "The list is as broad as the phone book."

 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/17/lawmakers-concerned-role-acorn-census/

Title: WSJ: Card Check is unconstitutional
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 29, 2009, 09:44:54 PM

By DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. and LEE A. CASEY
The Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 -- otherwise known as "card check" -- is organized labor's dream. As a practical matter, this legislation, pursued by both the Obama administration and the Democratic Congress, would do away with the secret ballot in the unionization process. Although card check's advocates and critics have spilled much ink arguing about the bill's fundamental fairness to labor and management, so far the debate has not focused on the other compelling interest at stake: the constitutionally protected right of employees to keep their opinions on controversial issues like unionization to themselves. This is card check's Achilles' heel.

 
David G. KleinThe Supreme Court has interpreted the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech, along with the Fifth and 14th Amendment due process clauses, to protect a variety of expressive and associational rights. The right to speak and associate anonymously is among those rights. Indeed, anonymous speech has a long and honored tradition in American politics. Much of the political agitation leading up to the American Revolution was necessarily anonymous in order to avoid British sedition charges. And three of the Constitution's Framers -- James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay -- wrote the Federalist Papers supporting its ratification under the anonymous pen name "Publius."

The Supreme Court has consistently recognized the importance of this type of political discourse. The reason is obvious: Public speech on contentious issues often inflames passions, prompting intimidation and retaliation. Outing speakers who prefer anonymity chills speech, and has the potential to suppress it entirely.

In an early and important case, NAACP v. Patterson, 1958, the state of Alabama attempted to obtain a listing of the NAACP's membership, although the organization had "made an uncontroverted showing" that revealing the identities of its members had, in the past, exposed them to "economic reprisal, loss of employment, threat of physical coercions and other manifestations of public hostility." The Supreme Court affirmed the NAACP's right to associate freely and privately.

The Court similarly vindicated the right to anonymous speech in political campaigns in the 1995 case McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission. It struck down a law forbidding distribution of unsigned campaign literature, reasoning that the state had shown no interest compelling enough (such as the integrity of the campaign financing process) to justify restrictions on this core First Amendment right. "Identification of the author against her will," the Court explained, "is particularly intrusive; it reveals unmistakably the content of her thoughts on a controversial issue."

When courts have upheld restrictions on anonymous speech, they have required that such provisions be narrowly tailored to serve an overriding governmental interest. Moreover, they have been most comfortable in upholding these provisions when the competing interest itself also involved the protection of First Amendment values.

Thus, for example, campaign contribution limits and disclosures have been defended as necessary anticorruption measures, balancing the abridgement of individual speech against the integrity of the political process, and protecting the marketplace of ideas. Whatever one thinks about the legal strength of these rationales -- and they have many detractors -- it's clear that the judiciary has used them when balancing competing First Amendment interests.

There can be little doubt that the act of voting on important issues is a form of symbolic speech, residing at the very core of the interests protected by the Constitution. The secret ballot has not only been adopted in federal and state elections, it is recognized as a fundamental human right in a number of international instruments. This includes the U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the United States is a party, that requires secret ballot voting as "guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors."

Labor organizing has been one of the most contentious exercises in modern American history, often leading to violence and employee intimidation on both the management and union side. Demanding that workers state publicly (by checking "yes" or "no" on a card) whether they support unionization would involve real and immediate dangers of intimidation, and would deprive workers of their right to anonymous expression. The fact that individuals could refuse to sign a card is unavailing, since a refusal to choose, in this instance, is an effective no.

Card-check supporters may argue that the activities of labor organizers, no matter how intimidating, involve purely private actions to which the Constitution's protections of free speech and association do not apply. However, the Supreme Court has recognized that certain government-sanctioned regulatory schemes can give associated private conduct the character of state or federal action, making the Constitution applicable.

In one early case, Public Utilities Commission v. Pollack (1952), the Court ruled that a private, Washington, D.C., bus company, which operated a radio news and music service in its vehicles that prompted customer complaints of unwanted political indoctrination, was subject to First and Fifth Amendment requirements. The Court reasoned that the Constitution applied since the local public utility commission had permitted the challenged service. In another important case, Railway Employees' Department v. Hanson (1956), the Court concluded that federal authorization of "union shop" agreements (under the Railway Labor Act) meant that governmental action was present because "the federal statute is the source of the power and authority by which any private rights are lost or sacrificed."

The same would be true of card check, which would endow a successful authorization-card drive by labor organizers with immediate consequences under federal law. The National Labor Relations Board would, under the new law, have to "certify" a collective bargaining unit based upon the completed cards. And the new law would effectively subject employer and employees to binding arbitration.

The presence of sufficient governmental action to require constitutional scrutiny can often be a fact-intensive inquiry. But when such mandatory legal consequences result from ostensibly private conduct, the courts would certainly be justified in concluding that the Constitution's requirements apply.

Sanctioning -- and thereby promoting -- demands that employees publicly disclose how they feel about unionization clearly violates their First Amendment entitlement to vote and practice their speech privately. Significantly, unlike other cases in which such restrictions have been upheld, union organizers cannot articulate even a semblance of an offsetting First Amendment value. While they may complain that the current system does not favor unionization and hence inhibits their associational rights, the problem, if any, arises from possible employer intimidation -- not from the secret ballot as such.

In this context, the new law would entitle organized labor to the government's imprimatur of its card-check choice. With the government thus supporting demands that employees publicly state their opinions on a controversial matter, the courts should view card-check's provisions as being ill-tailored to meet the problem of employer intimidation, and thus, unconstitutional.

Messrs. Rivkin and Casey are Washington, D.C., lawyers who served in the Justice Department under Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Title: NYT: Motor voter law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 11, 2009, 06:36:23 AM

The next push to subvert the integrity of the vote is coming.

Reviving the Motor Voter Law
Published: April 10, 2009

In 1993, Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act, widely known as the motor voter law, to make it easier for eligible voters to register and to increase registration rates of traditionally underrepresented groups, including poor people.

In addition to requiring states to provide voter registration materials to people applying for and renewing driver’s licenses, the law requires states to offer registration forms at offices that administer public assistance such as food stamps and unemployment insurance.

States started out with some enthusiasm, but in recent years compliance has fallen sharply. Project Vote and Demos, public-interest groups that work for voting rights, studied the implementation of the motor voter law nationally from 1995 to 2007. In a 2005 study of 103 people leaving a Department of Jobs and Family Services office in Ohio, only three reported being given voter registration forms. Surveys conducted outside of public assistance offices in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Maryland and other states found similar problems.

Not surprisingly, the motor voter law is proving to be far less effective in registering voters than it should be. According to the report by Project Vote and Demos, the number of people registering from public assistance agencies fell 79 percent between 1995 and 1996 — the first years for which data were collected — and 2005 and 2006, the most recent reporting period.

This week, Senator Charles Schumer, a Democrat of New York, wrote to Attorney General Eric Holder and asked him to sue states that fail to comply with the National Voter Registration Act. For eight years, the Bush Justice Department showed little interest in enforcing the law. The Obama administration needs to do better.

The larger answer to low registration rates is to enact laws requiring universal voter registration, which would put the burden on states to find people — through government lists, including tax records — and register them. But until that happens, the Justice Department should make sure that states follow the motor voter law’s more modest mandates.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: G M on April 11, 2009, 07:08:33 AM

And, like California, the federal law will forbid the gov't employees for asking if the person they are registering to vote is a citizen.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 11, 2009, 07:19:28 AM

CA law forbids asking citizenship?  I would love to have a citation on that as I spread it forward , , ,

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: G M on April 11, 2009, 07:41:27 AM

Ok, it appears not to be law, but California's policy interpreting federal law. I'm looking for where CA DMV has issued a policy forbidding DMV clerks from asking about citizenship prior to registering voters.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Legalissues/lm28.cfm

This problem has been exacerbated by many states' interpretation of a HAVA provision that requires a citizenship question on the federal mail-in voter registration form. The provision, in 42 U.S.C. § 15483, requires the following question: "Are you a citizen of the United States of America?" If an applicant fails to answer this question, HAVA provides that the local election official must notify the applicant of the failure and "provide the appli cant with an opportunity to complete the form in a timely manner to allow for the completion of the registration form" prior to the election.[64]  Under the threat of lawsuits by organizations like the Ameri can Civil Liberties Union, states such as Ohio, Iowa, and South Dakota will register an individual even if he fails to answer the citizenship question. The Justice Department so far has failed to sue these states to force compliance with HAVA.[65]

HAVA also imposes an identification require ment for first-time voters who register by mail.[66]  Many states, including California, have interpreted this provision to apply only to registration forms received through the U.S. mail, so the requirement is easily avoided by turning in the registration form directly to election officials. Additionally, docu ments named in the law as acceptable forms of identification for voter registration, such as utility bills and bank statements, are easily obtained by non-citizens. HAVA also requires applicants to pro vide a driver's license number or the last four digits of their Social Security number but allows an indi vidual to register even if he has neither number.[67]

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: G M on April 11, 2009, 08:15:52 AM

April 09, 2009
The End of Fair Elections?

By Tom Hoffman
Anyone who believes Hugo Chavez's presidency is the result of a free and fair election should stop reading and go protest against global warming.  For the rest of us, it may come as a surprise to some; we may have witnessed the last free and fair election in this country. How long ago that election was does not matter now; there will not be another one.

Remember when "B1 Bob" Dornan lost his House seat to a woman named Sanchez? The election was stolen by Hermandad Nacional Mexicana a group that made a concerted effort to register illegal aliens. Since then, the art of rigging the vote has been refined and perfected by the likes of ACORN and other community activist organizations.

The modus operandi is clear. First, there must be a team of lawyers to challenge any efforts to determine voter eligibility. What we end up with here in California is "motor voter" registration.  This means DMV workers urge anyone getting a driver's license to go ahead and register to vote. Lawyers and Democratic state legislators have made it illegal to require documentation regarding immigration status; it's the honor system. If an illegal feels uncomfortable lying to a bureaucrat at the DMV, he or she can apply by mail and receive an absentee ballot. This way they need not even have to show up at the polling place; just mail it in.

It's just too easy to cheat. Of course, at the polling place there is no need to prove who you claim to be; honor system again. Sign in and vote with no questions asked.  The lawyers and legislators paved the way for the "undocumented worker" to vote like a native born citizen by doing away with need to document anything, let alone citizenship.  All that is necessary is a mailing address; and, no kidding, the same culprits are busy doing away with that so the "homeless" can now register.

Registering as many fraudulent votes as possible and making it as difficult as possible to disqualify voters is only front end of the strategy. Once an election has been made close enough to allow for disputes and recounts, whole new machinery has been put in place. Here is where the big money comes into play. The secretaries of state, whose duty it is to oversee the election process, must be beholden to the community activists. Large campaign donations to the secretary of state candidates assure the community organizers a voice in all "recounts". Their squads of well-trained lawyers will likely get sympathetic rulings in their efforts to disqualify eligible voters and qualify the ineligible.

Is it any wonder that, as the rules get watered down again and again, the number of "get out the vote" organizations has multiplied?  There has always been some fraud in our electoral system: but until recently, the scale has not been sufficient to succeed in stealing a national election.  We've passed that line. Once passed, the line can never be redrawn.

ACORN is but one instance of a well financed nationwide effort to institute voter fraud. It is the financing of the likes of George Soros and the organizing skills of the likes of Bill Ayers that assures us of rigged elections from now on. Take the recent U.S. Senate election in Minnesota. The community activists registered thousands of new voters. Given that ACORN has already admitted to voter fraud (by mistake of course), it is certain a fair number of these were fraudulent. It is also certain that nearly all were Democrat votes. The Republican still managed to win by a few hundred votes on the initial count. The margin was too close to rule out a recount; mission accomplished for ACORN and their ilk. In come the lawyers to disqualify Republicans. With the full sympathy of the secretary of state, the radicals manage to turn the tide in favor of the Democrat; game, set, match.

With a proven game plan and large numbers of "community activist" organizations spread out across the country, all that is necessary to rig state and national elections from now on is a large and reliable source of funding. That has already been assured in the "Stimulus" bill. George Soros will now be helped by the U.S. Taxpayer; helped big time. Community activist organizations will find themselves flush with taxpayer cash. They are the grass roots agencies in charge of "neighborhood stabilization." I suppose we could get Jimmy Carter to certify the fairness of the 2010 elections.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/04/the_end_of_fair_elections.html at April 11, 2009 - 11:13:29 AM EDT

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 11, 2009, 10:59:45 AM

A post from the Warrior Talk forum

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Prior to my current place of employ, I worked for one of the big 3 electronic voting machine companies.

Election fraud is really easy to commit on a small scale by one person, but get many people online to collaborate and it can throw a small election. Massive fraud by one or two people is hard but massive fraud by many can and does happen.

Example 1:
In California an elections official cannot request an ID if you are not a provisional voter. The list of registered voters is posted on the outside of the polling center. Every two hours the list must be updated with who has voted so far and be publicly viewable so candidates can potentially call/contact voters who may or may not vote for them.

So, as someone who would travel from precinct to precint to check on the voting machines, I could have instead walked up to the list, grabbed a name off, quickly memorized the name and address and walked in and voted. We see how the left collaborates with "google-bombing" etc, it is very easy for them to collaborate with this.

Example 2:
Partisan Democrat works in the elections dept (they are almost all democrat)
Paper ballots used for election
Partisan worker makes a few marks on the ballots where republican has been chosen. Adding an additional vote to a "vote for one" contest makes it into an "overvote" and that contest is disqualified from count. The democrat does not have to add more ballots or actually vote for the dems, he or she just needs to overvote some contests here and there to subtract the republican vote.

Example 3
Ballots from republican areas "get lost"

Example 4
Ballots from democratic areas are run through the high-speed counting machines twice - honest mistake -not.

Example 5 -
San Francisco allows illegal aliens to vote in "local elections". In theory they should have a separate ballot that only displays the "local elections" in the precinct specfied, not state or federal. Though the special ballot most likely does exist, when the illegal alien checks in to vote, the poll worker gives him or her a complete ballot instead, either by habit, accident or intentional fraud.

Title: WSJ: Minnesota
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 18, 2009, 04:58:15 AM

Meanwhile, back in the Minnesota Senate recount, the three-judge panel reviewing the race has declared Democrat Al Franken the winner. Republican Norm Coleman intends to appeal to the state's Supreme Court, while Democrats and the press corps pressure him to surrender. We hope Mr. Coleman keeps fighting, because the outcome so far hangs on the fact that some votes have been counted differently from others.

 
APEven after the recount and panel-findings, the 312-vote margin separating the two men equals about .01% of the 2.9 million votes cast. Even without any irregularities, this is as close to a "tie" as it gets. And there have been plenty of irregularities. By the end of the recount, the state was awash with evidence of duplicate ballot counting, newly discovered ballots, missing ballots, illegal voting, and wildly diverse standards as to which votes were counted. Any one of these issues was enough to throw the outcome into doubt. Combined, they created a taint more worthy of New Jersey than Minnesota.

The Coleman camp pushed for resolution of these problems during the recount, but it was stymied by a state canvassing board that cared more about preserving its "Minnesota nice" reputation than about making tough calls. The state Supreme Court also punted difficult questions. The mess then landed with the three-judge panel overseeing Mr. Coleman's contest trial, a panel that seemed out of its depth.

Case in point: the panel's dismal handling of absentee ballots. Early in the recount, the Franken team howled that some absentee votes had been erroneously rejected by local officials. We warned at the time that this was dangerous territory, designed to pressure election officials into accepting rejected ballots after the fact.

Yet instead of shutting this Franken request down, or early on issuing a clear set of rules as to which absentees were valid, the state Supreme Court and the canvassing board oversaw a haphazard process by which some counties submitted new batches to be included in the tally, while other counties did not. The resulting additional 933 ballots were largely responsible for Mr. Franken's narrow lead.

During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6,500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933. The three judges then finally defined what constituted a "legal" absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied these standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional absentees that the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed only about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now "illegal" according to the panel's own ex-post definition.

If all this sounds familiar, think Florida 2000. In that Presidential recount, officials couldn't decide what counted as a legal vote, and so different counties used different standards. The Florida Supreme Court made things worse by changing the rules after the fact. In Bush v. Gore, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that this violated Constitutional principles of equal protection and due process, which require that every vote be accorded equal weight.

This will be a basis for Mr. Coleman's appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court. Should that body be reluctant to publicly rebuke their judicial colleagues who sat on the contest panel, Mr. Coleman could also take his appeal to federal court. This could take months.

Another solution is to hold a special Senate election. Minnesota law does not specifically provide for such a runoff. However, the U.S. Constitution's 17th amendment does provide states with a roadmap for filling "vacancies," which might be a legal starting point for a do-over. Even before the shifting standards of the contest trial, the St. Paul Pioneer Press looked at the ballot-counting evidence and called for a revote. It could be that this is where the court case is leading in any event.

Democrats want to portray Mr. Coleman as a sore loser and make the Republican worry that he will ruin his chances for other political office. But Mr. Coleman has a legitimate grievance that not all votes have been treated equally. If the Franken standard of disparate absentee-voter treatment is allowed to stand, every close election will be settled by a legal scramble to change the vote-counting rules after Election Day. Minnesota should take the time to get this one right.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on April 18, 2009, 07:59:24 AM

Doug,
What is your opinion of the "recount" process?
It seems the Dems always challenge the close contested contests and keep the counting going till they get a postive outcome then of coruse just stop.
Was the process as legit as it could be in your opinion?  One can never tell who to believe in these situations and with obvious media bias and loss of even semblence of even an effort of objectivity we don't know what to believe anymore.

Title: Hillary pays herself off
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 29, 2009, 02:15:42 PM

Moving this from the His Glibness thread:

"Under federal campaign finance rules, Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign committee -- called Friends of Hillary -- can't donate to her presidential campaign, but it can purchase such assets as the mailing list."

So she sends herself millions of dollars otherwise prohibited by law, and buys 'the list'.

"The second-largest list payment, about $822,000, came from Mrs. Clinton's political action committee, Hill PAC."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124096138758165891.html
---
We listen to these panderers call for campaign finance reform only to then watch them make a mockery of the laws they pass

Title: WSJ: From the mighty ACORN comes massive vote fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 09, 2009, 07:32:37 AM

By JOHN FUND
Democrats are split on how to deal with Acorn, the liberal "community organizing" group that deployed thousands of get-out-the-vote workers last election. State and city Democratic officials -- who've been contending with its many scandals -- are moving against it. Washington Democrats are still sweeping Acorn abuses under a rug.

On Monday, Nevada officials charged Acorn, its regional director and its Las Vegas field director with submitting thousands of fraudulent voter registration forms last year. Larry Lomax, the registrar of voters in Las Vegas, says he believes 48% of Acorn's forms "are clearly fraudulent." On Thursday, prosecutors in Pittsburgh, Pa., also charged seven Acorn employees with filing hundreds of fraudulent voter registrations before last year's general election.

Acorn spokesman Scott Levenson calls the Nevada criminal complaint "political grandstanding" and says that any problems were the actions of an unnamed "bad employee." But Catherine Cortez Masto, Nevada's Democratic Attorney General, told the Las Vegas Sun that Acorn itself is named in the criminal complaint. She says that Acorn's training manuals "clearly detail, condone and . . . require illegal acts," such as requiring its workers to meet strict voter-registration targets to keep their jobs.

Other Democrats on the ground have complaints. Fred Voight, deputy election commissioner in Philadelphia, protested after Acorn (according to the registrar of voters and his own investigation) submitted at least 1,500 fraudulent registrations last fall. "This has been going on for a number of years," he told CNN in October. St. Louis Democrat Matthew Potter, the city's deputy elections director, had similar complaints.

Elsewhere, Washington state prosecutors fined Acorn $25,000 after several employees were convicted of voter registration fraud in 2007. The group signed a consent decree with King County (Seattle), requiring it to beef up its oversight or face criminal prosecution. In the 2008 election, Acorn's practices led to investigations, some ongoing, in 14 other states.

The stink is bad enough that some congressional Democrats have taken notice. At a March 19 hearing on election problems, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, pressed New York Rep. Gerald Nadler, chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, to hold a hearing on Acorn. He called the charges against it "serious." Mr. Nadler agreed to consider the request.

Mr. Nadler's office now says there will be no hearing on Acorn because Mr. Conyers has changed his mind. Mr. Conyers's office released a statement on Monday saying that after reviewing "the complaints against Acorn, I have concluded that a hearing on this matter appears unwarranted at this time." A Democratic staffer told me he believes the House leadership put pressure on Mr. Conyers to back down. Mr. Conyers's office says it is "unaware" of any contacts with House leaders.

Then there's Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Last month, he voted for a committee amendment (to the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act) by Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R., Minn.) to block groups indicted for voter fraud from receiving federal housing or legal assistance grants. Identical language was passed into law in the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. Mr. Frank now says he "had not read [the amendment] carefully" before backing it. He gutted the amendment on Thursday, claiming that the language Congress passed just last year is "a violation of the basic principles of due process."

A lot of money is at stake. In the stimulus bill passed by Congress, Acorn is eligible -- along with other activist groups -- to apply for $2 billion in funds to redevelop abandoned and foreclosed homes. Meanwhile, public records show that last spring the IRS filed three tax liens totaling almost $1 million against Acorn, most of which concerned employee withholding.

All of this infuriates Marcel Reid, who, along with seven other national Acorn board members, was removed last year after demanding an audit of the group's books. "Acorn has been hijacked by a power-hungry clique that has its own political and personal agendas," she told me. "We are fighting to take back the group."

Bertha Lewis, the head of Acorn, told me last year before their ouster that the "Acorn Eight" were "obsessed" and "confused." But Anita MonCrief, an Acorn whistleblower, says the problems run deep. Ms. MonCrief worked at Project Vote, an Acorn affiliate, in late 2007. She says its development director, Karen Gillette, told her she had direct contact with the Obama campaign and also told her to call Obama donors who had maxed out on donations to the candidate but who could contribute to Acorn. Project Vote calls her charges "absolutely false." (Ms. Gillette has declined comment.)

Acorn's relationship to the Obama campaign is a matter of public record. Last year, Citizens Consulting Inc., the umbrella group controlling Acorn, was paid $832,000 by the Obama campaign for get-out-the-vote efforts in key primary states. In filings with the Federal Election Commission, the campaign listed the payments as "staging, sound, lighting," only correcting them after reporters from the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review revealed their true nature.

Mr. Obama distanced himself from the group's scandals last year, saying "We don't need Acorn's help." Nevertheless, he got his start as a community organizer at Acorn's side. In 1992, he headed a registration effort for Project Vote, an Acorn partner at the time. In 1995, he represented Acorn in a key case upholding the new Motor Voter Act -- the very law whose mandated postcard registration system Acorn workers use to flood election offices with bogus registrations.

But Acorn's registration tricks may soon be unnecessary. Congressional Democrats are backing a bill to mandate a nationwide data base to automatically register driver's license holders or recipients of government benefits.

This "would create an engraved invitation for voter fraud," says Hans von Spakovsky, a former Federal Election Commission member, who points out that these lists are filled with felons and noncitizens who are ineligible to vote. Ironically, in light of its troubles with the law, Acorn was selected in March to assist the U.S. Census in reaching out to minority communities and recruiting census enumerators for the count next year.

As for the Nevada indictment, Acorn isn't worried. "We've had bad publicity before, and all it does is inform the community that we're here working for the community," Bonnie Greathouse, Acorn's head organizer in Nevada, assured the Las Vegas Review-Journal this week. "People always come forward to our defense. We're just community organizers, just like the president used to be."

Mr. Fund is a columnist for WSJ.com .
===============

BTW, Glenn Beck has been going after ACORN with serious intent this week.  Very impressive.

Title: Charges against Black Panther type thugs dropped
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 29, 2009, 11:56:21 AM

Well this is certainly a naked exercise of political prerogative.

Friday, May 29, 2009


Charges brought against three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense under the Bush administration have been dropped by the Obama Justice Department, FOX News has learned.

The charges stemmed from an incident at a Philadelphia polling place on Election Day 2008 when three members of the party were accused of trying to threaten voters and block poll and campaign workers by the threat of force -- one even brandishing what prosecutors call a deadly weapon.

The three black panthers, Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were charged in a civil complaint in the final days of the Bush administration with violating the voter rights act by using coercion, threats and intimidation. Shabazz allegedly held a nightstick or baton that prosecutors said he pointed at people and menacingly tapped it. Prosecutors also say he "supports racially motivated violence against non-blacks and Jews."

The Obama administration won the case last month, but moved to dismiss the charges on May 15.

The complaint says the men hurled racial slurs at both blacks and whites.

A poll watcher who provided an affidavit to prosecutors in the case noted that Bartle Bull, who worked as a civil rights lawyer in the south in the 1960's and is a former campaign manager for Robert Kennedy, said it was the most blatant form of voter intimidation he had ever seen.

In his affidavit, obtained by FOX News, Bull wrote "I watched the two uniformed men confront voters and attempt to intimidate voters. They were positioned in a location that forced every voter to pass in close proximity to them. The weapon was openly displayed and brandished in plain sight of voters."

He also said they tried to "interfere with the work of other poll observers ... whom the uniformed men apparently believed did not share their preferences politically," noting that one of the panthers turned toward the white poll observers and said "you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."

A spokesman for the Department of Justice told FOX News, "The Justice Department was successful in obtaining an injunction that prohibits the defendant who brandished a weapon outside a Philadelphia polling place from doing so again. Claims were dismissed against the other defendants based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law. The department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/05/29/charges-black-panthers-dropped-obama/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 29, 2009, 06:33:48 PM

Moving GM's post to this thread:

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/05/29/who-pressured-justice-to-drop-case-against-vote-intimidation-in-philly/

Title: Feds spike citizenship checks in GA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 02, 2009, 07:18:43 PM

Feds spike voter citizenship checks in Georgia

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Georgia should use the same system that prospective gun owners have to pass.That check has been accepted as non discriminatory.

ATLANTA — The Justice Department has rejected Georgia's system of using Social Security numbers and driver's license data to check whether prospective voters are citizens, a process that was a subject of a federal lawsuit in the weeks leading up to November's election.

In a letter released on Monday, the Justice Department said the state's voter verification program is frequently inaccurate and has a "discriminatory effect" on minority voters. The decision means Georgia must halt the citizenship checks, although the state can still ask the Justice Department to reconsider, according to the letter and to the Georgia secretary of state's office.

"This flawed system frequently subjects a disproportionate number of African-American, Asian and/or Hispanic voters to additional, and more importantly, erroneous burdens on the right to register to vote," Loretta King, acting assistant attorney general of the Justice Department's civil rights division, said. King's letter was sent to Georgia Attorney General Thurbert Baker on Friday.

The decision comes as Georgia awaits word on whether a law passed in the spring that requires newly registering voters to show proof of citizenship will pass muster with DOJ. Under the law that takes effect in January, people must show their proof up front compared to doing checks through databases.

A three-judge federal panel in October ordered the state to seek Justice Department preclearance for the checks under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the same reason the federal agency must sign off on the new law that made Georgia only the second state after Arizona to require such proof. Georgia is one of several states that need federal approval before changing election rules because of a history of discriminatory Jim Crow-era voting practices.

Secretary of State Karen Handel blasted DOJ's decision, saying it opens the floodgates for non-citizens to vote in the state.

"Clearly, politics took priority over common sense and good public policy," said Handel, a Republican candidate for governor in 2010.

Justice Department officials said the citizenship match through driver's license and Social Security data has flagged 7,007 individuals as non-citizens but that many have been shown to be in error.

"Thousands of citizens who are in fact eligible to vote under Georgia law have been flagged," the Justice Department letter said.

The Justice Department decision marks the first time the new Democratic Obama administration has weighed in on Georgia's election laws. It is also the first time the Justice Department has rejected a change in election procedures by Georgia since the 1990s, according to a spokesman for the Georgia attorney general.

"We are pleased with this decision," said Elise Shore, Southeastern Regional Counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. "It vindicates our filing of the lawsuit."

But Handel said that more than 2,100 people who attempted to register in Georgia still have not resolved questions regarding their citizenship. Her office's inspector general is investigating more than 30 cases of non-citizens casting ballots in Georgia elections, including the case of a Henry County non-citizen who said she registered to vote and cast ballots in 2004 and 2006.

Handel said the checks were designed to follow federal guidelines to ensure the integrity of the vote and that those eligible are casting ballots.

But the ACLU and the Mexican American defense fund sued, saying the efforts amounted to a "systematic purging" of rolls just weeks before the election.

Separately, the U.S., Supreme Court is considering a challenge to the portion of the Voting Rights Act requiring Georgia and select other states to seek approval before tinkering with election law.

By SHANNON McCAFFREY, The Associated Press

Title: from PatriotPost.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 06, 2009, 06:30:30 AM

Last week, we reported on a bill introduced by Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA) to eliminate "birthright citizenship" for children of illegal aliens. We erred in stating, "Birthright citizenship has been in place since the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868..." The 14th Amendment does not confer citizenship on the children of illegal aliens born on U.S. soil as we implied.

Patriot reader and Harding University political science professor Cheri Pierson Yecke wrote in to clear up the matter. She noted that birthright citizenship "began with the Supreme Court decision of United States v. Wong Kim Ark (1898). SCOTUS shamefully ignored congressional intent and gave the following opinion: 'A child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the Emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the Emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States, by virtue of the first clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."'"

Dr. Yecke added, "As can be seen in the Senate debate on the 14th Amendment (39th Congress, First Session), a provision for 'anchor babies' was never the intent of Congress." Sen. Jacob Howard (R-MI) argued for adding the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to the Amendment, saying, "This [Amendment] will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors, or foreign ministers..."

In other news designed to create more Democrat voters, the Obama administration vacated a rule implemented by the Bush administration limiting access to an attorney for illegal aliens facing deportation. According to the Associated Press, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey "had issued a 33-page decision in January saying the Constitution does not entitle someone facing deportation to have a case reopened based upon shoddy work by a lawyer. Mukasey also said, however, that Justice Department officials have the discretion to reopen such cases if they choose."

From the Department of Injustice
Charges of voter intimidation against three members of the "New" Black Panther Party were dropped this week by the Obama Justice Department. It should have been an open-and-shut case of voter intimidation and harassment. Men in paramilitary uniforms, at least some of whom belonged to Louis Farrakhan's infamous Nation of Islam, were caught on videotape standing in front of a Philadelphia precinct blocking the doorway while voters tried to enter on Election Day last November. The thugs, one of whom brandished a club, cast menacing stares and racial epithets at white voters in line.

The men responsible were charged and the Obama administration actually won the case, but they moved to dismiss the charges on May 15. No justifiable explanation has been given, but we can reasonably suspect that it's primarily because Obama doesn't want to anger his constituents. A spokesman for the Justice Department had the nerve to state, "The department is committed to the vigorous prosecution of those who intimidate, threaten or coerce anyone exercising his or her sacred right to vote." The department clearly did not do that in this situation. Liberal civil rights attorney Bartle Bull was a witness and is leading the charge against the administration's actions.

Meanwhile, the "Justice" Department rejected a program put in place by Georgia's Secretary of State Karen Handel to screen state databases to flag ineligible voters. Their excuse was that the program was inaccurate and discriminatory, though they refused to share the information that led to that conclusion. Handel, who is a Republican candidate for governor, noted that the decision would lead to a flood of non-qualified voters. She also noted the irony that Justice was on board for the program when it was created. What changed? The ruling party in Washington, and the new bosses want wide open voter rolls with no restrictions on eligibility because it makes it easier for them to rig elections.

Title: Injustice Department
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on June 09, 2009, 10:12:52 AM

Holder Winks at Voter Intimidation
On ballot integrity, the Justice Department is taking us backward.

By HANS A. VON SPAKOVSKY

When Eric Holder became U.S. attorney general, he promised to administer the law in an objective, nonpolitical manner. So it's disappointing that the Justice Department had spent the last several months misinterpreting key voting rights laws for nakedly political reasons.

Exhibit A: Justice's inexplicable dismissal of a civil lawsuit for voter intimidation against the New Black Panther Party. The Black Panthers weren't content to endorse Barack Obama. They sent their members to the polls last November to "patrol election sites." Fox News aired a video of two Black Panthers in military-style uniforms in a Philadelphia precinct. One of them was carrying a nightstick.

The complaint the Justice Department filed in January (before Messrs. Obama and Holder took over) says the Panthers made "racial threats and racial insults" to voters and "menacing and intimidating, gestures, statements and movements directed at individuals who were present to aid voters." One witness, Bartle Bull, a civil-rights lawyer who worked with Charles Evers in Mississippi in the 1960s, called it the worst voter intimidation he had ever seen.

Justice won the suit by default when the Black Panthers and three individual defendants didn't show up in court to deny the allegations. But instead of following through and getting an injunction to prevent this behavior in future elections, the department, now under Mr. Holder, dismissed the lawsuit against all but one of the defendants (the nightstick holder). Even then, Justice requested only a watered-down penalty: an injunction to prevent him from carrying a weapon in a polling place. But only in Philadelphia and only until 2012!

Exhibit B: Justice recently stopped Georgia from implementing a key provision of the Help America Vote Act. Passed in 2002, the act requires states to verify the accuracy of information voters provide on their registration forms by comparing it with state driver's license and Social Security records -- a sensible requirement. With input from Justice Department lawyers in 2008, Georgia implemented this verification process, including checking the citizenship status of applicants. It is a violation of federal and state law for a noncitizen to register and vote in federal and state elections.

Under Georgia's program, anyone flagged as a potential noncitizen would still be registered if he could confirm to local election officials that he was indeed a citizen. Georgia sent letters to over 4,000 potential noncitizens. More than 2,000 failed to confirm their citizenship, strong evidence that noncitizens were prevented from illegally registering and voting.

Has this verification process depressed minority voter turnout, as some claim? Hardly. There has been a 140% increase in Hispanic turnout and a 42% increase in black turnout since the 2004 election.

But Georgia is still covered under the outdated Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires the state to submit any "change" in voting to the Justice Department for preclearance to assure it is not "discriminatory." On May 29, the department vetoed the state's verification program based on the spurious claim that it would have a "disparate" impact on minority voters -- particularly Asians and Hispanics, who are supposedly "twice as likely to appear on the list" of potential noncitizens than whites. Never mind that only 35% of Hispanics and 58% of Asians in Georgia are citizens. Or that not one eligible individual has come forward to claim this program prevented him from voting in the November election. Georgia was doing exactly what the federal government requires private employers to do in checking the citizenship of all employees.

Justice's objection defies common sense, manipulates federal law, and shows a complete disregard for the integrity of our election process. It is this kind of abuse of the applicable legal standard that is yet one more reason for the Supreme Court to hold, in a Texas case now pending (Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Holder), that the renewal of Section 5 in 2005 was unconstitutional and unjustified. If the Justice Department believes a state voting law is discriminatory it should be required by law to file a lawsuit in federal court to prove it, thus allowing the state to defend itself against the charge. That would certainly be an improvement over the current administrative system, where Justice gets to choose the evidence to consider and be the one to decide its legal effect.

But that's apparently too much for the current administration, which is trying to stop verification of voter registration information. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 requires states to maintain their voter lists by removing ineligible voters, such as those who have moved or died. In 2005, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit in Missouri against the secretary of state for not cleaning up voter registration lists. (A similar suit was settled with the Indiana secretary of state, who agreed to clean up the state's list.) Justice successfully litigated the Missouri lawsuit all the way up to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which remanded it to the district court for further proceedings.

Registration numbers from the November 2008 election show that more than a dozen counties in Missouri have more registered voters than the Census shows they have voting-age residents. Clearly, the state isn't keeping its lists current. However, in March, one month after Secretary of State Robin Carnahan (a Democrat and the defendant in the lawsuit) announced she was running for the Senate seat being vacated by Republican Kit Bond, the Justice Department dismissed the lawsuit without explanation.

All of these decisions seriously undermine confidence in the rule of law and our election process. Under the Voting Rights Act, the Department of Justice is charged with protecting voters, no matter what their racial or ethnic background. Under the Help America Vote Act and the National Voter Registration Act, the department is also charged with securing the integrity of the voter registration process. In just the first five months of this administration Justice seems to be moving as fast as it can to defeat that charge.

Mr. Spakovsky is a legal scholar at the Heritage Foundation and a former counsel at the Department of Justice.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124451552193396877.html#mod=djemEditorialPage

Title: Watchdog Axed?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on June 13, 2009, 10:07:14 AM

What's behind Obama's sudden attempt to fire the AmeriCorps inspector general?

By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
06/11/09 8:14 PM EDT

New info: See updates below for Walpin's "one-hour deadline" e-mail to the White House.

There are a number of unanswered questions today about President Obama's abrupt decision to fire the inspector general of the AmeriCorps program, Gerald Walpin.  Obama sent letters to House and Senate leaders yesterday informing them that he was firing Walpin, effective 30 days from the date of the letters.

"It is vital that I have the fullest confidence in the appointees serving as Inspectors General," the president wrote.  "That is no longer the case with regard to this Inspector General."

The 30 day requirement is important because last year Congress passed the Inspectors General Reform Act, which was designed to strengthen protections for IGs, who have the responsibility of investigating allegations of waste, fraud and abuse within federal agencies, against interference by political appointees or the White House.  Part of the Act was a requirement that the president give Congress 30 days' notice before dismissing an IG.  One of the co-sponsors of the Act was then-Sen. Barack Obama.

The Act also requires the president to outline the cause for his decision to remove an IG.  Beyond saying that he did not have the "fullest confidence" in Walpin, Obama gave no reason for his action.

There are two big questions about the president's actions.  One, why did he decide to fire Walpin?  And two, did he abide by the law that he himself co-sponsored?

According to Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, a strong advocate of inspectors general, Walpin received a call from the White House Counsel's office on Wednesday evening.  Walpin was told that he had one hour to either resign or be fired.  Senate sources say Walpin asked why he was being fired and, according to one source, "The answer that was given was that it's just time to move on.  The president would like to have someone else in that position."  Walpin declined to resign.

Grassley fired off a letter to the president on Thursday saying that, "I was troubled to learn that [Wednesday] night your staff reportedly issued an ultimatum to the AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin that he had one hour to resign or be terminated," Grassley wrote.  "As you know, Inspectors General were created by Congress as a means to combat waste, fraud, and abuse and to be independent watchdogs ensuring that federal agencies were held accountable for their actions.  Inspectors General were designed to have a dual role reporting to both the President and Congress so that they would be free from undue political pressure.  This independence is the hallmark of all Inspectors General and is essential so they may operate independently, without political pressure or interference from agencies attempting to keep their failings from public scrutiny."

Grassley's version of events suggests that the White House first tried to muscle Walpin out of his job without having to go through the 30-day process.  It was only when Walpin refused to resign that the White House then notified Congress of the president's intention to fire Walpin.

The bigger question is why the president is doing this and why he is attempting to do it so quickly.  Senate sources now believe Obama is firing Walpin over Walpin's investigation of Kevin Johnson, a former NBA star and a prominent supporter of the president.

Johnson, now the mayor of Sacramento, California, started a non-profit organization called St. Hope. The group's mission, according to its website, is "to revitalize inner-city communities through public education, civic leadership, economic development and the arts."  As part of its work, St. Hope received a grant of about $850,000 from AmeriCorps.

Last year, Walpin began an investigation of how Johnson's group spent the money.  According to the Associated Press, "[Walpin] found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car." Walpin asked federal prosecutors to investigate.  In April, the U.S. attorney in Sacramento, a Bush holdover, declined to file any criminal charges in the matter and also criticized Walpin's investigation.

That might suggest that St. HOPE was OK, and it was Walpin who was in the wrong.  But at the same time prosecutors decided not to file any charges against St. HOPE, the U.S. attorney's office also entered into a settlement with St. HOPE in which the group also agreed to pay back about half of the $850,000 it had received from AmeriCorps.

In his letter to the president, Grassley defended Walpin's performance.  "There have been no negative findings against Mr. Walpin by the Integrity Committee of the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE), and he has identified millions of dollars in AmeriCorps funds either wasted outright or spent in violation of established guidelines," Grassley wrote.  "In other words, it appears he has been doing his job. "

The bottom line is that the AmeriCorps IG accused a prominent Obama supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money.  After an investigation, the prominent Obama supporter had to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money.  And Obama fired the AmeriCorps IG.

 

UPDATE, 1:55 PM Friday:

There are a number of new developments since my post above was published.  First, the White House is confirming that it decided to fire IG Walpin because of the Kevin Johnson/St. HOPE affair.  In a letter sent Thursday night to Sen. Charles Grassley, White House counsel Gregory Craig cited a complaint lodged by the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento, Lawrence Brown, accusing Walpin of misconduct in the St. Hope investigation.  "The Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, a career prosecutor who was appointed to his post during the Bush Administration, has referred Mr. Walpin’s conduct for review by the Integrity Committee of the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE)," Craig wrote.  "We are aware of the circumstances leading to that referral and of Mr. Walpin’s conduct throughout his tenure and can assure you that that the President’s decision was carefully considered."  This is the White House's first public statement of its reason for firing Walpin.

In the referral which Craig mentioned, which was sent April 29, Lawrence Brown accused Walpin of conducting a biased investigation and seeking "to act as the investigator, advocate, judge, jury and town crier." Brown was particularly angry that Walpin's office had talked with the press at various times in the St. HOPE investigation.  Brown asked AmeriCorps to investigate Walpin's behavior. In a stinging response, Walpin wrote that several of Brown's points were flat-out wrong.

More importantly, Walpin's response sheds light on the process by which St. Hope will allegedly return to the government about half of the $850,000 grant it received from AmeriCorps.  Walpin accused the U.S. attorney's office of undermining Walpin's attempt at "suspension and debarment" -- that is, from taking action that prevents an organization that has engaged in misconduct from receiving any other federal money.

According to Walpin, the U.S. attorney's office resisted efforts to get St. HOPE to repay the money.  Even though AmeriCorps inspector general officials had found "six specific instances of diversion and misuse of [AmeriCorps] grant funds," and even though Kevin Johnson never "submitted a single fact to dispute those findings," the U.S. attorney, according to Walpin, insisted that the settlement agreement forbid suspension or debarment.

Further, according to Walpin, even with the settlement agreement as it now exists, there is little hope the government will ever get any of its money back.  "As St. HOPE is insolvent, the absence of any obligation imposed on…[Kevin Johnson], and the absence of any guarantee or security to ensure payment, makes the settlement a farce," Walpin wrote.

"Mr. Brown knows," Walpin concluded, "that the settlement agreement was carefully drafted so that no obligation is imposed on Mr. Johnson to pay to [AmeriCorps] a single penny of the amount supposedly to be paid to [AmeriCorps] by St. HOPE."

Walpin's response has led congressional investigators to want to know more about Brown, the acting U.S. attorney.  I referred to him earlier as a "Bush holdover."  That's not entirely accurate.  Brown is now the acting U.S. attorney, and he was in the office during the Bush years, but he is a career official, not a Bush appointee.  In the days to come, congressional investigators will be weighing Brown's claims versus Walpin's. A lot is going on with the story, and it is happening very quickly.

 

UPDATE, 4:55 PM Friday:

On Wednesday night, after the White House counsel's office called AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin on his cell phone to tell him he had one hour to resign or be fired, Walpin sent an extensive e-mail account of the call to the man who had phoned him, Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform.  In the e-mail, Walpin explained that he would not make a decision in such a short period of time.  He also noted that Eisen had said any appearance of a connection between Walpin's firing and recent conflicts over Walpin's handing of high-profile investigations was "coincidence."  Here is the whole e-mail, sent from Walpin to Eisen at 7:32 p.m. on June 10:

My email responds to your telephone call to me while I was in a car driving on a highway, at about 5:20 p.m.  I have now reached a destination and therefore can write you this email.

In your telephone call, you informed me that the President wishes me to resign my post as IG of CNCS [Corporation for National and Community Service, which includes AmeriCorps].  You told me that I could take no more than an hour to make a decision.

As you know, Congress intended the Inspector General of CNCS to have the utmost independence of judgment in his deliberations respecting the propriety of the agency's conduct and the actions of its officers.  That is why the relevant statute provides that the President may remove the IG only if he supplies the Congress with a statement of his reasons--which is quite a different matter than executive branch officials who serve at his pleasure and can therefore be removed for any reason and without notification to Congress.

I take this statutorily-mandated independence of my office very seriously, and, under the present circumstances, I simply cannot make a decision to respect or decline what you have said were the President's wishes within an hour or indeed any such short time.  As you are aware, I have just issued two reports highly critical of the actions of CNCS, which is presently under the direction of the President's appointee and, I am advised, someone with a meaningful relationship with the President.

Chairman Solomont and I have had significant disagreements about the findings and conclusions contained in these reports.  It would do a disservice to the independent scheme that Congress has mandated--and could potentially raise questions about my own integrity--if I were to render what would seem to many a very hasty response to your request.

I heard your statement that this request that you communicated on behalf of the President and the timing of our reports and disagreement with the CNCS Board and management are "coincidence," as you put it on the phone, but I would suggest there is a high likelihood that others may see it otherwise.

I suspect that, when presented with the circumstances I have just discussed, the President will see the propriety of providing me additional time to reflect on his request.  If however he believes that my departure is a matter of urgency, then he will have to take the appropriate steps toward ordering my removal, without my agreement.

Gerald Walpin

 

Below are my original posts and updates from Thursday night:

Some strange and potentially suspicious events tonight concerning the Obama White House and the AmeriCorps program.  I've been told that on Wednesday night the AmeriCorps inspector general, Gerald Walpin, received a call from the White House counsel's office telling him that he had one hour to either resign or be fired.  The White House did not cite a reason.  "The answer that was given was that it's just time to move on," one Senate source told me tonight.  "The president would like to have someone else in that position."

Inspectors General are part of every federal department. They are given the responsibility of independently investigating allegations of waste, fraud, and corruption in the government, without fear of interference by political appointees or the White House.  Last year Congress passed the Inspectors General Reform Act, which added new protections for IGs, including a measure requiring the president to give Congress 30 days prior notice before dismissing an IG.  The president must also give Congress an explanation of why the action is needed.  Then-Sen. Barack Obama was one of the co-sponsors of the Act.

Now, there is the hurried attempt to dismiss Walpin, without the required notice or cause.  After last night's call, Walpin got in touch with Congress, and it appears the White House has backed off, at least for now.  This afternoon, Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, who is something of a guardian angel for inspectors general, fired off a letter to the White House about the affair.

"I was troubled to learn that last night your staff reportedly issued an ultimatum to the AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin that he had one hour to resign or be terminated," Grassley wrote.  "As you know, Inspectors General were created by Congress as a means to combat waste, fraud, and abuse and to be independent watchdogs ensuring that federal agencies were held accountable for their actions.  Inspectors General were designed to have a dual role reporting to both the President and Congress so that they would be free from undue political pressure.  This independence is the hallmark of all Inspectors General and is essential so they may operate independently, without political pressure or interference from agencies attempting to keep their failings from public scrutiny."

Grassley said he was "deeply troubled" by the Walpin matter and closed by asking the president "to review the Inspector General Reform Act you cosponsored and to follow the letter of the law should you have cause to remove any Inspector General."

UPDATE 1: I've been trying to discover the real reason for Obama's move, and it's still not clear.  I'm told that it could be a combination of the normal tensions that surround any inspector general's office, or the president's desire to get his own people in IG positions, or a dispute over a particular investigation.  "Bottom line," one source wrote, "getting rid of a tough, Republican-appointed IG who has been aggressively going after waste and fraud gives Obama a chance to replace that IG with a more compliant team player."

I'm also told that a number of inspectors general around the government have been expressing concerns to Congress recently about threats to their independence.

UPDATE 2:  More information now, from the Associated Press.  The White House is going ahead with firing Walpin.  The firing apparently stems from Walpin's investigation of a non-profit group, St. HOPE Academy, run by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California (and a big Obama supporter).  "[Walpin] found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car," the AP reports.  In April, the U.S. attorney declined to file any criminal charges in the matter and criticized Walpin's investigation.  But at the same time Johnson and St. HOPE agreed to repay about half of the $850,000 it had received from AmeriCorps.

Bottom line: The AmeriCorps IG accuses prominent Obama supporter of misusing AmeriCorps grant money.  Prominent Obama supporter has to pay back more than $400,000 of that grant money.  Obama fires AmeriCorps IG.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Whats-behind-Obamas-sudden-firing-of-the-AmeriCorps-inspector-general-47877797.html

Title: ACORN Irony
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on June 30, 2009, 09:42:13 AM

ACORN Rent-A-Mob Thugs to Harass Lenders Tuesday
JUNE 29TH, 2009 BY MATTHEW VADUM
ACORN, which played a starring role in creating the subprime mortgage crisis, plans to add insult to injury by harassing lenders across the nation with protests tomorrow in an effort to coerce them into supporting President Obama’s Making Home Affordable foreclosure-avoidance program.

Austin King, director of ACORN Financial Justice, sent out a press release today advising of the demonstrations that are planned as part of its “Homewrecker 4″ campaign. The four financial companies targeted are Goldman Sachs, HomEq Servicing, American Home Mortgage, and OneWest. Read the whole document here.

ACORN plans to hit Dallas, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, St. Louis, New York City, Wilmington (Del.), Columbus (Ohio), Houston, Little Rock, Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, San Francisco, and Seattle.

But let’s not forget that ACORN helped to cause the mortgage bubble by strongarming banks into making loans they shouldn’t have. And cheering them on was ACORN’s lawyer, Barack Obama, who contributed to the increasingly hostile environment for banks when he represented plaintiffs in the 1995 class action lawsuit Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank. The suit demanded that Citibank grant mortgages to an equal percentage of minority and non-minority mortgage applicants. The bank settled the case three years later and reportedly agreed to beef up its lending to unqualified applicants.

ACORN refuses to acknowledge the role that it and the CRA played in the current crisis on Wall Street, and President Obama continues to support stronger enforcement of the disastrous law.

The final paragraph of the press release is unintentionally hilarious:

Because millions of Americans are losing their homes, neighborhoods and the economy are in ruins, and while the “Home Wrecker 4” are taking tax dollars and giving away huge bonuses, they refuse to do even the bare minimum for American homeowners by signing up for the Obama foreclosure plan.

Millions of Americans are losing their homes and neighborhoods and the economy are in ruins because of groups like ACORN that interfere with markets and force banks to do stupid things.

And ACORN too has taken in millions of dollars in taxpayer funding and is utterly unaccountable. The group even covered up a million dollar embezzlement for eight years.

As I’ve said before, ACORN lies, lies, and then lies so more. No lie is too big or outrageous for the criminal group now charged in Nevada with voter registration fraud.

http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/2009/06/29/acorn-rent-a-mob-thugs-to-harass-lenders-tuesday/

Title: The Clusterfcuk continues , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 30, 2009, 11:52:15 AM

Court Rules Franken Has Won Senate Seat

The Minnesota Supreme Court has just issued its long-awaited
judgment in the Senate race, declaring that Democrat Al
Franken is the winner.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/?emc=na

Title: WSJ: Franken manipulated absentee count
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 01, 2009, 06:50:36 AM

The Minnesota Supreme Court yesterday declared Democrat Al Franken the winner of last year's disputed Senate race, and Republican incumbent Norm Coleman's gracious concession at least spares the state any further legal combat. The unfortunate lesson is that you don't need to win the vote on Election Day as long as your lawyers are creative enough to have enough new or disqualified ballots counted after the fact.

Mr. Franken trailed Mr. Coleman by 725 votes after the initial count on election night, and 215 after the first canvass. The Democrat's strategy from the start was to manipulate the recount in a way that would discover votes that could add to his total. The Franken legal team swarmed the recount, aggressively demanding that votes that had been disqualified be added to his count, while others be denied for Mr. Coleman.

But the team's real goldmine were absentee ballots, thousands of which the Franken team claimed had been mistakenly rejected. While Mr. Coleman's lawyers demanded a uniform standard for how counties should re-evaluate these rejected ballots, the Franken team ginned up an additional 1,350 absentees from Franken-leaning counties. By the time this treasure hunt ended, Mr. Franken was 312 votes up, and Mr. Coleman was left to file legal briefs.

What Mr. Franken understood was that courts would later be loathe to overrule decisions made by the canvassing board, however arbitrary those decisions were. He was right. The three-judge panel overseeing the Coleman legal challenge, and the Supreme Court that reviewed the panel's findings, in essence found that Mr. Coleman hadn't demonstrated a willful or malicious attempt on behalf of officials to deny him the election. And so they refused to reopen what had become a forbidding tangle of irregularities. Mr. Coleman didn't lose the election. He lost the fight to stop the state canvassing board from changing the vote-counting rules after the fact.

This is now the second time Republicans have been beaten in this kind of legal street fight. In 2004, Dino Rossi was ahead in the election-night count for Washington Governor against Democrat Christine Gregoire. Ms. Gregoire's team demanded the right to rifle through a list of provisional votes that hadn't been counted, setting off a hunt for "new" Gregoire votes. By the third recount, she'd discovered enough to win. This was the model for the Franken team.

Mr. Franken now goes to the Senate having effectively stolen an election. If the GOP hopes to avoid repeats, it should learn from Minnesota that modern elections don't end when voters cast their ballots. They only end after the lawyers count them.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on July 01, 2009, 08:46:23 AM

Perhaps misfiled, but these ham-fisted efforts to limit free speech strike me as antithetical to the electoral process:

McCain, Feingold fight Obama on FEC
By: Kenneth P. Vogel and Manu Raju
July 1, 2009 04:32 AM EST

The campaign finance dream team of Sens. Russ Feingold and John McCain is reuniting to block President Barack Obama’s first appointment to the Federal Election Commission and to push him to shake up the embattled agency.

In a surprising move that invokes memories of a bitter skirmish during Obama’s annihilation of McCain in last year’s presidential election, Feingold (D-Wis.) and McCain (R-Ariz.) have placed a hold on the FEC nomination of Democratic labor lawyer John Sullivan, POLITICO confirmed Tuesday. Their hold could reverberate in Congress, the White House, the 2010 midterm elections and beyond.

In a statement issued in response to POLITICO’s inquiries, the lawmakers signaled they would release the hold only if Obama taps two additional nominees to fill expired seats on the six-member independent panel, which critics contend is systematically deregulating campaign rules.

“The FEC is currently mired in anti-enforcement gridlock,” read the joint statement from Feingold and McCain, whose names became synonymous with efforts to limit the role of special interest cash in politics when they teamed to shepherd into law the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act, better known as McCain-Feingold. “The president must nominate new commissioners with a demonstrated commitment to the existence and enforcement of the campaign finance laws.”

Their hold on Sullivan, who would replace a commissioner whose term expired two years ago, was exhilarating to advocates of limiting the role of money in politics, who want Obama to chart a new course for the agency. And it was an unmistakable shot across the bow of both Senate leaders and Obama, who have not moved to replace the two commissioners whose terms expired in May.

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who the White House had consulted on the Sullivan nomination, declined to comment on the hold through a spokesman, while an aide to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) did not respond to questions.

The White House, which has reached out to the self-styled campaign finance reform community in an unprecedented way, also did not respond to questions about the hold.

But Craig Holman, a campaign finance lobbyist for the nonprofit group Public Citizen, called news of the hold “delightfully surprising.”

“First of all, it’s good to see McCain and Feingold working together again on the campaign finance front,” said Holman.

He and other campaign finance reformers had worked closely for years with McCain on campaign finance matters until the senator began distancing himself from them in the run-up to his presidential campaign as he courted the GOP base. It considers restrictions on political spending to be a violation of free speech.

In regards to reconfiguring the FEC, Holman, who has met with Obama’s representatives several times about campaign finance issues since the election, said, “The White House needs pushing on this. [Obama] hasn’t come out in front in the battle.”

As a senator, Obama was a staunch advocate for beefing up campaign finance rules, and as a presidential candidate he touted a campaign finance measure as one of his top legislative accomplishments. He also promised that he would participate in a Watergate-era clean election system if his Republican opponent did the same.

When McCain won the Republican nomination and agreed to participate, though, Obama flip-flopped, earning the personal enmity of McCain and the scorn of editorial boards and campaign finance reformers.

At the time, Obama pledged to fix the system as president. But he has yet to respond to entreaties from Feingold to support an overhaul bill. And he disappointed reformers when he passed up the chance to dramatically reconfigure the FEC, which has increasingly deadlocked in partisan 3-3 votes on enforcement matters, resulting in dismissal after dismissal and, reformers fear, emboldening would-be violators on the cusp of the 2010 midterm elections.

The commission by statute consists of three appointees from each party, and traditionally Senate leaders have passed lists of acceptable commissioner candidates from their respective parties to the president, who then selects nominees for Senate approval.

The terms of one Democratic and one Republican commissioner – Steven Walther and Don McGahn, respectively – expired in May, while another Democratic commissioner, Ellen Weintraub, has continued to serve on commission even though her term expired two years ago.

But Obama in May announced a single nomination – Sullivan’s – to fill Weintraub’s seat. The White House touted Sullivan, an associate general counsel at the Service Employees International Union, as “a staunch advocate for election reform” and promised that more FEC nominations “will be forthcoming,” but would not say when.

The Campaign Legal Center, a reform group headed by McCain ally and former FEC Chairman Trevor Potter, criticized Sullivan for “bash[ing] important elements of McCain-Feingold” when he filed comments with the FEC on behalf of SEIU.

But Meredith McGehee, policy director for the Center, said the real problem Obama needs to address is McGahn and the two other Republican commissioners, who have regularly voted against enforcement, often against the recommendation of the FEC’s career legal staff.

“Doing something about the FEC without doing something about the McGahn problem is just unacceptable,” McGehee said, adding “this is a guy who is basically implementing a deregulatory ideology in violation of both the spirit and letter of the law.”

That’s not how former FEC Chairman Brad Smith sees it.

Smith – who leads the Center for Competitive Politics, which holds that some limits on campaign spending unconstitutionally suppress free speech – defended the 3-3 splits as the byproduct of a thorough analysis of the law’s application to specific cases and accused Feingold and McCain of targeting McGahn.

“Let’s not dress this up as some noble crusade for good government – McCain and Feingold want someone on the commission who agrees with them,” Smith said. “And they’re going to hold up a guy [Sullivan] who seems to be really a very qualified nominee out of petulance.”

Smith also questioned McCain’s re-embrace of campaign finance issues.

“A cynic might note that now that McCain is no longer seeking the Republican nomination, he has returned to the fold.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/24393.html

Title: Watchdog Bites Back
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on July 18, 2009, 10:42:40 AM

AmeriCorps IG sues government over "unlawful" firing
Washington Examiner ^ | July 18, 2009 | Byron York

Gerald Walpin, the AmeriCorps inspector general who was summarily fired in June amid controversy over his investigation of a politically-connected supporter of President Obama, has filed suit alleging that the firing was "unlawful," "politically driven," "procedurally defective" and "a transparent and clumsily-conducted effort to circumvent the protections" given to inspectors general under the Inspectors General Reform Act of 2008.

Walpin's suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is against the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps. Also named are Nicola Goren, the acting CEO of the Corporation, Frank Trinity, its general counsel, and Raymond Limon, the Corporation's "chief human capital officer." The suit asks the court to declare Walpin's firing unlawful and restore him to his position as the Corporation's inspector general.

At the time of his firing, Walpin was involved in a dispute with the Corporation's board over his handling a case involving the misuse of hundreds of thousands of dollars in AmeriCorps funds by Kevin Johnson, the former NBA star who is now mayor of Sacramento, California and a prominent supporter of President Obama. The board disapproved of Walpin's aggressive probe of Johnson, and the investigation also sparked conflict with the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento, because of fears that the probe -- which could have resulted in Johnson being barred from ever winning another federal grant -- might stand in the way of the city receiving its part of billions of dollars in federal stimulus money. This spring, the Corporation's top management decided to lift sanctions against Johnson. Walpin strongly disapproved; at a board meeting on May 20, he frankly criticized board members for going along with that decision to let Johnson off easy.

On June 10, Walpin received a call from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform, giving Walpin an hour either to resign or be fired. Eisen's ultimatum appeared to be a violation of the Inspectors General Reform Act, which requires the president to give Congress 30 days' notice, plus an explanation of the reasons for his action, before firing an inspector general. (Then-Sen. Barack Obama was a co-sponsor of that legislation.) It also appeared that Eisen's call to force Walpin to resign was an effort to push Walpin out of his job so the White House would not have to go through the 30-day process, or give a reason for its action. When Walpin refused to quit, the White House informed Congress and began the 30-day countdown.

In its first explanation of the firing, the White House wrote a letter to Congress on June 11 claiming that President Obama no longer had "the fullest confidence" in Walpin. When lawmakers of both parties demanded a more detailed reason, the White House wrote another letter on June 16 accusing Walpin of being "confused, disoriented [and] unable to answer questions" at the May 20 meeting.

In the suit, Walpin alleges that all three actions were violations of the job protections given to inspectors general. "There have been at least three attempts to unlawfully remove Mr. Walpin from his post," the suit says, "the first orally on June 10; the second by writing on June 11; and the third by writing on June 16."

In addition, Walpin charges that the White House, in its eagerness to remove him for political purposes, never investigated the reasons it cited for the firing. "In the haste to remove Mr. Walpin from his post, not only were there…failures to comply with the statutorily-mandated procedures to preserve the integrity of the Inspector General post from politically motivated job actions," the suit says, "no investigation was made into the facts alleged as the basis for Mr. Walpin's termination. In particular, there was no attempt to interview Mr. Walpin or ay members of the staff of the Office of Inspector General who were personally involved in each of the [investigations], nor any of the board members."

Walpin does not ask for any damages in the suit; his demands are that the Court declare the firing unlawful, that he be re-instated to his job, and that his attorneys' fees be paid. The suit was filed late Friday afternoon. For more information on the Walpin case, see here and here and here.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/AmeriCorps-IG-sues-government-over-unlawful-firing-51094442.html

Title: Goldman Sachs in the Crosshairs?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on July 20, 2009, 12:43:08 PM

Jul 20, 2009, 10:50 a.m. EST
Is grousing about Goldman reaching critical mass?
Commentary: Questions are reaching the point where something might happen

By Peter Brimelow, MarketWatch
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- I'm amazed: Grousing about Goldman Sachs, and fury at the financial sector, is actually reaching the point where something might happen -- maybe even answers to questions we've been asking for a while.

As Jim Bianco of Bianco Research just noted in his News Clips/Daily Commentary service: "The amount of bad news that [Goldman Sachs Group ] is generating with its record earnings is incredible. We cannot remember a company that has received so much scorn for making money."

Bianco linked to critical stories in the Economist and the New York Times, and a scathing op-ed column ("The Joy of Sachs") by Paul Krugman.

And that's only the beginning. Last week, Arianna Huffington in her liberal Huffington Post Webzine actually issued bipartisan praise of two Wall Street Journal pieces critical of Goldman and the bailout. (Her article is here; the WSJ pieces here and here.)

It's many years since Arianna and I were on the same politically incorrect side of one of William F. Buckley's Firing Line debates. She has since adroitly changed sides, and if she now thinks it's time to attack Goldman Sachs -- a major Democratic donor -- the firm is in trouble.

The most spectacular attack on Goldman Sachs: Matthew Taibbi's Rolling Stone article "The Great American Bubble Machine," posted in Rolling Stone magazine July 13.

This is a follow-up to Taibbi's earlier attack on the bailout, which he portrayed all too convincingly as a sort of Wall Street coup d'état. ( See March 30 column.)

Taibbi describes the extraordinary personnel interlock between Goldman Sachs and Washington, apparently regardless of the party in power. He thinks that a key development was the emergence of Robert Rubin, who became Goldman's co-chairman and then Bill Clinton's Treasury secretary.

Taibbi writes: "If America is circling the drain, Goldman Sachs has found a way to be that drain. ... The bank's unprecedented reach and power have enabled it to turn all of America into a giant pump-and-dump scam, manipulating whole economic sectors for years at a time, moving the dice game as this or that market collapses, and all the time gorging itself on the unseen costs that are breaking families everywhere."

Of the bailout, he writes: "The numbers show that Goldman essentially borrowed a $5 billion salary payout for its executives in the middle of the global economic crisis it helped cause, using half-baked accounting to reel in investors, just months after receiving billions in a taxpayer bailout."

Sounds wild, but Taibbi makes a case. As a Rolling Stone reader says in the article's comment thread: "The last time I read anything this scary was the New Yorker article about Burmese pythons taking over Florida."

I've been reporting for years that key investment letters had come to the conclusion that the financial markets have been manipulated. ( See Sept. 9, 2005, column.) Now this suspicion is all over the mainstream media. Hmmm.

The scale that would be involved is so spectacular that it dwarfs another issue the letters have been asking about for years: whether the gold price has been systematically suppressed. ( See April 20 column.) Manipulating gold is an afterthought compared to what was allegedly going on.

I continue to think that a key part of this story is the mysterious 1998 Rubin-orchestrated rescue of Long Term Capital. ( See Sept. 29, 2008, column.)

And I'm increasingly confident all this will end with the appointment of another Pujo Committee, paralleling the one which investigated the so-called "Money Trust" in the wake of the Panic of 1907.

The consequences will be monumental.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/is-grousing-about-goldman-reaching-critical-mass

Title: Illegal counting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 10, 2009, 10:08:19 AM

By JOHN S. BAKER AND ELLIOTT STONECIPHER
Next year’s census will determine the apportionment of House members and Electoral College votes for each state. To accomplish these vital constitutional purposes, the enumeration should count only citizens and persons who are legal, permanent residents. But it won’t.

Instead, the U.S. Census Bureau is set to count all persons physically present in the country—including large numbers who are here illegally. The result will unconstitutionally increase the number of representatives in some states and deprive some other states of their rightful political representation. Citizens of “loser” states should be outraged. Yet few are even aware of what’s going on.

In 1790, the first Census Act provided that the enumeration of that year would count “inhabitants” and “distinguish” various subgroups by age, sex, status as free persons, etc. Inhabitant was a term with a well-defined meaning that encompassed, as the Oxford English Dictionary expressed it, one who “is a bona fide member of a State, subject to all the requisitions of its laws, and entitled to all the privileges which they confer.”

Thus early census questionnaires generally asked a question that got at the issue of citizenship or permanent resident status, e.g., “what state or foreign country were you born in?” or whether an individual who said he was foreign-born was naturalized. Over the years, however, Congress and the Census Bureau have added inquiries that have little or nothing to do with census’s constitutional purpose.

By 1980 there were two census forms. The shorter form went to every person physically present in the country and was used to establish congressional apportionment. It had no question pertaining to an individual’s citizenship or legal status as a resident. The longer form gathered various kinds of socioeconomic information including citizenship status, but it went only to a sample of U.S. households. That pattern was repeated for the 1990 and 2000 censuses.

The 2010 census will use only the short form. The long form has been replaced by the Census Bureau’s ongoing American Community Survey. Dr. Elizabeth Grieco, chief of the Census Bureau’s Immigration Statistics Staff, told us in a recent interview that the 2010 census short form does not ask about citizenship because “Congress has not asked us to do that.”

Because the census (since at least 1980) has not distinguished citizens and permanent, legal residents from individuals here illegally, the basis for apportionment of House seats has been skewed. According to the Census Bureau’s latest American Community Survey data (2007), states with a significant net gain in population by inclusion of noncitizens include Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, New York and Texas. (There are tiny net gains for Hawaii and Massachusetts.)

This makes a real difference. Here’s why:

According to the latest American Community Survey, California has 5,622,422 noncitizens in its population of 36,264,467. Based on our round-number projection of a decade-end population in that state of 37,000,000 (including 5,750,000 noncitizens), California would have 57 members in the newly reapportioned U.S. House of Representatives.

However, with noncitizens not included for purposes of reapportionment, California would have 48 House seats (based on an estimated 308 million total population in 2010 with 283 million citizens, or 650,000 citizens per House seat). Using a similar projection, Texas would have 38 House members with noncitizens included. With only citizens counted, it would be entitled to 34 members.

Of course, other states lose out when noncitizens are counted for reapportionment. According to projections of the 2010 Census by Election Data Services, states certain to lose one seat in the 2010 reapportionment are Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania; states likely (though not certain) to lose a seat are Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, and Ohio could lose a second seat. But under a proper census enumeration that excluded illegal residents, some of the states projected to lose a representative—including our own state of Louisiana—would not do so.

The census has drifted far from its constitutional roots, and the 2010 enumeration will result in a malapportionment of Congress.

In the 1964 case of Wesberry v. Sanders, the Supreme Court said, “The House of Representatives, the [Constitutional] Convention agreed, was to represent the people as individuals and on a basis of complete equality for each voter.” It ruled that Georgia had violated the equal-vote principle because House districts within the state did not contain roughly the same number of voting citizens. Justice Hugo Black wrote in his majority opinion that “one man’s vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another’s.” The same principle is being violated now on a national basis because of our faulty census.

The Census Bureau can of course collect whatever data Congress authorizes. But Congress must not permit the bureau to unconstitutionally redefine who are “We the People of the United States.”

Mr. Baker teaches constitutional law at Louisiana State University. Mr. Stonecipher is a Louisiana pollster and demographic analyst.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on August 10, 2009, 11:10:44 AM

Except for Lou Dobbs everyone else is silent on the illegal issue. Even the cans are afraid of the racist label.

Geraldo Rivera states Lou Dobbs is "slandering" latinos (Dobbs is married to a latina!).

The crats are silent because they benefit from the invasion.  The media is silent because they are predominantly crat by nature.
The cans well...  are cowards?

Title: AG Underwrites Voter Intimidation?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on August 10, 2009, 05:59:43 PM

I'm not a fan of Newsmax, but think this issue they are reporting on--and they are one of the few doing so--is of critical importance. As some may recall, two members of the New Black Panthers were arrested for voter intimidation at a polling place in Philly last election. AG Eric Holder elected to drop those charges, and has failed to respond to congressional inquiries asking why. My take is that the AG is seeking to underwrite the type of thugocarcy we saw represented by the SEIU at a recent St Louis town hall meeting. I sure wish to be wrong.

More here:

http://video.newsmax.com/?bcpid=20972460001&bclid=22770166001&bctid=32670114001&s=al&promo_code=8517-1

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: G M on August 10, 2009, 06:36:18 PM

Obama is now even doing worse than I anticipated.

Title: WSJ: Dodd whitewash
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 15, 2009, 06:32:19 AM

As the old Irish toast goes, may your sins be judged by the Senate ethics committee. Actually that's not an Irish toast but it must be the fervent hope of every politician who received a "Friend of Angelo" loan from former Countrywide Financial CEO Angelo Mozilo. Late last week the six Senators on the ethics panel dismissed complaints against Senators Kent Conrad and Chris Dodd with a mere admonishment about the appearance of impropriety.

The three Republican and three Democratic Senators say they conducted an exhaustive probe and inspected 18,000 pages of documents. They say they found "no substantial credible evidence as required by Committee rules" that the Senators received mortgage rates or services that weren't commonly available to the public, and thus did not violate the Senate gift ban.

We'll have to take their word that the evidence wasn't "substantial," because they didn't release those documents, nor did they encourage Mr. Dodd to release any of his records. Readers will recall that in February Mr. Dodd staged a peek-a-boo release with selected reporters but did not allow anyone to have copies of the documents. If the evidence was so clear-cut, why the months of stonewalling?

The Associated Press may have the answer. AP recently noted that among the peek-a-boo papers were two documents titled, "Loan Policy Analysis." Reports AP, "The documents had separate columns: one showing points 'actl chrgd' Dodd — zero; and a second column showing 'policy' was to charge .250 points on one loan and .375 points on the other. Another heading on the documents said 'reasons for override.' A notation under that heading identified a Countrywide section that approved the policy change for Dodd."

View Full Image

Associated Press
 
Connecticut Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd
.How does Mr. Dodd explain that one? He may not have had to. The Senate ethicists don't seem to have required either Mr. Dodd or Mr. Conrad to provide sworn testimony. In its letters to Messrs. Conrad and Dodd, the committee referred to the "depositions" it collected from Countrywide employees, but it described only "responses" and "explanations" from the Senators. Mr. Dodd never spoke to committee members or staff, and never communicated directly with them.

When committee Senators wrote to Mr. Dodd to get answers to their questions about his VIP loans, they received a response signed by his attorney Marc Elias of Perkins Coie. We remember former Senator Robert Torricelli providing a sworn deposition before he was admonished by the committee in 2002. Perhaps he should have tried the Dodd strategy.

As for Mr. Conrad, his staff won't say if the Senator answered questions directly or let his lawyers handle it. Either way, he has to be thrilled that his colleagues found no violation of Senate rules, even after he acknowledged last summer that he had received a benefit and promptly donated $10,500 to charity.

We'd also like to know what committee members thought of Robert Feinberg, the former Countrywide loan officer who told us last year that Mr. Dodd received, and knew he was receiving, preferential treatment. The Washington Post reported last month that Mr. Feinberg told the same thing, under oath, to Senate investigators and said that Mr. Conrad also knew he was receiving special treatment. Mr. Feinberg said the same to the minority staff of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Does the committee think he's lying, or that his testimony simply wasn't "substantial" enough? Again, we don't know because the letters released by the ethics committee don't mention Mr. Feinberg.

Mr. Dodd is running for his sixth term next year and will no doubt claim this as vindication. Voters will have to decide if a Banking Committee Chairman who allowed himself even to be considered a VIP by the nation's foremost subprime lender deserves it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on August 17, 2009, 01:15:30 PM

“She’s not a doctor, but she plays one at town hall meetings” — Hannity
2009 AUGUST 17
tags: health care, News, Politics, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Town Halls
by kathyshaidle

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxna9SfmBgs&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnewsrealblog%2Ecom%2F2009%2F08%2F17%2Fshes%2Dnot%2Da%2Ddoctor%2Dbut%2Dshe%2Dplays%2Done%2Dat%2Dtown%2Dhall%2Dmeetings%2Dhannity%2F&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

Last week’s notorious health-care town hall hosted by Houston Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee is the gift that keeps on giving.

It’s bad enough that Jackson-Lee interrupted a question from a cancer-survivor constituent to take a cell phone call — then denied having done so, and hinted on CNN that video of the incident had been “doctored.”

But the word “doctored” takes on a whole new meaning, thanks to the latest revelations about what else happened at that embarrassing town hall.

On Friday night, Sean Hannity picked up a story that first broke on conservative websites, all because a lowly blogger dared to ask questions that the mainstream media couldn’t be bothered to raise.

At that town hall meeting, a young woman who described herself as a “general practitioner” stood up to praise Obamacare, and was rewarded with a hug from Jackson-Lee. A photo of that hug accompanied a Houston Chronicle story on the event.

But as Hannity reported, the blogger behind “Patterico’s Pontifications” dug through some readily available Internet data bases, and discovered that “Dr. Roxana Mayer,” wasn’t a doctor at all, but a graduate student in social work at the University of Houston — and a Texas Obama delegate during the 2008 election.

Worse, according to “Patterico”:

“The reporter who wrote the Houston Chronicle story apparently knew that Mayer was an Obama delegate, but didn’t include that detail in her story.” (The paper later edited the caption to the photo, but didn’t issue a formal correction.)

And the story doesn’t end there. “Patterico” thought a woman pictured sitting next to “Dr. Mayer” at the town hall looked familiar. Sure enough, that woman was Maria Isabel. Mayer admitted she’d been invited to attend the town hall by Isabel, whose previous claim to fame had been her appearance in this widely-mocked photo of a 2008 Obama campaign office, where a photo of Che Guevara, the onetime chief executioner for the Fidel Castro regime in Cuba, was prominently displayed:

(http://newsrealblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/maria-and-che.jpg?w=300&h=224)
Maria Isabel: Che fan, Obama campaign worker and town hall attendee

But remember, everyone: “astroturfing” is what those sinister right-wing “tea baggers” are doing at town halls. Democrat events are always completely spontaneous and authentic, and everyone who attends is an honest, ordinary American citizen.


http://newsrealblog.com/2009/08/17/shes-not-a-doctor-but-she-plays-one-at-town-hall-meetings-hannity/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on August 17, 2009, 04:58:30 PM

FWIW I believe the cell call was from the talking points people at leftist machine headquarters and they are very well aware of these town hall meetings.  If they had something for her to add I assume that they were watching and listening to a live feed or someone texted them for help.

Can you imagine the uproar if the puppet masters were Rove or Cheney intervening with an ongoing constituent meeting in a representative's home district?

The fact that the reporter knew and did not report a key fact and the paper sneakily removes a known falsehood without issuing a correction, explanation or especially without blowing it open themselves into a big new story themselves, casting doubt on the staged, propaganda event ... it reflects on why organizations like the Houston Chronicle are bankrupting themselves.  These events are part of the electoral process and a fraud was certainly perpetrated on anyone caring enough to watch.  Frankly I resent having to always go beyond mainstream publications to get the rest of the story.

Title: Triple H
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on August 20, 2009, 12:39:37 PM

All I gotta say is Haliburton, Haliburton, Haliburton.

Passing the Smell Test

Michael Lisle

Earlier this week, AT's Rick Moran highlighted the Obama Administration's decision to invest $2 billion to finance offshore drilling in Brazil. Many good questions there, including the pertinent question of why offshore drilling is okay for Brazil, but not for the U.S.

Since the initial story broke late last week, Bloomberg has reported that billionaire Democratic donor George Soros acquired over $800 million in Petrobas stock during the second quarter of  2008, ultimately selling 22 million common shares and acquiring 5.8 million preferred (read "dividend paying") shares recently.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air asks all of the salient questions, including this one:

Is it a coincidence that Obama backer George Soros repositioned himself in Petrobras to get dividends just a few days before Obama committed $2 billion in loans and guarantees for Petrobras' (sic) offshore operations?   Hmmmmmmmmmm.

I don't have a smoking gun, but I do have the good sense to recognize when something doesn't pass the smell test. It might well be happenstance that Soros' "repositioning" was completely unrelated to the decision to invest American dollars in Petrobas, but there are too many dots that have at least a tenuous connection to assume that it's a completely innocent coincidence.

Unfortunately, this is just the latest in a long string of issues emanating from the White House that cause Americans to question the integrity and good sense of the Campaigner in Chief's administration. Consider what we've learned in just the past several days.

Senior adviser David Axelrod is still owed $2 million by the advertising firm he ran until leaving after Obama's election. This firm, now run by Axelrod's son, is a key player in the healthcare reform advertising effort.

The administration, which Obama promised would be the most bipartisan ever, has floated a trial balloon to gauge reaction to achieving healthcare reform with only Democrat votes. This came after significant backtracking on the so-called "public option" deemed essential by the far left.

Many Americans are still furious about being spammed by Axelrod with a message about healthcare reform, and the dirty tactics of those opposed to the president's plan. Many are also still incensed about the fact that the White House set up a snitch email account and actively encouraged Americans to report any "disinformation" they heard from others regarding healthcare reform.

The list could go on (the Beer Summit and police "acting stupidly," the push for cap-and-trade, and many more), but the point is made: In less than eight months, the Obama administration already has a well-established track record that stands in opposition to the promises of transparency and the highest ethics. I don't think it stems from ignorance, but instead from Obama's trademark hubris. He knows the smell test exists; he simply thinks he is smart and clever enough to beat it, or, if he's caught, to contort his way out of the consequences.

In over their heads, trying to flood the system by pushing huge reform after huge reform through the system in the best Alinsky style, and severely underestimating the American public's ability to connect dots, Obama et al. have burned through copious amounts of political capital and public goodwill by trying to beat the smell test instead of working with it.

Michael Lisle is a conservative freelance writer in South Carolina who has recently begun blogging at thetruthconquersall.blogspot.com.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/08/passing_the_smell_test.html at August 20, 2009 - 03:37:47 PM EDT

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on August 20, 2009, 02:30:48 PM

***I don't have a smoking gun, but I do have the good sense to recognize when something doesn't pass the smell test. It might well be happenstance that Soros' "repositioning" was completely unrelated to the decision to invest American dollars in Petrobas, but there are too many dots that have at least a tenuous connection to assume that it's a completely innocent coincidence.***

This is to pay Soros back for all his support.
Plus it replenishes there own war chest so to speak as Soros we all know is happy to support their radical cause.

Even if there is a smoking gun somewhere we can all forget about anyone looking for it.
Not with a leftist controlled governent.
Reminds one of the famous cattle futures bribe.

Title: Ted Sez Rules are Made to be Broken
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on August 20, 2009, 05:05:38 PM

2nd post. Looks like Ted plans to go out with the same set of ethics he displayed at Chappaquidick.

State GOP leader calls Kennedy request 'hypocrisy'
Email|LinkAugust 20, 2009 06:20 PM

By Matt Viser and Frank Phillips, Globe Staff

Massachusetts Republicans spoke out today against a proposal by US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, who is battling brain cancer, under which Kennedy's Senate seat would be filled by an appointment by Democratic Governor Deval Patrick until a special election could be held.
RELATED

House Minority Leader Brad Jones of Reading said the proposal was based not on "what's best for the whole Commonwealth but based on what's best for one political party."

"The hypocrisy is astounding. If we had a Republican governor right now, would we be getting that same letter?" he said.

“Everybody feels for Senator Kennedy, but the laws shouldn’t be created to benefit particular individuals, it should be principled,” said Senate minority leader Richard Tisei of Wakefield.

In a personal, sometimes wistful letter sent Tuesday to Patrick, Democratic Senate President Therese Murray, and Democratic House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, Kennedy, the ailing liberal lion, asked the leaders to change the succession law to guarantee that Massachusetts will not lack a Senate vote when his seat becomes vacant, the Globe reported this morning.

Kennedy's poignant acknowledgment of his mortality comes at a critical time in the national health care debate. Although Kennedy does not specifically mention his cancer or the health care debate raging in Washington, the implication of his letter is clear: He is trying to make sure that the leading cause in his life, better health coverage for all, advances in the event of his death.

Top Democrats at the State House remained resolutely silent on the issue today. But one Democratic lawmaker said he was opposed.

“I’m not in favor of it,” said Representative Brian Wallace of South Boston. “I’ve got great respect for Senator Kennedy, but I think we’ve been down this road. I’m in favor of having an election, there’s nothing fairer than that. It just opens up a whole can of worms all again.”

“I don’t agree with it,” said state Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill, who left the Democratic Party last month to lay the groundwork for a gubernatorial run as an independent. “A senator should be directly elected by the people."

In his letter, which was obtained by the Globe, Kennedy said that he backs the current succession law, enacted in 2004, which gives voters the power to fill a US Senate vacancy. But he said the state and country need two Massachusetts senators.

“I strongly support that law and the principle that the people should elect their senator,’’ Kennedy wrote. “I also believe it is vital for this Commonwealth to have two voices speaking for the needs of its citizens and two votes in the Senate during the approximately five months between a vacancy and an election.’’

Under the 2004 law, if Kennedy were to die or step down, voters would select his successor in a special election to be held within five months of the vacancy. But the law makes no provisions for Massachusetts to be represented in the Senate in the interim. In the meantime, President Obama’s plan to overhaul the nation’s health care system, the fate of which may hinge on one or two votes, could come before Congress.

“I am now writing to you about an issue that concerns me deeply, the continuity of representation for Massachusetts, should a vacancy occur,’’ Kennedy wrote.

To ensure that the special election is fair, the senator also urged that the governor obtain an “explicit personal commitment’’ from his appointee not to seek the office on a permanent basis.

Separately, a Kennedy family confidant, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the letter was private, said the senator’s wife, Victoria Reggie Kennedy, is not interested in being a temporary appointee or running in a special election.

“Her focus is her husband and her family,’’ the confidant said. “To her, there is only one Senator Kennedy.’’

DeLeo and Murray, in a joint statement to the Globe Wednesday, did not address the substance of Kennedy’s request, saying: “We have great respect for the senator and what he continues to do for our Commonwealth and our nation. It is our hope that he will continue to be a voice for the people of Massachusetts as long as he is able.’’

Patrick said in a statement: “It’s typical of Ted Kennedy to be thinking ahead and about the people of Massachusetts, when the rest of us are thinking about him. Diane and I continue to pray for the restoration of the senator’s health and the comfort of his family.’’

Kennedy advisers were adamant Wednesday that the timing of the letter did not reflect any imminent emergency in the health of the senator, who has been battling brain cancer since May 2008. Rather, it was sent this week after the Globe began making inquiries to key Beacon Hill officials over murmurings that some politicians were pushing for a change in the law.

Kennedy aides said the senator never liked the five-month vacancy created by the 2004 law, but his dislike took on new urgency because Senate Democrats could need every vote possible on health care legislation.

The family confidant stressed that even with his deteriorating health, Kennedy continues to speak with staff and Senate colleagues. If his vote were needed, there exists every possibility he would fly to Washington again to cast it, Kennedy allies said.

Still, Kennedy’s letter is a candid acknowledgment that his long Senate career might be coming to an end, a historic development for both Massachusetts and the nation. He is the last of three Kennedy brothers whose careers helped define postwar Democratic politics.

“For almost 47 years, I have had the privilege of representing the people of Massachusetts in the United States Senate,’’ Kennedy wrote in his letter.

Serving in the Senate, he wrote, “has been - and still is - the greatest honor of my public life.’’

Advisers, including Senator John F. Kerry, began discussions months ago about pushing for a change in the state law.

Kennedy’s letter was drafted in early July, when he was writing several other letters, including a private note to the pope that Obama hand-delivered. The letter to state officials was kept secret, not sent until this week.

Kerry said yesterday that Kennedy had been considering this issue since the early summer.

“It is something he talked to me about some time ago,’’ he said in an interview.

Kerry rejected any notion that the letter signaled an immediate end to Kennedy’s nearly half-century in office, insisting that his colleague has been active in shaping the health care legislation in recent weeks.

“I don’t think this signals anything,’’ Kerry said. “He has been fully engaged. . . . If [Senate majority leader] Harry Reid required 60 votes tomorrow, Ted Kennedy would be on a plane and be down in the Senate to vote.’’

Kerry added that he speaks with the senator regularly and visited him several weeks ago at Kennedy’s Hyannis Port home.

Kennedy’s request puts Massachusetts lawmakers in a delicate position. On one hand, his personal appeal would probably have some sway.

But resistance on Beacon Hill to tinkering with the 2004 law is strong, with Democratic lawmakers nervous about being accused of engineering a self-serving change to help their party.

Massachusetts governors used to have the power to fill Senate vacancies, as happens in many other states, until the Legislature made the change five years ago.

Democratic lawmakers, then as now in the majority, did not want to give Governor Mitt Romney the chance to fill Kerry’s seat with a Republican if Kerry won the presidency.

Patrick, meanwhile, has dismissed past suggestions that the state change the law back to give him the power to fill a Senate vacancy.

Those who would run for Kennedy’s seat could also pressure state lawmakers to resist changing the law, out of concern that toying with the special election could somehow damage their prospects.

In Washington, there are increasing concerns among Democrats and health care advocates over Kennedy’s absence from Capitol Hill. His voice has often been one of the loudest and most influential on health care.

The Democratic caucus’s 60-vote majority is already tenuous, with several moderate Democrats having expressed skepticism about the health care bill.

Kennedy’s having not attended the funeral of his sister, Eunice, last week heightened concerns that he would be unable to return to the Senate for a vote.

President Obama has not spoken to Kennedy about the proposal, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said today.

"He has not talked to Senator Kennedy about this. The last time they spoke was several weeks ago about health care. I have not had the chance to talk to him this morning about Senator Kennedy's letter."

Susan Milligan of the Globe staff contributed to this report.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/08/kennedy_urges_s.html

Title: ACORN Conspirator Turns
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on August 20, 2009, 06:49:14 PM

3rd post.

In deal, ex-ACORN official promises to testify against others
By Jeff German (contact)
Tuesday, Aug. 18, 2009 | 2 a.m.

 
Catherine Cortez Masto

The attorney general’s office turned up the heat Monday on a national organization at the heart of a voter registration fraud investigation.

Christopher Edwards, 33, the former Las Vegas field director for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, pleaded guilty to two gross misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to commit the crime of compensation for registration of voters.

As part of a plea agreement, Edwards will testify against the other two defendants in the case — ACORN and its former regional director, Amy Busefink.

The anti-poverty organization has local chapters in 100 cities across the country and national offices in New Orleans, New York and Washington.

State investigators consider Edwards the mastermind of an illegal incentive program at the local ACORN office that, with the approval of Busefink and national ACORN officials, encouraged the collection of fraudulent voter registration forms during the 2008 campaign season.

Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto said late Monday that Edwards has “agreed to admit his culpability, accept his punishment, and provide valuable testimony against the others involved.”

But Las Vegas lawyers for ACORN and Busefink said they doubted Edwards’ testimony would hurt their clients because ACORN officials were kept in the dark about what he was doing.

“I’m not concerned about it,” said Lisa Rasmussen, who represents ACORN. “He was doing something he shouldn’t have been doing.”

Kevin Stolworthy, who represents Busefink, added, “I don’t believe they have anything in writing supporting what he’s going to testify about. Our position is, he was told not to do it.”

In his plea agreement, however, Edwards said that from Aug. 1 to Oct. 31, 2008, he unlawfully conspired with ACORN and Busefink to create a local bonus incentive program, known as “Blackjack,” giving ACORN canvassers an additional $5 for turning in 21 or more registration cards per shift. ACORN allegedly required its workers to submit at least 20 voter registration forms a day to keep their jobs.

It is illegal in Nevada to attach incentives to gathering registration forms because it encourages canvassers to submit fraudulent forms.

When the indictments were announced in May, Cortez Masto said that by structuring the compensation around a quota system, “ACORN facilitated voter registration fraud in the state.”

About the same time in Pittsburgh, a half-dozen ACORN workers were charged with violating a similar Pennsylvania law prohibiting quotas and other incentives in voter registration drives.

That case was put on hold last month after the American Civil Liberties Union there filed suit on behalf of ACORN challenging the constitutionality of the state law.

Edwards’ cooperation here is not expected to have an effect in Pennsylvania, but ACORN has a lot more riding on the outcome of the Nevada case. The organization is not charged in Pittsburgh, but is facing 13 felony counts in Las Vegas.

Edwards’ first opportunity to testify against ACORN and Busefink will come Sept. 29 at a preliminary hearing to determine whether ACORN and Busefink should stand trial.

In return for his testimony, the attorney general’s office is dismissing 13 felony charges against Edwards and recommending probation for concurrent sentences of one year behind bars on the two gross misdemeanor charges, a $500 fine and 16 hours of community service.

Edwards appeared before Kevin Williams, the district court’s arraignment master, on Monday wearing a shirt and tie and dress slacks. When Williams asked Edwards what his plea was, he responded, “Guilty” in a soft voice.

As he left the courtroom with his lawyer at his side, Edwards declined to comment.

Chief Deputy Attorney General Conrad Hafen, who is prosecuting the case, also had no comment afterward.

The case dates back to Oct. 7, when state investigators, armed with a search warrant, first sought evidence of voter registration fraud at ACORN’s Las Vegas office.

Allegations that some registration applications were completed with false information and that other applications were attempts to register the same person several times led investigators to raid the office, officials said at the time.

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/aug/18/deal-ex-acorn-official-cops-voter-quota-scheme/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on August 20, 2009, 10:11:08 PM

The Kennedy succession story says: "The hypocrisy is astounding". Quite an understatement.  Not just double, full-circle hypocrisy, but the arrogance they must have to do it so openly and so repeatedly.  Should make the Chicago political mafia blush.  They played around the rule to save a seat for Teddy before he turned 30.  Then they changed the succession rule for John Kerry to ascend to the President.  Oops, not needed and they fully exposed themselves for the mockery of principles they possess.  Now they fear losing the 60th vote so they don't want to wait for those clumsy voters to name a replacement when it turns out ironically and hypocritically that the D-Governor could do it just as well, and so much faster. Coercive healthcare could be on the line to them so the ends easily justify the means.

BBG, thanks for posting the ACORN case update.  They mix their commitment to take down liberty and capitalism with a lot of do-gooding like helpin' folks register to vote and taking over the census. Unfortunately they demand our public money to take down our system, and getting the wrong people to vote can be a felony.

Title: 11 FL ACORN Arrests
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on September 09, 2009, 01:06:56 PM

ACORN Turns in Florida Workers on Voter Fraud Charges
The FBI and state authorities were making arrests Wednesday of workers hired to register voters by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN.

Cristina Corbin
FOXNews.com
Wednesday, September 09, 2009


Arrest warrants have been issued in Miami for 11 people suspected of falsifying information on hundreds of voter registration cards -- including registering the name of the late actor Paul Newman -- the Florida state attorney told FOXNews.com.

The FBI and state authorities took seven people into custody Wednesday as it issued 11 arrest warrants for voter registration fraud in Homestead, Fla., in June 2008.

Florida state attorney Katherine Fernandez-Rundle said 11 workers hired to register voters by the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now -- or ACORN -- submitted 888 fraudulent names.  She said the names included people who were already registered voters, fictitious names, and the name of the late actor Paul Newman, who died in Sept. 2008.

Fernandez-Rundle said ACORN alerted her office after it reviewed hundreds of voter registration cards it suspected were fraudulent.  She said that none of the names in question actually voted.

"While they were attempting to steal from ACORN, they were stealing from our electoral process and we just will not tolerate that," she said. 

Fernandez-Rundle said the workers, who were being paid 10 dollars an hour to register voters, face anywhere from 2 to 37 counts of "false swearing in connection with voting or elections" and "submission of false voter registration information."

"They were attempting to justify their hourly wages," she said.

In a statement sent to FOXNews.com. on Wednesday, Florida ACORN board member Leroy Bell said, "We want to commend the state attorney for taking decisive action. Today's action demonstrates the seriousness we brought to the task of not only expanding the electorate, but also of protecting the integrity of the voting process. "

"Over the last five years thousands of dedicated people have worked or volunteered with Florida ACORN and succeeded in helping hundreds of thousands of Florida citizens -- especially African-Americans, Latinos, low-income and young people -- to apply to become registered voters. Fortunately, our quality control managers and the systems we developed ensured their ability to spot the isolated wrongdoing by these 11 workers who tried to pass off phony forms instead of doing their work," he said.

Bell added that the government should do more to modernize the voter registration system, saying ACORN would "prefer that Florida and the United States adopt a more modern voter registration system where getting everyone on the rolls is the government's job and mission."

ACORN's activities were frequently questioned during the 2008 presidential election.  The group, which claims to be a non-partisan grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people, came under fire in 2007 when Washington State filed felony charges against several paid ACORN employees and supervisors for more than 1,700 fraudulent voter registrations. In March 2008, an ACORN worker in Pennsylvania was sentenced for making 29 phony voter registration forms.

Click here to read an arrest affidavit.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/09/acorn-turns-florida-workers-voter-fraud-charges/?test=latestnews

Title: Accorn willing to help pimp set up brothel?
Post by: Freki on September 10, 2009, 08:37:24 AM

This is a breaking news story.  I wonder how it will play out.  Here is the link to the Fox News video. 


http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=011008&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=9393548&referralPlaylistId=c985e69916535a2170b2b18ab0ab7eb60401f9bb (http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=011008&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=9393548&referralPlaylistId=c985e69916535a2170b2b18ab0ab7eb60401f9bb)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on September 10, 2009, 09:57:32 AM

More source material for the story Freki posted above:

http://biggovernment.com/

At what point do the Democrats acknowledge that all the money they've been throwing at ACORN is being used to prime a pump that then subverts American law and values? Or perhaps that's the whole point?

Title: Another Isolated Incident
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on September 11, 2009, 02:03:35 PM

ACORN Fires More Officials for Helping 'Pimp,' 'Prostitute' in Washington Office

Friday , September 11, 2009


Two more ACORN officials were fired Friday after a second video surfaced showing staffers in the community organizers' Washington office offering to help a man and woman posing as a pimp and prostitute acquire illegal home loans that would help them set up a brothel.

The firings came less than 24 hours after another pair of ACORN officials from the group's Baltimore office were canned for instructing the "pimp" and "prostitute" how to falsify tax forms and seek illegal benefits for 13 "very young" girls from El Salvador that pair said they wanted to import to work as child prostitutes.

Both of the encounters were videotaped on a hidden camera wielded by 25-year-old independent filmmaker James O'Keefe, posing as the pimp — tapes that have ignited calls for investigations of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

The group's leaders said Friday they were "appalled and angry" at what their staffers had done, but insisted the videos were part of a political "smear" campaign and not representative of the institution as a whole.

"But that does not excuse the behavior of the employees," wrote ACORN's president Alton Bennet and executive director Mike Shea. "We have fired them and are initiating an internal review of practices and reminding all staff of their obligation to uphold the highest legal and ethical standards."

Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., called for a hearing to investigate ACORN's tax filing assistance programs following the release of the videos he said suggested multiple incidents of tax fraud.

"In light of the apparent flagrant and willful attempts to suborn tax fraud, I ... (am seeking) a hearing of the Oversight Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee as soon as practicable to investigate ACORN’s activities," he said Friday.

O'Keefe, the filmmaker, was accompanied by 20-year-old Hannah Giles, who posed as a prostitute. On a videotape of their visit to ACORN's Washington's office, they are seen receiving guidance to establish the woman as the sole proprietor of a bogus company to mask the nature of her business.

"She's not going to put on (the loan application) that she's doing prostitution ... she doesn't have to," a now-fired ACORN staffer says. "You don't have to sit back and tell people what you do."

• Click here to see video.

The ACORN staffer is heard suggesting that O'Keefe can purchase a house, and as the landlord, if he is ever questioned by authorities, he can say he was unaware of the illegal business going on inside.

"[W]hen the police ask you, (tell them) you don't know where (the money is) coming from," the staffer said. "We are looking out for you."

The ACORN employee later suggests that O'Keefe, who said he had a budding political career, not linger at the house in case people "put the dots together" and leave him "smeared and tarnished" by his association with his prostitute girlfriend. She should keep her business "low key," the employee continued, saying "You have neighbors and they see stuff. Don't think that people won't get on the telephone and call Fox."

• STORY: ACORN Officials Videotaped Telling 'Pimp,' 'Prostitute' How to Lie to IRS

One day before the Washington video was shot, O'Keefe and Giles sought help from ACORN workers in Baltimore, who told the pair how to falsify tax forms and seek illegal benefits for 13 "very young" girls from El Salvador that they said they said they wanted to import as prostitutes.

As he did in the taping in Baltimore, O'Keefe told the Washington officers that he had plans to bring as many as 10 women from El Salvador to work as prostitutes in Giles' "business."

"There's like 10 girls," O'Keefe says. "There's ten El Salvodoreans."

The ACORN staffer replies, "I understand what you are saying."

ACORN — the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — calls itself a network of families "working together for social justice and stronger communities," according to its Web site.

The organization has been accused by conservatives and Republicans of committing fraud in voter registration drives around the country, and reaction to the videotape came swiftly after its release on Thursday.

"Taxpayers should be outraged that their money has gone to an organization that, in addition to facing charges of voter fraud and tax violations, is willing to facilitate prostitution," said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa.

"As this video confirms, ACORN continues to operate as a criminal enterprise."

The first videotape, made in the Baltimore offices of ACORN, was made public Thursday on the political blog BigGovernment.com. That night, after portions of the video were aired throughout the day on FOX News, the group fired the two women who assisted O'Keefe and Giles in Baltimore.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,549241,00.html

Title: Serious Businesses
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on September 16, 2009, 06:37:44 AM

No Joke
By the Editors

James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles, two guerilla documentarians, have accomplished what neither the Republican party’s sense of outrage nor the Democratic party’s sense of decency could: They have inspired the federal government to begin cutting its ties with ACORN, the shady “community activist” organization that helped bring Barack Obama to power.

The set-up was both risible and shocking. Mr. O’Keefe and Miss Giles, who look for all the world like young Republican country-clubbers dressed for a tasteless costume party, walked into a number of ACORN offices and managed to pass themselves off as a pimp and a prostitute. They informed ACORN staffers that they were looking to set up a whorehouse and to traffic some children into the country for the purposes of prostitution. ACORN’s official mission is to facilitate affordable housing and social services for low-income families, not to facilitate child trafficking, but the staffers responded with advice on getting on welfare, claiming their underage victims as dependents, evading law enforcement, cheating on their taxes, defrauding federal housing authorities, et cetera ad nauseam. One ACORN staffer advised Miss Giles to bury her illicit sex-trade earnings in a tin in her back yard.

Asked about housing assistance, an ACORN staffer explains: “Honesty is not going to get the house. That’s why you've probably been denied. . . . Don't say you’re a prostitute thing or whatever.” Similar sagacity followed.

This was not a single, isolated incident. Mr. O’Keefe and Miss Giles took their chinchilla cape and hot pants, respectively, to a number of ACORN offices: in Baltimore, Washington, New York City. The results were similar for each outing. Mr. O’Keefe says there are more and yesterday released another video, of a California ACORN office.

The Census Bureau has severed its relationship with ACORN, and House Republicans are pressing the Internal Revenue Service to do the same. The Senate has voted to deny any future Housing and Urban Development funding to the organization. (Whether Nancy Pelosi’s House will follow suit is not yet known.) Somebody in Washington must be forced to answer this question: Why would any government agency have anything to do with this motley crew? Heads already are rolling at ACORN, and they should be rolling in the offices of the government agencies that approved these relationships. HUD is bad enough, but letting ACORN within spitting distance of the IRS bespeaks defective judgment. The group is deeply tapped into Washington: ACORN relies on government money for some 40 percent of its revenue, and that fact is a national disgrace.

President Obama’s ties to ACORN are of long standing and are widely documented. ACORN, which ran a number of voter-registration drives rife with fraud (Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck being two notable registrees, along with one Mr. Jive Turkey of Ohio) is at its core a political operation, one that was an important presence in Obama’s community-organizing days, as well as in his campaign. The organization has enjoyed a degree of political protection in Washington: Rep. Barney Frank was called upon by the Consumer Rights League to investigate ACORN in his role as an overseer of housing and mortgage matters. He refused to do so.

ACORN now alleges that the videotapes were altered — but they fired the employees in question, which does not suggest gross distortion or an innocent misunderstanding. As more videos come out, this story will get worse. Not that this story is a story so far as the mainstream media is concerned: Outside of Fox News, which aired the videos, the media has abdicated on ACORN coverage. This is the sort of sting video that used to be the bread-and-butter of 60 Minutes and other investigative television journalism. Now they look on the story with contempt; Charlie Gibson sneered that it was the sort of thing better left to “the cables.”

This is serious business — advising people how to defraud the government in furtherance of child prostitution and human trafficking — but it took two twentysomething documentarians to get it on our national radar. We’d argue that Congress should investigate, but who would be put in charge? Barney Frank? Nancy Pelosi? A blue-ribbon committee selected by President Obama? By their fruits (and nuts) ye shall know them.

 

National Review Online - http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MzA2ZWE3ZjhiNTM0MDNmYTlmNTVlMjBlZDM1ZTlkZWU=

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 17, 2009, 08:22:09 AM

By JAMES TARANTO
The Acorn scandal continues to mushroom. Yesterday BigGovernment.com published videos from a fourth Acorn office visit by freelance investigators James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles. As Johnny Carson used to say, it's weird, wild stuff. The woman manning the Acorn office in San Bernardino, Calif., Tresa Kaelke, responds to the pair's requests for help setting up a child-prostitution ring by claiming to be an ex-prostitute herself. "Heidi Fleiss is my hero!" she exclaims.

When Giles claims her former pimp abused her, Kaelke tells of having been abused by an ex-husband--then confesses to his premeditated murder. San Bernardino's finest are looking into the claim: "Investigators have been in contact with the involved party's known former husbands, who are alive and well." Thus her claims "do not appear to be factual." Politico's Ben Smith interprets this as meaning that the confession was "a joke" and writes that according to Acorn, this "demonstrates that the employee there was playing along with the outlandish visitors, not actually indulging them."

Smith is writing rather sloppily here, since indulging and playing along are more or less the same thing. In any case, another Acornite gave a somewhat different, but highly entertaining, explanation to the San Bernardino Sun:

At ACORN's office Tuesday, office supervisor Christina Spach told reporters she was not authorized to comment and that an official spokesperson would comment later in the day.
"Just to be clear, ACORN in not [sic] in the prostitution business," Spach said.
Spach said she did not wish to be quoted, but did confirm that Kaelke is an ACORN employee. She would not permit reporters to speak to Kaelke and said ACORN employees do not typically make statements to the media, instead relying on their members to articulate the group's positions and activities.
In a subsequent telephone conversation on Tuesday, Spach said Kaelke pretended to cooperate with O'Keefe and Giles because she feared for her safety.
"She was in an office all by herself," Spach said. "She felt unsafe in their company."
Spach, who identified herself as Kaelke's supervisor, said Kaelke lied to the undercover bloggers because she was afraid and wanted to "come across as a strong individual."
"It was a defense mechanism," Spach said.
Think about it: When you feel threatened, isn't "Heidi Fleiss is my hero" the first thing you blurt out?

Government officials continue responding to the Acorn revelations. The New York Post reports that Andrew Cuomo, New York's state attorney general, "yesterday launched an investigation into pork-barrel grants given to ACORN by state lawmakers, as City Council Speaker Christine Quinn froze all city funding earmarked for the scandal-scared [sic] community-activism organization"--this in response to the third released set of videos, from Acorn's Brooklyn office.

The Wall Street Journal urges the U.S. Justice Department to undertake a criminal investigation of Acorn. This column echoes that call, although we wonder if the Obama administration is compromised here. The president, who as a candidate touted his background as a "community organizer," has extensive ties to Acorn. In February 2008, the Acorn Political Action Committee endorsed Obama over Hillary Clinton, and Obama's campaign Web site, Organizing for America, boasted of the candidate's support for the group:

When Obama met with ACORN leaders in November, he reminded them of his history with ACORN and his beginnings in Illinois as a Project Vote organizer, a nonprofit focused on voter rights and education. Senator Obama said, "I come out of a grassroots organizing background. That's what I did for three and half years before I went to law school. That's the reason I moved to Chicago was to organize. So this is something that I know personally, the work you do, the importance of it. I've been fighting alongside ACORN on issues you care about my entire career. Even before I was an elected official, when I ran Project Vote voter registration drive in Illinois, ACORN was smack dab in the middle of it, and we appreciate your work."
And in August 2008, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported that the Obama campaign paid more than $800,000 to an Acorn "offshoot" for "get out the vote" projects.

Obama worked for Acorn and Acorn worked for Obama. That doesn't mean the president is implicated in any wrongdoing, but it suggests at least that the worse things get for Acorn, the more embarrassing it is for him. If the Justice Department fails to prosecute, it invariably would raise suspicions of political favoritism. This column does not care for special prosecutors, but the case for appointing one would seem to be stronger here than usual.

Title: The Audacity of Hos
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on September 17, 2009, 08:30:02 AM

John Stewart's take on the ACORN scandal:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-15-2009/the-audacity-of-hos

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on September 17, 2009, 09:45:07 AM

BBG, Excellent piece.  Might be the first of the 'humor' shows I've seen really ripping the corruption of the left. Excellent question, where was the media on this.

Charlie Gibson, ABC Anchor: "maybe this is just one you leave to the cables."
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2009/09/15/charles-gibson-totally-unaware-five-day-old-acorn-controversy-senate-vot

This group is a racketeering conspiracy corrupting democracy across state lines for more than a decade.  Unbelievable that they are also federally funded, not just a hack, anti-capitalism leftist Marxist activist group.  And that our President is an alum.  Which article in the constitution authorizes their millions and decades of funding?
----
My previous comments tying ACORN to the US Census were meant a bit tongue in cheek, that these types already working the neighborhoods would be the ones that would seek and get the Census jobs especially with the leftist machine holding power.  In a worst nightmare scenario I didn't imagine there was actually an official, contractual relationship!
---
On the silver lining side, a short time ago I felt like I was whining to the only 3 people in America who also already knew what a danger the group posed, and now ACORN is becoming exposed and infamous.  If there was a right wing equivalent - just for the extreme views, not the corruption and methods - a candidate's affiliation during the primaries would have been a disqualification because of unelectability in a general election.

The videos begin to expose the fact that these people oppose all the principles the founders and the republic once represented.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Freki on September 17, 2009, 10:32:00 PM

"BREITBART: Acorn Horrors, The New Journalism & This Is Not JFK's Democratic Party"

http://www.pjtv.com/v/2448

I found this very interesting. 

Freki

Title: Re: electoral process fraud - Quid Pro Art
Post by: DougMacG on September 21, 2009, 07:26:44 PM

The NEA is the largest funder of arts in the country.  The link has the NEA conference call plea for help with an all star lineup from the White House asking funded artists to support the President's agenda on a host of NON-ART related issues.  Just like ACORN working their neighborhoods, they just presume you are with them politically.  George Will speculated that a few laws were broken. 

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/pcourrielche/2009/09/21/explosive-new-audio-reveals-white-house-using-nea-to-push-partisan-agenda/

Title: WH: Whoops! Sorry!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 22, 2009, 04:09:59 PM

WH: NEA Conf Call should never happen again

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jake Tapper of ABC News:

White House officials say they are enacting specific steps to make sure such a call never happens again.

Today White House officials are meeting with the chiefs of staff of the executive branch agencies to discuss rules and best practices in this area, a conversation during which they will be told that that while White House lawyers do not believe that the NEA call violated the law, “the appearance issues troubled some participants,” Burton said. “It is the policy of the administration that grant decisions should be on the merits and that government officials should avoid even creating the incorrect appearance that politics has anything to do with these decisions.”

After listening to the transcript and the audio posted at the conservative website BigHollywood.Breitbart.com — secretly recorded by Los Angeles filmmaker Patrick Couriellech — Melanie Sloan, executive director of the good-government group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), told ABC News that the call was “disturbing.”

“Government agencies are not supposed to be engaged in political activities,” Sloan said. “Here, because they didn’t veer off into ‘This is about the election,’ where you’d get into violations of the Hatch Act, it’s not illegal. But it doesn’t look good — it looks terrible. It’s inappropriate.”
The Hatch Act restricts the political activity of executive branch employees of the federal government.*

Said Sloan of the conference call: “It’s not what the NEA was created for, it’s not supposed to be helping the president’s agenda; that’s not the point.”

Burton added that the White House will be issuing a formal memo for White House staff “to that effect and will be doing training sessions and personal visits with staff here to make sure the message gets across.”
Sergant seemed to have some indication on the call that maybe he was coming close to the line of inappropriateness if not crossing it.
You can read the piece in full here.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 23, 2009, 05:43:05 PM

ACORN Sues Filmmakers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACORN has filed a lawsuit against the makers of a hidden-camera video that showed employees of its Baltimore office giving tax advice to a man posing as a pimp and a woman posing as a prostitute.

The liberal activist group contends that the audio portion of the video was obtained illegally because Maryland requires two-party consent to create sound recordings.

The two employees seen in the video were fired after it was posted online. The lawsuit says the employees, Tonja Thompson and Shera Williams, suffered "extreme emotional distress."

The multimillion-dollar lawsuit seeks damages from James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, who played the pimp and prostitute in the videos, and from conservative columnist Andrew Breitbart, who posted the videos on his Web site.




BEN NUCKOLS, Associated Press Writer (© 2009 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on September 23, 2009, 05:53:36 PM

Chutzpah to the max. It will be interesting to see how the MSM deals with this. Anyone want to bet on which side they file the amicus brief for?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: G M on September 23, 2009, 05:56:02 PM

I can't wait until the discovery from the suit surfaces! Glad to see these dummies want to keep the story active.

Title: Patriot Post
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 25, 2009, 08:37:58 AM

From the Leftjudiciary: Indiana Court Tosses Voter ID
Despite a significantly higher voter turnout last year than in most previous presidential elections, as well as Barack Obama's narrowly carrying the state, the Indiana State Court of Appeals threw out the state's voter identification law -- a statute that had already passed muster with the U.S. Supreme Court -- claiming the law wasn't equally applied to those casting absentee ballots. The 3-0 ruling, made by a panel of judges appointed by Democrat governors, was blasted by Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels as "an act of judicial arrogance" and "transparently" partisan.

Predictably, state Democrat leaders hailed the ruling, claiming, even in the face of those increased turnout numbers, that the law requiring voters to present a form of identification bearing their photo "disenfranchised hundreds if not thousands of voters." Heaven forbid, after all, that voters are who they say they are and vote only once.

Title: Hsu sentenced to 24 years
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 02, 2009, 08:38:28 AM

Hsu Sentenced for Ponzi Scheme
Norman Hsu, a prominent fundraiser for Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, was sentenced Tuesday to 24 years in prison for "illegally funneling money to U.S. political candidates and for defrauding investors in a multimillion-dollar Ponzi scheme," reports The Wall Street Journal. Clinton returned $850,000 in funds raised by Hsu, who had already been on the lam since 1992 after charges of grand theft. Knowing the Clintons, that was probably a résumé enhancement. Meanwhile, the operators of the Ponzi scheme known as Social Security remain at large.

Title: An so it goes , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 03, 2009, 10:25:41 PM

Because the effort failed these details are likely to slip down the memory hole rather quickly.  Note them now before they do.
==============

All the president’s Olympic cronies
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2009

When government officials play the Olympic lottery, taxpayers lose. That has been the disastrous experience of host cities around the world (Forbes magazine even dubbed the post-Olympic financial burden the “Host City Curse”). So, why are President Obama and his White House entourage headed to Copenhagen, Denmark this week to push a fiscally doomed Chicago 2016 bid? Political payback.

Bringing the games to the Windy City is Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley’s “vision.” The entrenched Democratic power-broker – in office since 1989 – would like to cap off his graft-tainted career with a glorious, $4 billion bread and circuses production. The influential Daley machine backed Barack Obama for the presidential primary. Obama lavished praise on Daley’s stewardship of the city. Longtime Daley cronies helped pave Obama’s path to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Now, they’re returning the favor for their hometown boss.

Senior White House adviser and Obama consigliere Valerie Jarrett is a Daley loyalist who worked as his deputy chief of staff, deputy corporation counsel, and planning commissioner. She hired the future First Lady of the United States, then-Michelle Robinson, as a mayoral assistant. Jarrett went on to serve as president and CEO of The Habitat Company, a real estate firm with a massive stake in federally-funded Chicago public housing projects.

One of those public-private partnerships, the Grove Parc Plaza Apartments, was run into the ground under Jarrett’s watch. Federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex a bottom-of-the-barrel 11 on a 100-point scale. “They are rapidly displacing poor people, and these companies are profiting from this displacement,” Matt Ginsberg-Jaeckle of Southside Together Organizing for Power, a community group that seeks to help tenants stay in the same neighborhoods, told the Boston Globe last year. “The same exact people who ran these places into the ground,” the private companies paid to build and manage the city’s affordable housing, “now are profiting by redeveloping them.”

Coincidentally enough, Grove Parc — now targeted for demolition as a result of years of neglect by Obama’s developer friends—sits in the shadows of the proposed site of the city’s 2016 Olympics Stadium

Jarrett served as vice chair of Chicago’s 2016 Summer Olympics bid committee before moving to the White House, where she has helmed a new “White House Office on Olympic, Paralympic and Youth Sport” with an undisclosed budget and staff. It’s not just taxpayers in cash-strapped Chicago who should be worried about this field of schemes. Crain’s Chicago Business reports that Jarrett and Chicago 2016 committee member Lori Healey met this month with federal officials at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development “to discuss financing options” for the estimated $1 billion Olympic Village.

The door is open and the administration is “willing to meet and listen” to any federal subsidy proposals, Jarrett said. Hey, what happened to Obama’s tough rules on interest-conflicted lobbying by his administration officials?

A majority of Chicagoans who live in pay-for-play-plagued Cook County oppose public funding for the Olympic party. The city has more than a half-billion-dollar deficit – and just received word that its Olympic insurance policy will cover only about $1.1 billion of the $3.8-billion operating budget drawn up by Daley. Cost overruns, fraud, and union-inflated contracts are inevitable. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs defended President Obama’s all-out campaign for Chicago’s 2016 Olympics bid by claiming America will see a “tangible economic benefit.”

But as is always the case with sports corporate welfare disguised as “economic development,” an elite few will benefit far more than others.

Take senior White House adviser and Obama campaign guru David Axelrod. He’s been a Daley loyalist since 1989, when he signed up as a political consultant for the mayor’s first run. Axelrod’s public relations firm, Chicago-based AKPD Message and Media, has pitched in work for the Chicago 2016 committee. It is unknown how much AKPD has received for its services – or how much they’ll make in future income if the bid is successful. AKPD currently owes Axelrod $2 million.

The head of the Chicago 2016 bid committee is Patrick Ryan, chairman of the Aon Corporation and a co-chair of Obama’s deep-pocketed presidential inaugural committee. (Under Ryan’s watch at Aon, the company settled a massive corruption probe with 3 states for $190 million. More here on Ryan/Aon/Daley dealings More on corruptocrat Chicago Republicans like Ryan and others here.)

Also on both of those committees: Obama confidante Penny Pritzker, who in addition chairs the Olympic Village Subcommittee and is president of Pritzker Realty Group – a mega-developer in Illinois that could reap untold millions in project work if the Daley Machine/White House campaign succeeds.

Former Pritzker executive and Obama campaign treasurer Martin Nesbitt is also on the bid committee – and serves as Mayor Daley’s chairman of the Chicago Housing Authority.

Another bid committee member, Michael Scott Jr., is “trying to develop a for-profit real estate project that would sit within feet of the cycling venue if Chicago wins the 2016 Summer Games,” according to the Chicago Tribune.

It takes a crony-filled White House to raise a Chicago Olympic village. Daley and Obama will get the glory. America will get stuck with the bill.

Title: corruption fraud etc. ACORN loses foundation funding
Post by: DougMacG on October 05, 2009, 09:04:19 AM

The failure of the crony contracts to build the Olympic village may turn out to be a blessing in disguise for the young President.  He gets the credit at the home precinct for putting it all on the line for them and averts the scandals that were certain to follow.
----
Beware you charity givers that most do-gooding in the inner cities is welfare and dependency supporting redistribution along with opposition to private property rights and support for public and private takings, laced in scandal and corruption (my humble observation). 
----
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/02/AR2009100205261.html

ACORN Losing Funding From Big Foundations
   
By Susan Kinzie
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 3, 2009

The liberal political organizing group ACORN, battered by the release of embarrassing videos and allegations of financial mismanagement and fraud, has also been losing support from several major foundations.

The Ford Foundation, the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, the Marguerite Casey Foundation and Bank of America have stopped funding the group and its affiliates over the past year and a half.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, a network that helps low-income families with housing, voter registration and other issues, receives about 10 percent of its $25 million annual budget from federal grants, according to Brian Kettenring, deputy director of national operations. The rest comes from foundations, membership dues and private donations.

Title: Fellow Census Travelers
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 11, 2009, 11:19:55 AM

2010 Census Still a Boondoggle for the Left
by Kyle Olson
While there may have been a collective sigh of relief across America after the news that the Census Bureau severed ties with ACORN, it made me wonder who other Census partners were.
In short, ACORN or not, the 2010 census will be an organizing tool for the American Left.
Here is a partial list of other census partners, according to the Census website:
AARP
A. Phillip Randolph Institute
AFL-CIO
American Federation of Government Employees
AFSCME
American Federation of Teachers
Coalition of Labor Union Women
Coalition of Black Trade Unionists
Community Action Partnership
Families USA
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Labor Council for the Latin American Advancement
League of Women Voters of the United States
National Black Justice Coalition
National Council of La Raza
National Education Association
Pride at Work
Rainbow Push Coalition
Service Employees International Union
Southern Coalition for Social Justice
United Workers
Workforce Alliance
My problem all along is that overtly political organizations, say SEIU or ACORN, would be out collecting sensitive information on Americans.  What would stop them from zapping off one copy of personal information for themselves as they submit it to the Census Bureau?  The federal government We will essentially be paying organized labor and “social justice” organizations to recruit new members.
With such a tight grip on the Census by the Obama administration and its allies, one wonders what the end result will be and if it can be trusted.

http://biggovernment.com/2009/10/10/2010-census-still-a-boondoggle-for-the-left/

Title: Re: ACORN - the firewall
Post by: DougMacG on October 11, 2009, 01:31:40 PM

"What would stop them from zapping off one copy of personal information for themselves as they submit it to the Census Bureau?  The federal government We will essentially be paying organized labor and “social justice” organizations to recruit new members."

Luckily they have a "firewall" (Lol) between activities partisan-political and all the taxpayer funded, Marxist do-gooding that they do.  I heard that directly from the head of ACORN.  

Also reassuring is that the incident in Baltimore (and in New York, Washington, Houston, Chicago, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Boston, Minneapolis, San Diego and Seattle) was an isolated incident.  

If anyone out there has ever seen a picture of this firewall, please post it.
---

The constitution authorizes and mandates the count of the number of people in your household.  Where in the constitution does it empower the federal government to coerce answers on anything else??

The list of 'Census Partners' is scary and obnoxious.  What about naming rights, will it soon be called the Pepsi or Bud Light Census?  In the meantime maybe we can just call it the ACORN or Bill Ayers Census.

Did I really see La Raza in charge of counting legal immigrants for congressional representation?  :-(

Title: Countrywide Scandal
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 17, 2009, 09:07:20 AM

The Vote Democrats Don't Want
Whatever you do, don't mention Countrywide.

By JAMES FREEMAN

If you think moderate Democrats are afraid of voting for ObamaCare, you should see how they react to a potential vote on the Countrywide Financial loan scandal.

The House oversight committee was scheduled to meet on Thursday afternoon to mark up several minor pieces of legislation. Days before the meeting, California Republican Darrell Issa notified committee Chairman Edolphus Towns that Mr. Issa would call for a vote to subpoena Countrywide documents from Bank of America, which bought the failed subprime lender last year. Recall that, under the "Friends of Angelo" program, named for former Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo, Democratic Senators Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad received sweetheart deals on home mortgages. Mr. Issa wants to uncover the full story on Countrywide's effort to influence Washington policy makers.

Mr. Towns, a New York Democrat who also received mortgages from the unit that processed the VIP loans but claims he received no favors, has opposed such a subpoena. But can he count on his Democratic colleagues to vote it down? Perhaps Mr. Towns would rather not find out. Mr. Issa showed up for the scheduled 2 p.m. markup on Thursday hoping that a few Democrats would vote his way and allow the investigation to proceed. Then a strange thing happened: As Mr. Issa and the GOP members of the committee sat waiting for the meeting to begin, Democrats huddled in a back room without explanation. Thirty-five minutes later, the committee announced that the meeting had been postponed indefinitely.

A committee press release later claimed the postponement was "due to conflicts" with a markup occurring at the same time in the financial services committee. But Mr. Issa's staff videotaped several financial services members leaving the back-room gathering with Mr. Towns at the conclusion of the meeting. If members were there to confab with Chairman Towns, obviously they weren't at any finance committee markup -- suggesting the real "conflict" was between Democrats over whether to keep stonewalling the Countrywide matter.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704322004574477411300771366.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 23, 2009, 09:14:53 AM

From the Left: ACORN Lies Exposed Again

Just when you thought it was safe to visit an ACORN office again, yet another video was released this week at BigGovernment.com. James O'Keefe and Hannah Giles, the young conservative activists who posed as a pimp and prostitute in order to get ACORN's advice on tax evasion and other illegal activities, released a sixth video putting the lie to the organization's claim to have "thrown out" the pair from its Philadelphia office. The same employee who claimed she showed them the door is on camera in the newest video giving them the same advice on illegal activities that they received at five other ACORN offices -- and the conversation lasted for 32 minutes.

The audio is frequently muted because of ACORN's legal action against O'Keefe and Giles, but Andrew Breitbart, whose BigGovernment.com Web site first aired the videos, has challenged ACORN to allow him to play the full audio. O'Keefe said, "We call upon ACORN to state publicly now that it has no objection to the public release of any of its employees' oral statements to us. If they are interested in the truth, why wouldn't they do so?" Furthermore, O'Keefe asks, "Why did the Philadelphia press report that we were kicked out? Will those reporters now print corrections? [Will the] Washington Post print a second correction?" Don't hold your breath.

Title: ACORN Mounts a Comeback
Post by: DougMacG on October 29, 2009, 08:27:33 AM

The ACORN thread was supposed to be a place for a few side note comments about an obscure organization that operates in the inner cities of America that recruits 'welfare rights' support quietly without really telling people that they oppose all of the founding principles of our country.  Now they have entrenched power all the way up to the Oval Office and the funding committees in congress. 

A liberal 'friend' of mine was sarcastically making fun of conservatives by saying that  some little "acorn" is now the greatest threat this country has ever faced.  I waited my turn and replied that except for the sarcasm, I agree whole-heartedly; we face a threat from within that is greater than any foreign enemy we have ever faced.
----------
http://www.powerlineblog.com/

ACORN Mounts a Comeback
October 28, 2009 Posted by John at 6:37 PM

Just a few weeks ago, the criminal enterprise called ACORN was on the run. Both House and Senate voted to de-fund the organization, but in different ways that were, in effect, more symbolic than real. The Democrats, having laid low for a while, are now moving to restore ACORN to a more powerful position than ever.

Byron York explains last week's maneuvering in the House Financial Services Committee. Republicans led by Michele Bachmann matched wits with Maxine Waters and the Democrats. That sounds like a mismatch, but the Dems prevailed by aiming higher than the Republicans had anticipated.

What is at stake is the administration's proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency. The House bill creates an Oversight Board that will advise the administrator of the agency. The Oversight Board consists of high-ranking officials like the chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve and the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission. Only, under Waters's amendment, the Oversight Board would also include five members selected for their "expert[ise] in financial services, community development, fair lending and civil rights, and consumer financial products or services." Read, ACORN and assorted partners in crime.

The Waters Amendment passed, but the war isn't over yet. When the bill gets to the House floor, Republicans will offer an amendment intended to force Democrats to go on record as voting to empower the corrupt organization. Will that work? Hard to say, but one thing is certain: ACORN is a hard organization to put out of business.
-----
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/How-Dems-outmaneuvered-GOP-on-ACORN-66727072.html


How Dems outmaneuvered GOP on ACORN
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
October 27, 2009

Last Thursday was a confusing day at the House Financial Services Committee. The committee was preparing to vote on legislation to create a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency when a fight erupted over ACORN, the community organizing group that was defunded by Congress after videos surfaced showing ACORN workers involved in a variety of corrupt practices.

Although the proposed Consumer Financial Protection Agency -- designed to deal with issues like mortgages and credit-card fees -- has nothing to do with community organizing, Democrats offered an amendment that could allow ACORN and groups like it to participate in the new agency. Republicans offered an amendment of their own, designed to stop the Democratic one. An argument ensued. It was complicated, with lots of different proposals and a good bit of misunderstanding. But when the dust settled, Democrats had outmaneuvered Republicans, and the new bill they approved could allow organizations like ACORN to play a role in the highest levels of the new consumer protection agency.

The bill creates two boards. One, the Oversight Board, will be the key panel giving advice to the director of the new agency. The bill says the Oversight Board will have seven members and specifies who those members will be: the chairman of the board of governors of the Federal Reserve; the head of the agency responsible for chartering and regulating national banks; the chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; the chairman of the National Credit Union Administration; the chairman of the Federal Trade Commission; the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development; and the chairman of the liaison committee of representatives of state agencies to the Financial Institutions Examination Council.

That's the Oversight Board. The bill would also create a second board, the Advisory Board, which would offer general advice to the director of the new agency. The bill does not specify how many members the Advisory Board will have, nor who they will be. It just says they should be "experts in financial services, community development, fair lending and civil rights, and consumer financial products or services."

The Oversight Board, made up of some of the most powerful people in the U.S. government, is clearly the more powerful of the two boards. Since the makeup of the Oversight Board is specified in the bill, Republicans did not expect Democrats to try to open up that board to include openings for ACORN and similar groups. Instead, Republicans expected Democrats to offer an amendment which would make it possible for representatives from ACORN and other groups to serve on the Advisory Board. With that in mind, Republicans prepared an amendment of their own banning ACORN from the Advisory Board. (The central part of the amendment did not go after ACORN by name, but barred individuals from organizations that have been indicted for federal or state election law violations from serving on the board.)

It turns out Republicans were mistaken. On Thursday, Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters introduced an amendment that would add five members, not to the Advisory Board, but to the Oversight Board, with all five chosen from among "experts in the fields of consumer protection, fair lending and civil rights, representatives of depository institutions that primarily serve underserved communities, or representatives of communities that have been significantly impacted by higher-priced mortgage loans." That description could easily fit ACORN, or any number of other pro-Democratic groups. In any event, these new members would serve alongside the top officials from the Fed, FDIC, HUD, and the rest of the Oversight Board. Waters did not waste her time with the lower-level Advisory Board; she went straight for the top, the Oversight Board.

But Republicans had prepared an amendment which covered just the Advisory Board. "We can only anticipate what she's going to offer," says Rep. Michelle Bachmann, who introduced the Republican amendment, referring to Waters. "We anticipated the Advisory Board."

"Did Rep. Waters aim higher than you thought she would?" Bachmann was asked. "She certainly did," Bachmann answered.

If Waters surprised Bachmann, it also appears that Bachmann surprised Waters. The California Democrat appeared to expect Bachmann to attack the proposal to add community activists to the Oversight Board, and Waters seemed confused that Bachmann's amendment addressed the Advisory Board instead. Waters was prepared to fight, and then discovered the other side had missed the real target. "I do not know what we are doing here," Waters said at one point. "She [Bachmann] is amending the wrong board."

But committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank knew what was going on. Seeing that Bachmann's amendment did not cover the more important Oversight Board, Frank made sure Waters' amendment remained untouched. "We are simply trying to make sure that [Bachmann's] amendment does not inadvertently undo the amendment the gentlewoman from California previously offered," Frank said, before quickly ordering a vote on the amendments. The committee approved both Bachmann's and Waters'. The result was that the Oversight Board will be expanded with members of community organizations, including ACORN. Democrats did not seem to mind that ACORN was banned from the less-important Advisory Board.

In the end, the committee approved the bill, with amendments, by a vote of 39 to 29. And that was it for the day. But the issue is not yet settled.

Bachmann knows that Democrats managed to open up the Oversight Board to ACORN and other groups without even being forced to publicly defend the decision. Now, she hopes they will be forced to vote up or down on a proposal to bar ACORN from the Oversight Board. "What we're going to try to do is offer an amendment when the bill goes to the floor," says Bachmann. "That's the goal -- to keep people who are from ACORN from serving on the Oversight Board."

So there will be another test. Will Democrats vote to negate Waters' amendment, to keep ACORN and other organizations from playing key roles in the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency? Or will they take a stand for ACORN when it comes to the final debate on the bill? The answer could determine whether ACORN finds an important place in a large and powerful new government agency.

Byron York, The Examiner's chief political correspondent

Title: WH Visitor Database
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 31, 2009, 04:03:27 PM

Searchable database of White House visitors. Some very unsavory names appear:

http://www.socrata.com/government/White-House-Visitor-Records-Requests/644b-gaut

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2009, 06:37:13 PM

William Ayers Visited White House – No, Not That One

The Obama administration has released a preliminary list of White House visitors as part of its promise to release to the public a record of people who came to the White House as well as "when they came, how long they were here, and who they met with."

The list, which is here, includes the names "William Ayers" and "Jeremiah Wright." But the White House says they aren't the Ayers and Wright that are known to the public.

"A lot of people visit the White House, up to 100,000 each month, with many of those folks coming to tour the buildings," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said in a statement. "Given this large amount of data, the records we are publishing today include a few 'false positives' – names that make you think of a well-known person, but are actually someone else."

"In September, requests were submitted for the names of some famous or controversial figures (for example Michael Jordan, William Ayers, Michael Moore, Jeremiah Wright, Robert Kelly ("R. Kelly"), and Malik Shabazz)," he continued. "The well-known individuals with those names never actually came to the White House. Nevertheless, we were asked for those names and so we have included records for those individuals who were here and share the same names."

Among the names on the list that appear to not be "false positives" are Bill Gates and George Clooney.

The White House told CBS News that it has social security number records that show that the Ayers who visited and the controversial William Ayers whose connections to Mr. Obama were brought up several times during the campaign last year are not one in the same.

It's unclear why the White House is including the names of people who went on White House tours with their listing of those who have come to the White House on official business. It may be news to those who have gone on the tours that a record of their visit will be released to the public.

The White House announced in September that it would release the records of visitors from the previous 90-120 days every month, "aside from a small group of appointments that cannot be disclosed because of national security imperatives or their necessarily confidential nature (such as a visit by a possible Supreme Court nominee)."

Those releases begin in December. The White House had also said it would release information about visitors prior to the beginning of the disclosure program in response to specific requests. This release is in response to such requests, 110 of which the White House says it has processed. It covers specific requests about visitors between January 20, 2009 to July 31, 2009.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/10/30/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5466001.shtml

William Ayers Visited White House – No, Not That One

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/10/white-house-posts-visitor-lists-is-that-the-bill-ayers-no.html

also

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/10/31/2009-10-31_big_names_on_white_house_visit_list.html

WASHINGTON - For one brief, shining moment, it looked like conspiracy theorists had found the mother lode on Friday as the White House released visitor logs with such names as William Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and Michael Moore.

But alas, they weren't that Ayers, Wright or Moore.

The people who actually came to the White House just had the same or similar names as 1960s terrorist bomber Ayers, controversial preacher Wright and leftist filmmaker Moore, said White House Special Counsel Norm Eisen.

"The well-known individuals with those names never actually came to the White House," Eisen said on the White House blog.

The visitor logs from Jan. 20 through July 31, released in reponse to information requests, also included people who are the real deals. They ranged from former Vice President Al Gore and liberal-cause bankroller George Soros to celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey, George Clooney and Denzel Washington.

Title: Removing Doesn't Mean Removal
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on November 15, 2009, 01:09:24 PM

I hate citing the Moonie-owned Washington Times, but it's the only news organization I seen that is following this:

EDITORIAL: Walpin-gate opens wider

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The case of Gerald Walpin, the controversially fired inspector general for the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), continues to raise questions about what the Obama administration is hiding.

Two new items and one previously overlooked item are of interest in the case. First, Mr. Walpin filed a legal brief on Nov. 6 that convincingly refutes the arguments in a White House motion to dismiss the lawsuit he had filed demanding that he be reinstated to his job. Second, White House officials met on Tuesday with staff of Sen. Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican, and narrowed but did not solve their differences over the Obama administration's withholding of documents related to the firing.

Though the White House has shared with the senator several hundred pages of relevant material, it continues to claim that several hundred more pages are protected by various legal "privileges." Until Mr. Grassley is satisfied with the level of White House cooperation, he probably will continue his "hold" on the nomination of CNCS Chairman Alan Solomont to be ambassador to Spain.

The previously overlooked item, meanwhile, plays a significant (but not determinative) role in Mr. Walpin's court filing against the White House's motion to dismiss. It involves one of the main arguments belatedly advanced by the White House to try to justify the firing - a firing that occurred shortly after Mr. Walpin filed two reports highly embarrassing to political allies of President Obama's. To explain Mr. Walpin's termination, the White House had tacitly endorsed a complaint filed by Acting U.S. Attorney Lawrence Brown of Sacramento concerning Mr. Walpin's behavior while compiling one of those two reports. But on Oct. 19, that complaint against Mr. Walpin had been summarily dismissed by the relevant investigator.

The Oct. 19 letter from the Council of Inspectors General for Integrity and Efficiency said Mr. Walpin had "sufficiently and satisfactorily addressed the matter and that further inquiry or an investigation regarding the matter was not warranted. The [Integrity Committee] has completed its review of the matter."

In other words, Mr. Walpin had done nothing wrong. The charges against him were bogus.

The rest of Mr. Walpin's brief makes mincemeat of the White House motion to dismiss his lawsuit. Past Supreme Court decisions show that for someone to be dismissed without even the benefit of oral argument, the court must determine that the plaintiff's case has no "plausible" grounds. So let's examine the plausibility:

The crux of Mr. Walpin's case is that the White House "removed" him from his job without providing 30 days' notice and without providing Congress with reasons for the removal, both of which requirements are mandated by law. The administration's legal brief asserts that putting Mr. Walpin on paid administrative leave did not amount to "removal." That's awfully odd, considering that the entire reason Congress provided the 30-day window was so IGs could not be blocked from continuing any ongoing investigations that might embarrass an administration.

In this instance, according to Mr. Walpin's brief, before the administration notified Congress in any way about its unhappiness with Mr. Walpin, it "terminated [his] access to his [own] email account and office, and denied him access to his staff. Mr. Walpin was prevented from performing even the most rudimentary steps in order to ensure that his termination did not prevent the Office of Inspector General from performing its duties."

A letter from the White House six days after that stated clearly that "Mr. Walpin was removed." Yet now the White House plays semantics by claiming that being "removed" does not constitute "removal." This all sounds a bit too much like another Democratic president arguing over the meaning of the word "is." It is dishonest on its face.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/15/walpin-gate-opens-wider-28331053/

Title: ACORN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2009, 07:52:02 AM

http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/20/...2010-election/

Breitbart to AG Holder: Investigate ACORN or We’ll Release More Tapes Just Before 2010 Election

by Publius

Earlier tonight Andrew Breitbart, James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles discussed the final chapter of the ACORN L.A. saga on “Hannity,” but more interestingly, Breitbart disclosed where the story goes from here. Transcript (below) starts from 3:50 into the clip:

(Go to website to view video)

Breitbart: There’s a lot of hypocrisy and the dust has settled for ACORN and at the end of the day they’ve recognized that Eric Holder, the Attorney General, has not initiated an investigation into ACORN after we now have seven tapes. There were five initially that came out, ACORN was defunded by the Senate, was defunded by the House, lost it’s link to the Census; while all that damage occurred, Congress didn’t come in to investigate them, obviously not the Attorney General’s office, and they’ve now realized let’s get back into business because they realized that the dust settled and they were not being investigated, it was Hannah, James, and me who were being investigated, that’s why we’ve been forced to offer this latest tape.

Hannity: Are you saying, Andrew, that there are more tapes?

Breitbart: Oh my goodness there are! Not only are there more tapes, it’s not just ACORN. And this message is to Attorney General Holder: I want you to know that we have more tapes, it’s not just ACORN, and we’re going to hold out until the next election cycle, or else if you want to do a clean investigation, we will give you the rest of what we have, we will comply with you, we will give you the documentation we have from countless ACORN whistleblowers who want to come forward but are fearful of this organization and the retribution that they fear that this is a dangerous organization. So if you get into an investigation, we will give you the tapes; if you don’t give us the tapes, we will revisit these tapes come election time.

Hannity: This is a blockbuster, what you’re saying here. You guys have more tapes, you’ll release them before the election, that could have a big impact on the election, obviously…

Title: Easy Home Test
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on November 20, 2009, 09:17:09 AM

A little comic relief:

Chris Duco
Top 10 reasons you might be a progressive:

10. If you are an ACORN employee who tried to organize other ACORN employees into a union but were stopped by ACORN's illegal union busting activities while ACORN fights to unionize OTHER companies... you might be a progressive.

9. If in the year 2009, you belong to a congressional caucus that uses skin color as it's only membership criteria... you might be a progressive.

8. If you are a congress person who belongs to a congressional caucus started by a self described socialist, and you think it is OK... you might be a progressive.

7. If you are a congress person in a "free country" who has a Freudian Slip and tells someone you want to nationalize their whole industry while at the same time you are directing tax payer dollars to save a company you are part owner of... you might be a progressive.

6. If you are the Ohio spokesperson for a Presidential campaign and you vote in that swing state instead of your home state as the law requires... you might be a progressive.

5. If you get an appointment in the Department of Transportation within that winning administration despite your illegal voter fraud activities... you might be a progressive.

4. If an organization you work for is paid almost a million dollars by a Presidential campaign to register voters, the organization endorses that campaign's candidate and only turns in registrations for that candidate's party and that organization is tax exempt... you might be a progressive.

3. If you call people who drive cross-country with hand made signs because they heard there was going to be a protest against big government "astro-turf" but you call the people paid below minimum wage waving professionally printed signs that were handed out to them as they get off a bus paid for by a PAC "grass roots"... you might be a progressive.

2. If you find yourself at a rally chanting that health care is a human right while forgetting that doctors are not slaves and you actually don't have a right to lay claim to their skills and abilities for free... you just might be a progressive.

1. If you think Carbon Dioxide, the gas required by plants to convert solar energy into usable chemical energy in the photosynthetic process, the very source of all food on the planet, is a pollutant... you might be a progressive.



Chris Duco served 8 years in the US Navy, 6 as a nuclear trained Machinist Mate aboard the most highly decorated ship in US history.

Title: Continuing to fund the criminal enterprise that helped elect President Obama
Post by: DougMacG on November 28, 2009, 07:42:17 PM

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/11/republican_blas.html

Republican blasts ACORN reprieve
Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor November 27, 2009

A top House Republican today blasted a ruling by the Justice Department that allows the Obama administration to pay ACORN for services provided under contracts signed before Congress passed a law banning the community advocacy group from receiving taxpayers money.

Republicans have been on the warpath against ACORN since its voter registration efforts came under scrutiny during the 2008 presidential campaign. After conservative activists, who posed as a prostitute and pimp, released videos appearing to show ACORN staffers advising them how to skirt the law, Democrats joined in the outrage, leading to the congressional funding ban that Obama signed on Oct. 1.

Since 1994, ACORN, which stands for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, has received about $53 million in federal aid, much of it in grants to help poor people obtain affordable housing. The Justice Department asked whether the funding ban applied to prior contracts. In a ruling first reported by the New York Times, a department lawyer said the payments under prior contracts should continue because the language of the law did not expressly wipe them out.

But Representative Darrell Issa, the top Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said "the bipartisan intent of Congress was clear -- no more federal dollars should flow to ACORN."

"It is telling that this administration continues to look for every excuse possible to circumvent the intent of Congress," Issa said in a statement. "Taxpayers should not have to continue subsidizing a criminal enterprise that helped Barack Obama get elected president. The politicization of the Justice Department to payback one of the president’s political allies is shameful and amounts to nothing more than old-fashioned cronyism."

Title: How they got the 60th vote
Post by: DougMacG on November 29, 2009, 09:20:42 AM

Al Franken couldn't hold a 14 point Obama margin against popular centrist Republican incumbent Norm Coleman, but he did hold his election to a zero point margin, and that was enough because of the victory guarantee program his party had put in place ahead the election.

The near sweep of 2006 included replacing a competent (R) Secretary of State with one that was hand-picked by and heavily supported by the left-wing activist group moveon.org.  At the tiime no one outside of the Bush-Gore inner fight understood the significance.  Simultaneous to state change and even preceding it was the takeover of the inner city election process by ACORN.

Twin Cities ABC affiliate KSTP-5 just ran an extensive investigative report concluding that whether or not your questionable or clearly defective ballot was accepted or rejected depended wholly on what jurisdiction you lived in.  In the outlying areas, state law was followed.  In the liberal inner cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, ballots without signatures, witnesses or addresses were commonly accepted.

They interviewed the MN Sec. of State for 90 minutes and he refused to break out his reading glasses to look at any of the material they presented, sticking to generalities that prevailed in the court challenge to the end result.

Title: POTB
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 12, 2009, 07:45:49 AM

 NEW YORK Judge: Keep funding ACORN A federal judge has ruled the U.S. government's move to cut off funding to ACORN is unconstitutional. U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon issued the preliminary...

Title: electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN) - Yes, MN was stolen.
Post by: DougMacG on December 22, 2009, 08:33:51 PM

"Doug, not that it matters at this point but do you think Coleman was robbed of the election?
The msm of course is dead silent on this issue."

Please watch the video at the link: http://kstp.com/article/stories/S1222327.shtml?cat=5  This is the definitive piece on the recount IMO.  8 minutes of investigation reporting by the local ABC affiliate, no follow up, and like CCP said, the national media didn't pick up on it at all.  They got what they wanted.  The report closes by saying we haven't heard the end of this.  That was a month ago.  I guess we did.  They even let the link fall off their website already. 

Basically the election was a tie.   Coleman won with the original data.  Franken won with the 'adusted' data.

Ballots were counted in liberal strongholds that wouldn't have been counted elsewhere in the state - enough to win.  ACORN and George Soros picked Sec of State says he didn't bring his reading glasses to the interview - didn't know he was going to have this sprung on him.

Title: Another New Black Panther Case Casualty?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on December 28, 2009, 07:57:46 AM

DOJ Voting rights chief fired. Prosecuted New Black Panthers

Clarice Feldman
Main Justice.com   reports there's been an unceremonial  removal from office of the Civil Rights Division's Voting Rights Section chief, Christopher Coates. He signed off on the complaint against the Black Panthers and is presently under subpoena by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission which is investigating Attorny General Holder's decision to drop the case after it was won.

Veteran Civil Rights Division attorney Christopher Coates is no longer chief of the Voting Section, according to the division's Web site.

There was no official announcement of the personnel change in the long-troubled section, which most recently has been embroiled in the controversy over the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case. Main Justice noticed the change on the Voting Section Web site.

Taking over for Coates in an acting role is Chris Herren, a deputy chief of the section, according to the Web site.

Alejandro Miyar, a spokesman for the Civil Rights Division, wasn't available for comment Sunday. Coates did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment. It could not be learned whether Coates left the department entirely or transferred to another post.

Coates signed off on the controversial voter intimidation complaint against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members, filed in the waning days of the George W. Bush administration. The Obama DOJ's decision to dismiss most of the charges in May has become a political controversy for the administration.

Coates also supervised J. Christian Adams, the career Voting Section attorney who compiled the Black Panther case. Adams, who has a history of conservative advocacy, was hired in 2005 by then-Civil Rights Division official Bradley Scholzman, a Bush political appointee who improperly politicized the hiring process in the division, the department's Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility found in a joint investigation.

Coates had been listed on the Web site as chief of the Voting Section as late as Dec. 20.

h/t:Ryan J, Reilly - Free Republic

Clarice Fledman

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/12/doj_voting_rights_chief_fired.html at December 28, 2009 - 10:55:59 AM EST

Title: IG Budgets Slashed
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 13, 2010, 09:16:40 AM

Obama's war on Inspector Generals

Ed Lasky
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is investigating the Office of Management and Budget for threatening an inspector genera l that if he did not keep quiet regarding slashes in his department's budget "they'd make life miserable for him." 

The inspector generals are federal watchdog officials who are supposed to ensure the honesty and integrity of other federal officials. In this case, Patrick McFarland , inspector general of the Office of Personnel Management, received a "not so veiled threat from the OMB" about telling Congress of concerns over its budget.
 

A 2008 federal law allows inspectors general to inform Congress if they believe their proposed budgets would inhibit oversight duties. The law was designed to protect watchdogs from top agency officials that might cut watchdog budgets in retaliation for hard-hitting investigations.

The inspector generals watch to make sure taxpayer dollars are spent wisely and honestly, that rules are followed, that government power is not used for improper ends (such as partisan politics). The fact that the Obama administration, addicted to vast deficit spending, has chosen to slash spending for internal watchdogs is very revealing. The most honest and open administration in the history of the world wants to eviscerate the one department charged with ensuring the integrity and honesty of the federal government.

There is a greater rationale to increase funding for our nation's inspector generals given the orgy of spending that the Obama administration is undertaking to make sure rules are followed and money is tracked.

Instead, the inspector generals are now seemingly being treated as enemies of the Obama team - joining an ever-expanding list. We have seen hits before by the Obama team-against Inspector General Walpin, who was investigating improper activities by Sacramento's mayor (a Democratic and political ally of Barack Obama's) and who was fired and subject to rounds of public abuse and criticism. The Walpin affair came amid other allegations of political interference at other agencies and even the Library of Congress.

The Chicago Boys play rough. They do not want the media keeping an eye on them (see Fox News) and they do not want federal officials monitoring them, either. So they manipulate the budget to cut one area where an oversight is desperately needed as trillions of tax-payer dollars are spent.

They also could care less about pledges of honesty and openness that were made in 2008, 2009, 2010. Words Matter, according to Obama. But those were just words after all.



Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/01/obamas_war_on_inspector_genera.html at January 13, 2010 - 12:14:39 PM EST

Title: Holder's Stonewall Continues
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 16, 2010, 07:41:13 PM

Judiciary Committee Turns Down Black Panther Resolution
By Michael P. Tremoglie, For The Bulletin
PUBLISHED:
SATURDAY, JANUARY 16, 2010
The House Judiciary Committee voted against a measure on Jan. 13, that was previously introduced by Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., that would have required the Department of Justice (DOJ) to explain to Congress why it dismissed a voter intimidation case involving members of the New Black Panther Party at a polling place in Philadelphia in November 2008.

Mr.  Wolf, the top Republican on the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds DOJ, introduced a “resolution of inquiry” in December.  The measure, H. Res. 994, was defeated 15-14 on a party-line vote.   

 “I am deeply disappointed that Judiciary Committee defeated my resolution of inquiry on a party-line vote.  There has been no oversight, no accountability and certainly no transparency with regard to this attorney general and this Department of Justice,” Mr. Wolf said in a written statement.

 Mr. Wolf noted that the Obama administration promised "unprecedented transparency" and has provided the exact opposite. The American people deserve better he said.

 Attorney General Holder has ignored seven letters over seven months from Mr. Wolf. He has also failed to comply with subpoenas issued by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

 The attorney general continues to thwart all efforts to compel an explanation for the dismissal of U.S. v. New Black Panther Party.  DOJ is claiming broad privileges — which many legal scholars question — in order to avoid disclosing any new information regarding this case.

 “The Justice Department has gone as far as to claim ‘privilege’ and redact seven pages of a letter that I sent to the attorney general and released publicly on July 31, 2009,” Mr. Wolf said. “It failed to provide the commission with many of my other letters that it said it was prepared to share.  I sincerely question the judgment of the Civil Rights Division leadership — both in its dismissal of this case and its stonewalling of this Congress and the Commission on Civil Rights.”

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2010/01/16/news/nation/doc4b515b24c3884598936717.txt

Title: Smoking Guns Galore, & Utter Silence, too
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 19, 2010, 11:15:17 AM

Pretend for a moment that this was a Republican effort and then imagine the ensuing din.

The New Black Panthers and the White House
What did the White House know and when did it know it?

By Hans A. von Spakovsky

The more the Obama administration fights the subpoenas from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and denies congressmen’s requests for answers concerning the inexplicable dismissal of the voter-intimidation case in Philadelphia against the New Black Panther Party (NBPP), the more reasonable people wonder what the administration has to hide. And so it is appropriate now to ask: What did the White House know and when did it know it?

Perhaps the single most important question that the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the White House are refusing to answer in the growing scandal (for the stonewalling and subpoena violations make it a scandal) is which political appointees were involved in the obviously wrongful decision to dismiss the lawsuit — a civil suit filed under the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Newly released White House visitor records present strong circumstantial evidence of White House involvement in what should have been an independent and impartial law-enforcement decision.

The facts of the voter-intimidation case have been widely reported. There is even a video of NBPP members outside a polling place; they are dressed in paramilitary uniforms, and one of them is waving a nightstick. Poll watchers also reported that they were hurling racial epithets at elderly voters, some of whom were quite afraid. When the DOJ filed suit last January, the NBPP did not deny the charges, and the veteran trial lawyers were preparing a default judgment and broad injunction. So it is completely inexplicable from a legal point of view why the career lawyers in the Civil Rights Division were suddenly ordered in May to dismiss the lawsuit against the NBPP and all but one defendant. The injunction against the remaining defendant is a joke, for it does not prohibit him from wielding his weapon in polling places outside Philadelphia or from yelling racial epithets and blocking entrances to polling places anywhere. There is also nothing to stop the NBPP from organizing the same type of harassment in future elections.

On December 30 — a time of year when most people’s attention is not on the news — the administration released the latest list of White House visitors. Going through the list takes quite a while, but doing so reveals some rather startling “coincidences” — meetings between Justice Department political appointees known to be involved in the dismissal and a White House deputy counsel that coincide with key dates in the New Black Panther saga. Some of the meetings appear to have followed a regular schedule. Others were set up on short notice and break from the pattern in unusual ways, particularly as they are matched up against some known or reported facts in the NBPP litigation.

In reviewing the data, keep in mind that internal DOJ memos and news reports establish that the career lawyers in the Voting Section working on the case were overruled by Obama political appointees. But who exactly was involved? The Washington Times reported that Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli, the No. 3 official at Justice, “was consulted and ultimately approved a decision in May to reverse course and drop a civil complaint.” The DOJ has not denied this, but it also won’t say if Perrelli was the highest official involved.

Loretta King, the acting assistant attorney general for civil rights, was also involved in ordering the career Voting Section lawyers to dismiss the suit and was in communication with Perrelli. So what else can we piece together?

The newly released White House records show a series of meetings between Perrelli and the then White House deputy counsel, Cassandra Butts, some also involving Spencer Overton, the deputy assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Policy at the Justice Department. All of these Obama political appointees were actively involved with voting issues in their previous jobs.

Perrelli was extensively involved in some of the Democratic Party’s biggest redistricting fights as a private attorney. Butts used to work at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and has described herself as being “as close to Barack as anyone in law school.” When Butts was at the Center for American Progress, she complained on CAP’s blog about John Ashcroft allowing conservative views to influence decisions in the Civil Rights Division and specifically the Voting Section.

Spencer Overton is a George Washington University Law School professor who considers himself an “expert” on the Voting Rights Act and is one of the most partisan individuals in the so-called “vote reform” community. He has relentlessly attacked Republicans as “vote suppressors” and “intimidators” in demagogic publications like Stealing Democracy: The New Politics of Voter Suppression.

The NBPP voter-intimidation lawsuit was filed in January 2009, just before the Bush administration left office. Court records show that Justice lawyers notified the court on April 1 that the defendants had not answered the lawsuit, which is the preliminary step necessary to obtain a default judgment. On April 2, the clerk in the federal court in Philadelphia entered notice in the record that the defendants were in default.

That was about the same period of time when Kristen Clarke, on behalf of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, was circulating copies of the complaint and reportedly demanding that the Obama administration dismiss the lawsuit. Did she call her former NAACP colleague in the White House counsel’s office? Did she try to have other politically powerful people make calls to get the suit dismissed? We don’t yet know for sure, but just a week later, on April 8, Thomas Perrelli was meeting with Cassandra Butts and Spencer Overton at the White House.

On April 17, the judge in Philadelphia took notice of the failure of the NBPP defendants to answer the lawsuit by issuing an order giving Justice until May 1 to file its request for a default judgment. On May 1, however, Perrelli met in the West Wing with Butts and Overton at 2 p.m.; later that same day, the trial team on the NBPP case suddenly filed a request for an extension of time — instead of a motion for default — telling the court that it needed additional time to draft an “appropriate” default judgment order.

This was a bizarre request and bizarre timing. Justice had had a full month to draft a proposed order, something that the experienced lawyers on the case could have done in a few hours. It appears they were ordered at the last minute to ask for an extension, instead of completing what they had set in motion on April 1 when they first told the court that the defendants were in default. The judge gave Justice an extension until May 15 to file its motion for default judgment.

Right after May 1, there was a request from higher-ups for a second, very extensive case memorandum, which was given to Loretta King on May 6 by the trial team. Later that day, at 4:30 p.m., Perrelli met with Butts and another, unnamed White House official.

On May 13, two days before the court’s deadline, King received a third important memorandum on the case. Apparently, she had asked the Civil Rights Appellate Section for another review, a very unusual procedure, no doubt hoping the liberals in that section would find that there was no merit to the case. However, the chief of the Appellate Section, Diana Flynn, concluded on May 13 that the suit was meritorious and that there was no reason to dismiss the suit. Yet that same day, at 2 p.m., Perrelli again met with Butts and another White House official. We know what resulted from that meeting — an order to dismiss the case. The trial lawyers who had to prepare the dismissal motions probably have a record of when they were ordered to do so. Was it late on May 13?

Despite all the evidence of intimidation and the unanimous conclusions of the career lawyers who actually worked on the case, the Appellate Section lawyers who carefully scrutinized the relevant facts and law, and each of their respective supervisors that Justice had a solid case, the DOJ dismissed the lawsuit against all but one defendant late on May 15 and sought only an extremely limited remedy against the remaining defendant.

There is certainly other evidence known to the career trial lawyers at the DOJ that could make the circumstantial links with the White House much stronger. The DOJ has reportedly ordered several of the trial lawyers to disobey subpoenas issued by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, but the subpoena fight is ongoing. Because the DOJ by statute is supposed to enforce the commission’s subpoenas, and instead is actively thwarting them, the DOJ is caught in an outrageous conflict of interest that cries out for condemnation.

The NBPP story broke on the front page of the Washington Times on May 29. The reporters had earlier called DOJ officials to get the department’s position, and no doubt the reporters have a record of when they called for comment. Two days before the story broke, when Justice likely knew it was coming, Perrelli was once again at the White House — but this time he was meeting with Gregory Craig, who was then President Obama’s White House counsel, and another unnamed White House official.

Finally, on July 30, although the Justice Department had all along been asserting that career lawyers had made all the decisions in this case, the Washington Times ran a story revealing that Perrelli was “ultimately consulted and approved” the decision to reverse course and drop the lawsuit. The White House records show that an appointment was made that very day for a meeting between Perrelli and Cassandra Butts; the meeting took place the next afternoon. The records also show Perrelli meeting with Catherine Whitney, executive assistant to Gregory Craig, on July 24 and 27, at the same time, almost certainly, that Washington Times reporters were calling the DOJ as they were preparing the July 30 story.

During the summer and into the fall, this case received more and more attention. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights opened an investigation and sent a series of letters to the Justice Department starting in June requesting information and documents on the dismissal. Reps. Lamar Smith (R., Tex.) and Frank Wolf (R., Va.) also sent a series of increasingly angry letters to Justice asking for information and complaining about the department’s stonewalling. Perrelli met with Butts and Associate White House Counsel Danielle Gray on various other dates that may prove relevant to the NBPP cover-up. Those dates are not yet tied to events in the NBPP saga that are currently public, but additional information may come to light in the near future.

Butts resigned as a deputy counsel in November to be a “senior adviser” to the CEO of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, in what appears to be a demotion to a minor government post. What remains unanswered is how much involvement the White House had in the decision to dismiss the NBPP case and what Perrelli, Butts, Overton, and the others were discussing in their meetings that coincided with key events in the NBPP case.

All of this is circumstantial evidence, of course. But as any good Justice Department prosecutor can tell you, there are many people in prison whose guilt was proved beyond a reasonable doubt on the basis of circumstantial evidence alone. As Thoreau said, “Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.” We can safely assume the trout did not jump into the milk, and we can reasonably assume that the White House would deny involvement in the NBPP scandal if it in fact was not involved. Perhaps all of Perrelli’s meetings had nothing to do with the NBPP case; perhaps Perrelli and the White House officials were discussing the latest Washington Redskins loss. Or perhaps not.

It’s also important to understand that the radical civil-rights establishment, to which Perrelli, Butts, Overton, and Clarke belong, don’t believe in color-blind enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. Nor do they believe that all voters should be protected from discrimination. They were apoplectic when the Bush administration filed, and won, a voting-rights case against black officials in Noxubee County, Miss. They made it very clear that the Voting Rights Act should be used only to go after white officials, and that it was blasphemy to use it to protect white voters — no matter what the circumstances. The NBPP case in Philadelphia infuriated them just as the Noxubee case did.

Did White House officials order Perrelli to dismiss this case? If so, which officials? These questions may help explain why the Justice Department has refused to provide almost any information about this case, despite clear law that it must “cooperate fully” with the Commission on Civil Rights. The department is even asserting privileges that do not exist in response to the commission’s subpoenas, such as the need to protect against disclosures that would “undermine its ability to carry out its mission.”

Last week, the Democrats in the House Judiciary Committee voted not to support their fellow congressmen who want answers. What hypocrisy! Remember the dozens of hearings and subpoenas by congressional Democrats over the firing of the U.S. attorneys during the Bush administration, and their demands for answers from the White House? During the Obama administration, Democratic members of Congress want to hear no evil and see no evil about politicizing law-enforcement decisions in the Justice Department.

That said, it should be noted that almost no Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee actually spoke against investigating the NBPP dismissal — which must have made the administration nervous. The Democrats offered one last almost silent vote for the cover-up, but they know the other shoe might drop soon. Chairman John Conyers suggested to the committee’s Republican members that he might support hearings if the DOJ did not provide answers. Even if the White House visitor records are not the other shoe themselves, it may not take much more digging to make the picture complete. Then what will the White House say? That the system (to politicize law enforcement) worked?

— Hans A. von Spakovsky is a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation (www.heritage.org) and a former counsel to the assistant attorney general for civil rights at the Justice Department.
 
National Review Online - http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGQ2MmNjNDAzNGQwODUwOWNkZjMxZDc3MzZkNzI3NzI=

Title: SoCal Kaiser votes out SEIU
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 28, 2010, 11:09:56 AM

The LA Times reports today that Kaiser Permanente health care workers have voted themselves out of SEIU by a 6 to 1 margin.  They are aligning with a break-away faction National Union of Health Care Workers.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Rarick on January 29, 2010, 03:22:57 AM

Issues with Electronic Votes, Shads, and ACORNs.  I sometimes wonder why we do not already have people marching...........   I sometimes wonder if it is an intentional action to get citizens to lose confidence in the vote to destabilize the country?  Do any of these functionaries realize how IMPORTANT that is?   A certain amount of confidence is required or we evenyually will go the way of some of the denocratic banana republics- constant civil war over the outcome of the vote..........

Title: Pelosi's Party Planes
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 29, 2010, 05:38:07 PM

Judicial Watch can come off as cranks, but they do find some interesting stuff like this:

Judicial Watch Uncovers New Documents Detailing Pelosi's Use of Air Force Aircraft

View Discussion
House Speaker’s Military Travel Cost the United States Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a Two-Year Period, Including $101,429 for In-Flight Expenses

Contact Information:
Press Office 202-646-5172, ext 305

Washington, DC -- January 28, 2010
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has obtained documents from the Air Force detailing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s use of United States Air Force aircraft for Congressional Delegations (CODELs). According to the documents, obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Speaker’s military travel cost the United States Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol. The following are highlights from the recent release of about 2,000 documents:

Speaker Pelosi used Air Force aircraft to travel back to her district at an average cost of $28,210.51 per flight. The average cost of an international CODEL is $228,563.33. Of the 103 Pelosi-led congressional delegations (CODEL), 31 trips included members of the House Speaker’s family.
One CODEL traveling from Washington, DC, through Tel Aviv, Israel to Baghdad, Iraq May 15-20, 2008, “to discuss matters of mutual concern with government leaders” included members of Congress and their spouses and cost $17,931 per hour in aircraft alone. Purchases for the CODEL included: Johnny Walker Red scotch, Grey Goose vodka, E&J brandy, Bailey’s Irish Crème, Maker’s Mark whiskey, Courvoisier cognac, Bacardi Light rum, Jim Beam whiskey, Beefeater gin, Dewars scotch, Bombay Sapphire gin, Jack Daniels whiskey, Corona beer and several bottles of wine.
According to a “Memo for Record” from a March 29—April 7, 2007, CODEL that involved a stop in Israel, “CODEL could only bring Kosher items into the Hotel. Kosher alcohol for mixing beverages in the Delegation room was purchased on the local economy i.e. Bourbon, Whiskey, Scotch, Vodka, Gin, Triple Sec, Tequila, etc.”
The Department of Defense advanced a CODEL of 56 members of Congress and staff $60,000 to travel to Louisiana and Mississippi July 19-22, 2008, to “view flood relief advances from Hurricane Katrina.” The three-day trip cost the U.S. Air Force $65,505.46, exceeding authorized funding by $5,505.46.
“Speaker Pelosi has a history of wasting taxpayer funds with her boorish demands for military travel. And these documents suggest the Speaker’s congressional delegations are more about partying than anything else,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Judicial Watch previously obtained internal DOD email correspondence detailing attempts by DOD staff to accommodate Pelosi’s numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft as well as the speaker’s last minute cancellations and changes.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2010/jan/judicial-watch-uncovers-new-documents-detailing-pelosis-use-air-force-aircraft

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 14, 2010, 07:24:31 AM

Acorn-ucopia
Posted 02/12/2010 07:05 PM ET
 

Politics: Didn't Acorn, the corrupt community organizer, get its federal funding yanked after its last scandal? Actually, no. Through municipal middlemen, it's poised to rake in another $4 billion. Where is the outrage?

You'd think a group implicated in dozens of electoral fraud cases, theft of funds and, most recently, helping criminals interested in bringing child prostitutes to the U.S. would have been ruled ineligible for federal aid long ago.

But think again, because these aid rats are experts at survival.

FrontPage magazine reports that federal Judge Nina Gershon ruled that Acorn is eligible for the Obama administration's proposed $4 billion in Housing and Urban Development grants within the $3.83 trillion federal budget proposal for 2011.

That cancels the ban Congress placed on Acorn funding late last year after at least five of the group's offices willingly aided undercover reporters posing as a pimp and prostitute to get federal funding for a brothel and cheat on their taxes.

Acorn's antics were revealed after a series of reports last September on the BigGovernment Web site. Faced with a firestorm of complaints, Congress had no choice but to pull funds for the group.

Many were surprised that Congressional Democrats backed Acorn's defunding. Usually, Acorn and the Democratic Party work hand in hand. Acorn supplies votes and election assistance to Democratic candidates, and the Democrats supply them with funding.

Turns out, the fund-pulling was really just for show.

Acorn is being allowed to make an end-run around the federal funding ban through the use of a middleman, the Washington Times reports.

The way it's done is through HUD Community Development Block Grants, which are given to cities and states to help boost development efforts. Instead of applying directly to the federal government for aid, a violation of Congress' ban, Gershon, a Clinton appointee, effectively ruled that Acorn can instead apply directly to cities and states.

In short, this gaping loophole means the ban is off.

No organization that has broken the law so many times has any right to even indirect federal funding. The fact the feds never prosecuted them as they should have is what has created the opening for Acorn to put its snout in the public trough once again.

It's time for Congress and HUD to get tough with these miscreants before they do any more damage to our system.

Title: The electoral process
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 15, 2010, 08:10:35 AM

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual -- or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country." --Samuel Adams, in the Boston Gazette, 1781

Title: Walpin Languishes
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 16, 2010, 10:17:21 AM

Much as I hate to cite the Washington/Mooney Times, they are the only ones keeping this in the public eye.

EDITORIAL: Walpin-gate gets rusty

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Lawyers learn early that if they are in danger of losing a case, their best strategy is to delay it. With the help of a friendly judge, that seems to be the Obama administration's strategy in the case of fired AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin. It is past time for the case to move forward.

Mr. Walpin was fired in June after releasing two reports critical of close allies of President Obama's. As a senator, Mr. Obama was a leading co-sponsor of a 2008 law requiring that inspectors general receive 30 days' notice before being fired and that Congress receive a formal justification for any dismissal. As president, Mr. Obama gave Mr. Walpin no notice and offered Congress no reason for the firing other than a vague claim that he didn't have "the fullest confidence" in Mr. Walpin.

Mr. Walpin originally filed suit in July demanding reinstatement to his job. The suit still languishes, seven months later, without the benefit of a single preliminary hearing. First the Obama administration asked for an extension of the ordinary time period to respond to the suit. Then, rather than addressing the merits of the case, the administration made a motion to dismiss without a hearing or trial. Mr. Walpin countermoved on Dec. 16 for summary judgment in his favor. One week later, the administration filed another motion to delay. Briefs went back and forth on that motion for another month, but Federal District Judge Richard W. Roberts has ruled on nothing.

Finally, noting that a scheduling hearing should by law be held no later than 90 days after the defense's first "notice of appearance" and that 90 days expired on Dec. 15, Mr. Walpin on Feb. 3 filed a motion demanding a scheduling conference. Still no answer from the judge. However, on Friday, the administration moved to block all legal discovery on the numerous outstanding motions. Through all these delays, the Obama administration wards off the day when Mr. Walpin can use the legal discovery process to unearth documents or other evidence that might embarrass the White House.

Everything thus far calls attention to dirty tricks by the Obama team. The administration cited an ethical complaint against Mr. Walpin of which he was fully exonerated and suggested that the fired IG was losing mental capacity, which he quite clearly is not. Meanwhile, several of Mr. Walpin's major contentions against Obama allies have been shown to have real substance.

This scandal is about the role of inspectors general to be independent watchdogs on behalf of the public. By firing Mr. Walpin without cause, Mr. Obama undermined the whole system of inspectors general and thus the ideal of honest governance.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/16/walpin-gate-gets-rusty/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 16, 2010, 11:57:20 AM

Thanks for spotting this.  The Pravda lap dogs continue to not bark c.f. AC Doyle "Hound of the Baskervilles"

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2010, 04:28:19 PM

As predicted by Glenn Beck, ACORN has changed its names so that we cannot track it without considerable effort.

Title: Oversight Committee Walpin Report
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 02, 2010, 09:51:53 AM

Issa-Grassley Release New Documents Exposing Politicization of Inspector General Firing         
Tuesday, 02 March 2010 05:14
WASHINGTON. D.C. – House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) and Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) today released an updated supplement to a report released last November investigating the firing of Gerald Walpin, the Inspector General (IG) for the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS).  Walpin’s investigation found significant wrongdoing and allegations of sexual misconduct by President Obama’s good friend and Sacramento Mayor, Kevin Johnson.

“Rather than diminishing the appearance that politics played a role in the removal of Gerald Walpin, these new documents reinforce that appearance,” the updated report says.  “The new documents make the President’s initial explanation that he merely ‘lost confidence’ in the Inspector General seems even less credible.”
Specifically, new documents obtained by Issa-Grassley demonstrate that:
1.     Lawrence Brown was actively seeking a Presidential appointment as the U.S. Attorney at the same time he was negotiating a lenient settlement agreement with Kevin Johnson, excluding the Inspector General from the negotiations, and filing a complaint against Walpin with the Integrity Committee; and

2.     Lawrence Brown and Matthew Jacobs, Kevin Johnson’s attorney, frequently exchanged informal emails about Walpin, which do not suggest an appropriately arm’s length negotiating relationship.

3.     An internal memo that reveals that the White House considered issues in deciding to remove Walpin that it did not disclose in the official notice to Congress.

“Throughout our investigation of Mr. Walpin’s removal, the White House has repeatedly communicated that the President was not motivated by inappropriate political reasons,” Issa said.  “The fact is Gerald Walpin led an aggressive investigation of a political ally of President Obama that successfully recovered taxpayer dollars.  While firing an investigator who uncovered the abuse of funds by a political ally might be considered an act of ‘political courage’ in Chicago politics, for most Americans it raises troubling questions.”

The 62 page report released last year by Issa and Grassley detailed how prominent allies of the President were able to effectuate Walpin’s removal absent a thorough White House review.  The report further described how the White House Counsel’s Office withheld information from Congress and misled investigators after Rep. Issa and Sen. Grassley questioned the President’s methods and motives for removing Walpin. This controversy has also raised questions surrounding the role of former Michelle Obama Chief of Staff and current CNCS Senior Advisor Jackie Norris and her previously undisclosed meeting then CNCS Board Chairman Alan Solomont, now the President’s Ambassador to Spain.

CLICK HERE to Read the Updated Supplement to the Initial Report
CLICK HERE to View the Exhibits
CLICK HERE to View Appendix 1
CLICK HERE to View Appendix 2
CLICK HERE to View Appendix 3
CLICK HERE to View Section 1 - Appendix 4
CLICK HERE to View Section 2 - Appendix 4
CLICK HERE to View Section 3 - Appendix 4
CLICK HERE to View Section 4 - Appendix 4
CLICK HERE to View Section 5 - Appendix 4
CLICK HERE to View Section 6 - Appendix 4
CLICK HERE to View Section 7 - Appendix 4

http://republicans.oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=578:issa-grassley-release-new-documents-exposing-politicization-of-inspector-general-firing&catid=27:latest-news

Title: A piece of good news
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 03, 2010, 06:30:22 AM

Good follow through on that BBG.  No doubt the MSM will be all over this  :roll:

Speaking of corruption, , ,

Representative Charles B. Rangel Says He Is Stepping Down Temporarily as House Ways and Means Committee Chairman

Caught in a swirl of ethics inquiries, Representative Charles
B. Rangel said on Wednesday that he would temporarily step
aside as leader of the House Ways and Means Committee.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com?emc=na

Title: IOUs for SEIU's
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 11, 2010, 09:44:30 AM

http://reason.com/blog/2010/03/11/ten-years-of-union-ugly-in-cal
Reason Magazine


Ten Years of Union "Ugly" in California

Matt Welch | March 11, 2010

So, who have been the top two political donors in California over the past decade, accounting for around one-third of all political donations during the period when the Golden State went from the envy of the world to the laughingstock of the nation? According to the L.A. Times,

--The California Teachers Assoc., which spent $211.8 million.
--The California State Council of Service Employees, $107.4 million.

We've seen what the teachers unions have done to public education out west. But what is the California State Council of Service Employees? It's the state version of the national Services Employee International Union, the labor juggernaut headed up by the Obama White House's most frequent visitor, Andy Stern. More than 350,000 of its members are California state employees. Which may help explain why Obama put Stern on a conference call with the Schwarzenegger administration to discuss how the state wouldn't get stimulus money if it followed through on the governor's meek threats to maybe fire a couple of state employees. Gee, I wonder what Stern is going to recommend in his new role as a member of the administration's fancy new deficit-reduction panel?

Never forget: When confronted last year with his wretched impact on California governance, Stern said: "Democracy is an ugly thing at times." Now he's poised to inflict that ugly on the rest of the country as well. Good thing that President Obama, in the words of spokesman Robert Gibbs yesterday, has been so busy "reducing the undue influence of special interests and their lobbyists over government."

Title: Patriot Post
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 12, 2010, 08:37:51 AM

Income Redistribution: You Paid for It
Executive salaries reach $500,000, hourly fees top $600, and millions of your dollars are propping it all up. Welcome to the underworld of the environmental industry. According to Richard Pollock of Pajamas Media, "environmental activist groups have surreptitiously received at least $37 million from the federal government for questionable 'attorney fees'" related to lawsuits that "had nothing to do with environmental protection or improvement."

Since 2000, nine national environmental groups have filed the astounding number of 3,300 lawsuits, most based on "alleged procedural failings of federal agencies" rather than "substance or science." Not only has Uncle Sam doled out the millions, but Washington has "neither tracked nor accounted for" any of the outgo. Wyoming attorney Karen Budd-Falen, who helped uncover the fraud, says the $37 million is just the "tip of the iceberg," estimating the actual number is in the hundreds of millions.

Interestingly, according to the Washington Examiner, compensation for the top 10 paid environmental executives ranges from $308,000 to $496,000. Pajamas Media notes that of the $3.4 million that environmental PACs have given in federal campaign contributions since 2000, approximately 87 percent was to Democrats. Coincidence? We think not.

Eco-activists aren't the only ones greening themselves with your money. It seems Wake Forest University is using a $71,623 federal "we must rescue the economy now" stimu-less grant to study the effects of cocaine on a specific neurotransmitter in addicted monkeys. The economic benefit? Apparently a job "saved." For the record, we believe taxpayer dollars already fund too much monkey business in Washington; there's certainly no need to fund it anywhere else.

Title: Smelt Unendangered
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 18, 2010, 06:20:17 AM

Obama's hypocrisy on the environment exposed

Andrew Thomas
Is the Obama administration sacrificing America's ecosystem for two Congressional votes?

Something's fishy in the state of California, and it stinks of political corruption most foul.  The water supply to the San Joaquin valley was shut off on December 2008 and remains off today, destroying thousands of lives and livelihoods of the farmers, small business owners and their employees who live and work in the valley.  Additionally, it has crippled our domestic crop production, of which about 12% was grown in this area.

This tremendous sacrifice was absolutely necessary, at least according to the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Obama administration.  A valuable endangered species, the Delta Smelt, was being threatened by the diversion of water into the valley.  Local salmon and steelhead were threatened, as well. 

The overwhelming menace to the Pacific ecosystem was so extreme that no amount of pleading from California politicians such as Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger or Senator Dianne Feinstein could persuade Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, or President Obama to turn the water back on.  On this, they had to take a principled stand.  What courage these brave men possessed to steadfastly defend such a sensitive moral and ethical issue.  Our natural resources and environmental sanctity must rightly outweigh the lives of 40,000 citizens and 12% of the nation's food supply.

Uh well, not quite.  Apparently, the Obama administration values something even more than all the endangered species, American lives, and food shortages combined.  That would be the two ObamaCare "yes" votes miraculously garnered from two previously undecided Democrat congressmen, Reps. Costa and Cardoza, whose districts are coincidentally affected by the government-imposed drought. This announcement on March 16 coincided (again, coincidentally) with the US Department of Interior's announcement that they have had a change of heart, and now will turn the water back on.

I guess the environment is not that important an issue in Obama's agenda, after all.  Not today, anyway.  At least not until there is a need to use it as a weapon to forcibly extract more of our freedoms.  Maybe tomorrow.

Andrew Thomas
darkangelpolitics.com


Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/03/obamas_hypocrisy_on_the_enviro.html at March 18, 2010 - 08:18:47 AM CDT

Title: Invoke or Revoke Immunity
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on April 05, 2010, 03:27:32 PM

Panel: Justice stonewalling on Panthers

Jerry Seper

President Obama or Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. should declare publicly whether executive privilege has been invoked in the Justice Department's refusal to release documents showing why voter-intimidation charges against the New Black Panther Party were dismissed, says the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Declaring an impasse in negotiations between the commission and the department, Commission Chairman Gerald A. Reynolds said the Justice Department has "repeatedly refused" to provide any basic information regarding the case, instead asserting "vague and generalized privileges" that do not apply.

"The actual basis for the department's continued refusal to cooperate with the commission remains unclear," Mr. Reynolds said in a letter last week to Mr. Holder. "For example, has the president invoked executive privilege over the materials that the commission is seeking? If that is the case, the president or the attorney general must so state.

"The department's continued refusal to provide the requested information will lead to a conflict of interest, whereby the target of the subpoena — the department — can evade its statutory obligation to the commission by refusing to respond to or enforce the commission's subpoena," he said.

Mr. Reynolds asked Mr. Holder to respond by April 12 on whether he intends to cooperate in the inquiry "as is required by law," whether he would direct his subordinates to do so, and if he intends to allow Justice Department employees to respond to the commission's subpoenas to testify.

He said the department had "rebuffed each offer made by the commission" to meet to discuss and resolve the issues.

Justice Department officials did not respond to e-mails from The Washington Times seeking comment on the commission's letter.

In January, the department refused to turn over documents sought by the commission to explain why a civil complaint was dismissed against members of the New Black Panther Party who disrupted a Philadelphia polling place in the November 2008 elections.

In a 38-page response, the department objected to "each and every" question and document request submitted by the commission, saying the subpoenas violated privacy and privilege concerns, and were burdensome, vague and ambiguous.

The department also said the requested information was protected by the attorney-client privilege or were not subject to disclosure because they included attorney or law-enforcement work products. It also refused to release any information about an investigation of the New Black Panther Party case by its Office of Professional Responsibility, saying the review was privileged information or was covered by the Privacy Act.

In an accompanying letter, Joseph H. Hunt, director of the Justice Department's Federal Programs Branch, which oversees litigation matters, said the department was "constrained by the need to protect against disclosures that would harm its deliberative processes or that otherwise would undermine its ability to carry out its mission."

Also in January, the Justice Department refused to release e-mails and other documents sought under an open-records request by The Times in the New Black Panther Party case, despite acknowledging that 69 documents, totaling 135 pages, were responsive to the request.

The Times had sought copies of e-mails between officials in the Civil Rights Division and the Office of the Associate Attorney General regarding the litigation strategy, drafts of court filings and briefing materials related to the case.

The commission issued subpoenas on Dec. 9 demanding records showing why a civil complaint against the New Black Panther Party and three of its members was dismissed after a federal judge in Philadelphia ordered default judgments in the case. The New Black Panther Party members had refused to respond to the charges or to appear in court.

The Justice Department's Voting Rights Section was in the final stages of seeking the judgments when Loretta King, serving as acting assistant attorney general, ordered a delay. The delay came after she met with Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, the department's No. 3 political appointee, who approved the dismissal, according to interviews with department officials who sought anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the case.

A civil complaint was filed by the Voting Rights Section in January 2009 in Philadelphia against the party after two of its members in black berets, black combat boots, black shirts and black jackets purportedly intimidated voters with racial insults, slurs and a nightstick. A third party member was accused of managing, directing and endorsing their behavior. The incident was captured on videotape.

Four months later, the Justice Department dropped the charges, saying "the facts and the law did not support pursuing" them.

Among the documents being sought by the commission are those regarding any communications between Mrs. King, Mr. Perrelli and Mr. Holder about the case.

The civil complaint accused Minister King Samir Shabazz, head of the Philadelphia chapter, and Jerry Jackson, a Philadelphia party member, of intimidating voters at the polling place. A third party member, Chairman Malik Zulu Shabazz, a lawyer and D.C. resident, was accused of directing and endorsing their behavior.

The party members have not been available for comment. The department obtained an injunction against Mr. Samir Shabazz that prohibits him from brandishing a weapon outside a polling place until 2012.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/05/rights-panel-justice-stonewalling-on-panthers/

Title: DOJ Atty Resigns Over Black Panther Case
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on May 19, 2010, 04:36:03 PM

DOJ Voting Rights attorney resigns over Black Panthers stonewalling
By: J.P. Freire
Associate Commentary Editor
05/18/10 6:40 PM EDT
A trial attorney with the Department of Justice’s Voting Rights Section has resigned, citing concerns about the government’s refusal to prosecute a case involving voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party. A letter of resignation obtained by The Washington Examiner from a former Justice Department employee makes clear DOJ has refused to allow attorneys in the Voting Rights Section to testify before the congressionally-chartered bipartisan U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, despite subpoenas that could result in their being held in contempt.
In his letter of resignation, J. Christian Adams said:
On the other hand, the events surrounding the dismissal of United States v. New Black Panther Party, et al., after the trial team sought and obtained an entry of default, has subjected me, Mr. Christopher Coates, and potentially at some point, all members of the team, to a subpoena from the United States Commission on Civil Rights. The subpoena is based on an explicit federal statute and seeks answers about why the case was dismissed.
I have incurred significant personal expense in retaining a number of separate attorneys and firms regarding this subpoena in order to protect my interests and advise me about my personal legal obligation to comply with the subpoena. Over the last few months, one of my attorneys has had multiple communications with Federal Programs regarding the subpoena. My attorney suggested to them that the Department should file a motion in district court to quash the subpoena and thereby resolve conclusively any question about my obligation to comply.
Months ago, my attorney advised the Department that a motion to quash would be welcome, and that I would assert no objection to the motion. Further, my attorney has explicitly sought to ascertain whether Executive Privilege has been invoked regarding the decisions of individuals not in the Voting Section to order the dismissal of the case. If Executive Privilege has been asserted, or will be, obviously I would not comply with the subpoena. These options would provide some conclusive legal certainly about the extent of my obligation to comply with a subpoena issued pursuant to a federal statute. Instead, we have been ordered not to comply with the subpoena, citing a federal regulation (emphasis mine).
Adams also cites his knowledge of the criminal character and “violent tendencies of” members of the New Black Panther Party, saying:
As you also know, the defendants in the New Black Panther lawsuit have become increasingly belligerent in their rhetoric toward the attorneys who brought the case. (See eg., April 23, 2010 statement of Malik Zulu Shabazz,http://www.newblackpanther.com/usccrphony case statement.pdf, describing the “phony case” brought by “the modern day racist lynch mob seeking to hang what [we] think .are [our] modern slaves.”) Their grievances toward us generally echo the assertions that the facts and law did not support the lawsuit against them, ab initio. Knowing intimately the criminal character and violent tendencies of the members of New Black Panther Party, it is my profound hope that these assertions are tempered.
This follows the departure of another attorney, who before transferring to South Carolina, read a statement to a surprised “goodbye luncheon” about his opposition to the way the case is handled (see here). More updates to follow. The document is below:
J. Christian Adams resignation letter 051910


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/doj-voting-rights-attorney-resigns-over-black-panthers-stonewalling-94202249.html#ixzz0oQBkBny2

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/doj-voting-rights-attorney-resigns-over-black-panthers-stonewalling-94202249.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: G M on May 19, 2010, 05:22:43 PM

Good to see progress here.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud (ACORN et al), corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 19, 2010, 06:07:43 PM

Excellent follow up on this BBG.  Thank you.

Title: morris making sense of elections
Post by: ccp on May 20, 2010, 01:33:29 PM

 By Dick Morris 05.19.2010 The message of the May 18th primaries is that it is open season on incumbents. In Pennsylvania, Senator Arlen Specter (D-Pa) lost decisively to Congressman Joe Sestak (D-Pa)in his primary contest while Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark) limped into the runoff in the Democratic primary by 44-42 over Lt. Gov. Bill Halter. There can be little doubt that Lincoln will lose the runoff having scored so far under 50% of the vote. The fact is that 56% of the Democrats in Arkansas decided to vote against Lincoln.

Both Specter and Lincoln are now reaping the harvest of their votes for health care, a fate soon to be shared by Senators Harry Reid (D-NV), Barbara Boxer (D-Cal.), Michael Bennet (D Col.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY). And the liability of incumbency was also vividly on display a week ago when long time Democratic incumbent Congressman Alan Mollohan (D-W Va.) was upended in his primary contest.


Lest the Democrats take comfort in their new standard bearers in Pennsylvania and Arkansas, it is obvious that Sestak and Halter will be easier to defeat than their far better known incumbent rivals would have been. The new Senator from Pennsylvania will be Republican nominee Pat Toomey and from Arkansas it will be Congressman John Boozman (R-Ark.).

With the defeat of Specter, the likely demise of Lincoln, and the recent loss of Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah), the new Senate class of 2011 will have at least 14 new members…with more to come.

Democrats are taking satisfaction from their victory in Pennsylvania 12 where they held onto the seat of deceased Congressman John Murtha. But the obvious reason for their success is that Democratic turnout was boosted by a ferocious statewide Senate primary which drew out 1,050,000 voters while the Republican contest — never seriously contested 00 brought a paltry 800,000 to the polls. With no statewide reason to vote, local PA-12 Republicans stayed home while their Democratic neighbors flocked to the polls to vote against Specter (a joy not to be missed).

The Democratic victory in PA-12 also underscores a more fundamental point which is that incumbency is a huge liability in 2010. It is simply better to come from nowhere to run this year than to seek to keep a seat in this totally discredited Congress.

Rand Paul´s success in Kentucky in toppling establishment Senate candidate Trey Grayson in the Republican primary — along with the Bennett defeat in Utah — shows that this anti-politician sentiment cuts across party lines.

The harsh verdict on incumbents stems not so much from party preferences as from revulsion at the legislative process itself. The by-product of violating Bismark´s maxim that the public should never see sausage being made or a law being passed is that those who do the latter in full public view are doomed to end their legislative careers in defeat. The unseemly bargaining, machinations, and overt buying and selling of votes that characterized the health care debate of 2009-2010 has left so sour a taste in voter mouths that they understandably dismiss those incumbents from office whenever they can.

The fact that President Obama let the Congress write the two thousand page bill in public and that Reid and Pelosi negotiated for votes in front of the media, has amplified voter anger at Congress. Watching the deals being hatched and votes switching proved too much for the electorate to stomach. Now it is expressing its discontent with the legislative shenanigans it has had to watch.

This year is not just an anti-Democrat year. It is an anti-incumbent year.

Title: SEIU Thugs Bussed In
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on May 24, 2010, 07:36:09 AM

Perhaps it's time to add "SEIU" to this forums' header.

Not mentioned herein is that DC police escorted this mob to the house in question, while the Montgomery County police that held jurisdiction refused to respond to the reports of the 14 year old boy cowering inside because the "didn't want to escalate things." Profiles in cowardice all the way around.



What's really behind SEIU's Bank of America protests?



By Nina EastonMay 19, 2010: 6:15 AM ET


(FORTUNE) -- Every journalist loves a peaceful protest-whether it makes news, shakes up a political season, or holds out the possibility of altering history. Then there are the ones that show up on your curb--literally.

Last Sunday, on a peaceful, sun-crisp afternoon, our toddler finally napping upstairs, my front yard exploded with 500 screaming, placard-waving strangers on a mission to intimidate my neighbor, Greg Baer. Baer is deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500), a senior executive based in Washington, D.C. And that -- in the minds of the organizers at the politically influential Service Employees International Union and a Chicago outfit called National Political Action -- makes his family fair game.

Waving signs denouncing bank "greed," hordes of invaders poured out of 14 school buses, up Baer's steps, and onto his front porch. As bullhorns rattled with stories of debtor calls and foreclosed homes, Baer's teenage son Jack -- alone in the house -- locked himself in the bathroom. "When are they going to leave?" Jack pleaded when I called to check on him.

Baer, on his way home from a Little League game, parked his car around the corner, called the police, and made a quick calculation to leave his younger son behind while he tried to rescue his increasingly distressed teen. He made his way through a din of barked demands and insults from the activists who proudly "outed" him, and slipped through his front door.

"Excuse me," Baer told his accusers, "I need to get into the house. I have a child who is alone in there and frightened."

When is a protest not a protest?
Now this event would accurately be called a "protest" if it were taking place at, say, a bank or the U.S. Capitol. But when hundreds of loud and angry strangers are descending on your family, your children, and your home, a more apt description of this assemblage would be "mob." Intimidation was the whole point of this exercise, and it worked-even on the police. A trio of officers who belatedly answered our calls confessed a fear that arrests might "incite" these trespassers.

What's interesting is that SEIU, the nation's second largest union, craves respectability. Just-retired president Andy Stern is an Obama friend and regular White House visitor. He sits on the President's Fiscal Responsibility Commission. He hobnobs with those greedy Wall Street CEOs -- executives much higher-ranking than my neighbor Baer -- at Davos. His union spent $70 million getting Democrats elected in 2008.

In the business community, though, SEIU has a reputation for strong-arm tactics against management, prompting some companies to file suit.

Now those strong-arm tactics, stirred by supposedly free-floating (as opposed to organized) populist rage, have come to the neighborhood curb. Last year it was AIG executives -- with protestors met by security guard outside. Now it's any executive -- and they're on the front stoop. After Baer's house, the 14 buses left to descend on the nearby residence of Peter Scher, a government relations executive at JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500).

Targeting homes and families seems to put SEIU in the ranks of (now jailed) radical animal-rights activists and the Kansas anti-gay fundamentalists harassing the grieving parents of a dead 20-year-old soldier at his funeral (the Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on the latter). But that's not a conversation that SEIU officials want to have.

When I asked Stephen Lerner, SEIU's point-person on Wall Street reform, about these tactics, he accused me of getting "emotional." Lerner was more comfortable sticking to his talking points: "Millions of people are losing their homes, and they have gone to the banks, which are turning a deaf ear."

Okay, fine, then why not continue SEIU protests at bank offices and shareholder meetings-as the union has been doing for more than a year? Lerner insists, "People in powerful corporations seem to think they can insulate themselves from the damage they are doing."

Other reasons why SEIU might protest
Bank of America officials dispute Lerner's assertion about the "damage they are doing," citing the success of workout programs to help distressed homeowners, praise received from community groups, the bank's support of financial reform legislation, and the little-noticed fact that Bank of America exited the subprime lending business in 2001.

SEIU has said it wants to organize bank tellers and call centers -- and its critics point out that a great way to worsen employee morale, thereby making workers more susceptible to union calls, is to batter a bank's image through protest. (SEIU officials say their anti-Wall Street campaign has nothing to do with their organizing efforts.) Complicating this picture is the fact that BofA is the union's lender of choice -- and SEIU, suffering financially, owes the bank nearly $4 million in interest and fees. Bank of America declined comment on the loans.


But SEIU's intentions, and BofA's lender record, are ripe subjects to debate in Congress, on air, at shareholder hearings. Not in Greg Baer's front yard.

Why the media wasn't invited
Sunday's onslaught wasn't designed for mainstream media consumption. There were no reporters from organizations like the Washington Post, no local camera crews who might have aired criticism of this private-home invasion. With the media covering the conservative Tea Party protesters, the behavior of individual activists has drawn withering scrutiny.

Instead, a friendly Huffington Post blogger showed up, narrowcasting coverage to the union's leftist base. The rest of the message these protesters brought was personal-aimed at frightening Baer and his family, not influencing a broader public.

Of course, HuffPost readers responding to the coverage assumed that Baer was an evil former Bush official. He's not. A lifelong Democrat, Baer worked for the Clinton Treasury Department, and his wife, Shirley Sagawa, author of the book The American Way to Change and a former adviser to Hillary Clinton, is a prominent national service advocate.

In the 1990s, the Baers' former bosses, Bill and Hillary Clinton, denounced the "politics of personal destruction." Today politicians and their voters of all stripes grieve the ugly bitterness that permeates our policy debates. Now, with populist rage providing a useful cover, it appears we've crossed into a new era: The politics of personal intimidation.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/19/news/companies/SEIU_Bank_of_America_protest.fortune/index.htm

Title: Saint Consulting Group
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on June 07, 2010, 12:19:32 PM

I've long thought about founding a company I'd call "Counterpro" that could be hired out to counter protest the events the far left often stages. Sounds like this company has taken that concept several steps further, utilizing union henchmen along the way.

Rival Chains Secretly Fund Opposition to Wal-Mart
By ANN ZIMMERMAN

MUNDELEIN, Ill.—Robert Brownson long believed that his proposed development here, with its 200,000-square-foot Wal-Mart Supercenter, was being held hostage by nearby homeowners.

He had seen them protesting at city hall, and they had filed a lawsuit to stop the project.

What he didn't know was that the locals were getting a lot of help. A grocery chain with nine stores in the area had hired Saint Consulting Group to secretly run the antidevelopment campaign. Saint is a specialist at fighting proposed Wal-Marts, and it uses tactics it describes as "black arts."

As Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has grown into the largest grocery seller in the U.S., similar battles have played out in hundreds of towns like Mundelein. Local activists and union groups have been the public face of much of the resistance. But in scores of cases, large supermarket chains including Supervalu Inc., Safeway Inc. and Ahold NV have retained Saint Consulting to block Wal-Mart, according to hundreds of pages of Saint documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal and interviews with former employees.

Saint has jokingly called its staff the "Wal-Mart killers." P. Michael Saint, the company's founder, declines to discuss specific clients or campaigns. When read a partial list of the company's supermarket clients, he responds that "if those names are true, I would say I was proud that some of the largest, most sophisticated companies were so pleased with our success and discretion that they hired us over the years."

Supermarkets that have funded campaigns to stop Wal-Mart are concerned about having to match the retailing giant's low prices lest they lose market share. Although they have managed to stop some projects, they haven't put much of a dent in Wal-Mart's growth in the U.S., where it has more than 2,700 supercenters—large stores that sell groceries and general merchandise. Last year, 51% of Wal-Mart's $258 billion in U.S. revenue came from grocery sales.


In many cases, the pitched battles have more than doubled the amount of time it takes Wal-Mart to open a store, says a person close to the company. And the fights generate negative publicity for the retailer.

A Wal-Mart spokesman declined to comment on activities Saint has undertaken on behalf of its competitors.

In Mundelein, a town of 35,000 about 20 miles northwest of Chicago, it was Supervalu, a national grocer based in Eden Prairie, Minn., that hired Saint to work behind the scenes, according to Saint documents. Supervalu's objective was to block Wal-Mart from competing with its nine Jewel-Osco supermarkets located within three to ten miles of the proposed shopping center, the documents indicate.

City officials say the effort stalled the development for three years and cost Mundelein millions in lost property and sales taxes.

Mr. Brownson, who has developed shopping centers in 15 states over 25 years, says he learned about Saint's involvement only recently when someone phoned him and spilled the news. "A huge national company conducts a dirty tricks campaign for its own goals, and a city and a developer become collateral damage," he complains.

Supervalu didn't return calls for comment. Mr. Saint declines to discuss the situation in Mundelein. In general, he says, "developers always say the world is coming to an end because the project that would have made them millions wasn't approved."

Mr. Saint, a former newspaper reporter and political press secretary, founded his firm 26 years ago. It specializes in using political-campaign tactics—petition drives, phone banks, websites—to build support for or against controversial projects, from oil refineries and shopping centers to quarries and landfills. Over the years, it has conducted about 1,500 campaigns in 44 states. Mr. Saint says about 500 have involved trying to block a development, and most of those have been clandestine.

For the typical anti-Wal-Mart assignment, a Saint manager will drop into town using an assumed name to create or take control of local opposition, according to former Saint employees. They flood local politicians with calls, using multiple phones to make it appear that the calls are coming from different people, the former employees say.

They hire lawyers and traffic experts to help derail the project or stall it as long as possible, in hopes that the developer will pull the plug or Wal-Mart will find another location.

"Usually, clients in defense campaigns do not want their identities disclosed because it opens them up to adverse publicity and the potential for lawsuits," Mr. Saint wrote in a book published by his firm.

Mr. Saint says he "encouraged" his employees not to use their real names in campaigns in order to protect the client's identity and "to protect our employees, who have been followed, threatened and harassed by the opposition."

Safeway, a national chain based in Pleasanton, Calif., retained Saint to thwart Wal-Mart Supercenters in more than 30 towns in California, Oregon, Washington and Hawaii in recent years, according to a Saint project list and interviews with former employees. Former Saint employees say much of the work consisted of training Safeway's unionized workers to fight land-use battles, including how to speak at public hearings.

Former Saint workers say the union sometimes pays a portion of Saint's fees. "The work we've funded Saint to do to preserve our market share and our jobs is within our First Amendment rights," says Jill Cashen, spokeswoman for the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. Safeway declined to comment.

In Pennsylvania, Saint's work roster in August 2007 listed 53 projects, almost all directed at stopping Wal-Mart on behalf of client Giant Food Stores, owned by Amsterdam-based supermarket company Ahold. Saint documents from 2007 say it had lost one battle in Pennsylvania, defeated 13 projects and delayed the remaining ones from four months to four years.

In 2005, Giant Foods hired Saint to stop a proposed Wal-Mart in North Cornwall, Pa., a town of 6,000, a Saint report indicates. Saint planned to charge Giant $7,500 to $10,000 a month for legal services, mailings, phone banks and 60 hours a month of Saint staff time, according to a preliminary budget.

Locally, there was strong opposition from a citizens group that wanted to preserve the proposed site as farmland and was concerned about traffic. Nevertheless, Wal-Mart received conditional approval.

Before construction began, with support from Saint, the opponents filed suit, claiming that when the land was rezoned for commercial use three years earlier, neighbors had not been properly notified.

One member of the citizens group, Kip Kelly, says a woman he assumed was from a labor group or anti-Wal-Mart coalition had offered to fund the effort. Former Saint employees say the woman was a Saint operative and that Giant was paying the group's legal bills through Saint. Tracy Cadzow, the lawyer who represented the group, says she had no idea that the grocer was behind the effort. "This is new information to me," she says.

As the suit dragged on, Giant abruptly changed its game plan, according to two former Saint employees. Giant had decided it wanted to erect a supermarket directly across from the Wal-Mart location, according to former Saint workers and Saint documents. Giant needed Saint to switch sides in the political battle over commercial zoning, the former employees say.

Saint workers were directed to withdraw support for the anti-Wal-Mart group, called Citizens for Responsible Growth, according to the former Saint workers. "We had to kill a community group we started, and I was told to stop paying the attorney," says a former Saint employee.

Town officials reapproved commercial zoning for the land, this time giving proper notification to homeowners, which rendered the lawsuit moot.

Giant and its parent company, Ahold, did not return calls seeking comment.

Asked about the situation, Mr. Saint said his company is an advocate for its clients but doesn't determine overall strategy. "If it's legal to perform a service, we'll do it," he said.

Mr. Saint says there is nothing illegal about a company trying to derail a competitor's project. Companies have legal protection under the First Amendment for using a government or legal process to thwart competition, even if they do so secretly, he says.

The protection is known as the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, which grew out of several U.S. Supreme Court cases. Some legal experts say that, under the doctrine, a company has to reasonably expect it can win a lawsuit or a zoning battle—it cannot just use the process to interfere with a competitor's business.

"If a company routinely files suits and does it to delay a competitor, there is a pattern exception to the Supreme Court decisions," says Timothy Muris, former chairman of the Federal Trade Commission and a law professor at George Mason University. "If a competitor in this instance is spending millions [of dollars] to repeatedly sue, it is hard to believe they are doing so because they care about zoning."

Former Saint employees say that the goal of many legal or political challenges was merely to delay projects.

"That may be the result," responds Mr. Saint. "But our goal is always to kill Wal-Mart."

In Mundelein, where Supervalu wanted to protect its Jewel-Osco stores from Wal-Mart, Saint first focused on a vote on the 100-acre development by the city's Plan Commission, scheduled for May 2007, Saint documents indicate. Saint's Chicago-based regional director, Jay Vincent, who drives a Honda CRV with the license plates BLKOPS 1, assigned the job to a project manager, Saint documents indicate. That manager, who is a baseball fan, borrowed an alias for each of his assignments from a major leaguer. For the Mundelein job, he took the name of a former catcher for the Minnesota Twins, Greg Olson.

"For this project, delay is a substantial weapon," the project manager wrote in a report. He sent a flyer to neighbors of the proposed development that outlined purported evils of a neighborhood Wal-Mart, including increased police calls and more traffic. The flyer listed his alias and an email address, according to several residents.

Tom Budwick, a retired crane operator in Mundelein, responded. The project manager told him that a Wal-Mart built behind his own parents' home had prevented them from selling it and having a comfortable retirement, Mr. Budwick recalls.

Several former colleagues of the baseball-loving project manager say he frequently told that story, which is false, in connection with Wal-Mart projects.

Mr. Budwick says the project manager told him that the fight in Mundelein would be lengthy and expensive, but it would cost the residents nothing because he was involved in politics and had sympathetic donors willing to fund their campaign.

"I didn't know where the money was coming from, and I didn't want to know," says John Abraham, a landscape-company owner whose large home abuts the development site.

The project manager arranged for a lawyer, William Graft, who had experience fighting land-use battles, to represent neighbors who opposed the development, according to Saint documents. Although the public hearing on the development was packed with opponents, according to city trustee Ed Sullivan, the city's board of trustees approved the project in July 2007.

Mr. Graft filed suit on behalf of four local residents with properties adjacent to the proposed development, appealing the board's decision and claiming their rights had been violated. He sent monthly bills ranging from $20,000 to $55,000 to the project manager, who forwarded them to Saint, according to copies of the bills viewed by the Journal. Mr. Graft confirms that Saint paid those bills.

The suit remained in court for two and a half years—until March 26 of this year, when a judge ruled in favor of the city, saying its decision to approve the development was not "capricious, irrational or arbitrary."

The development is still in limbo. The plaintiffs have asked the judge to reconsider his decision. The developer, Mr. Brownson, says he and his partners have spent more than $3 million on legal fees, expert testimony and other expenses. He lost almost all the tenants he had lined up three years ago, including Kohl's and Petsmart, according to documents he provided the city. All except Wal-Mart.

City Administrator John Labaido says the village and school district have lost an estimated $6 million a year in sales and property-tax revenue.

"It is disheartening to hear that a corporate competitor was behind this whole thing," he says.

—Dionne Searcey contributed to this article.
Write to Ann Zimmerman at ann.zimmerman@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704875604575280414218878150.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 07, 2010, 03:32:25 PM

BBG:"I've long thought about founding a company...to counter protest the events the far left often stages.

This could go under grateful but I'll go with 'electoral process' - inspired by your protest company, Crafty's story of this mother's activism and JDN's post of the less than perfect conservatism of the Reagan administration.

My mom also took an activism in politics.  A few memories come to mind.  She and a stationwagon full of activists drove MSP to DC to protest the Reagan's selection of Sanda Day O'Connor for the Supreme Court.  They thought Reagan wanted to appoint a woman so badly that he forgot to appoint a conservative. (They were right.)  It wasn't successful but maybe helped set the stage for others to derail the Harriet Meirs mistake two decades later.  They joined forces previously with Phyllis Schlaffley to help stop the equal rights amendment.  Her view was that women already had special rights and that equal rights - being treated the same as a man - was a step down.  While people were trying to open doors for more women into more fields my mom had earned her degree in aeronautical engineering from the institute of technology in the 1940s.  Asked why there were no other women in her class picture she said no others applied.

My daughter completed her Catholic confirmation this spring with a ceremony at the great Cathedral in St. Paul.  As we left I commented that I had never been to the cathedral before.  I asked what family members had been there before and my mom said 'only to picket'.  Apparently the Catholic Church was a big proponent of unilateral disarmament (sound familiar).  She and her cronies printed up 'peace through strength' signs and tried to get their smiling faces with a different viewpoint on the news. 

These were volunteers, BBG, but hired protesters were always one of ACORN's trademarks.  Not taxpayer money, because they have the "firewall" lol.They had plenty of throw around money.  In liberal parts of Minneapolis they always had activists with signs on all the major street corners for the elections.  Turns out they were paid people from elsewhere but projected an enthused electorate.

Title: Am I Not my Landlords Keeper?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on June 08, 2010, 08:46:39 AM

Well here's a string of coincidences that would likely generate a lot more ink were a Republican involved.

The ties that bind. Remember Rahm Emanuel's rent-free D.C. apartment? The owner: A BP adviser
June 7, 2010 |  3:34 pm

In case you were tempted to buy the faux Washington outrage at BP and its gulf oil spill in recent days, here's a story that reveals a little-known corporate political connection and the quiet way the inner political circles intersect, protect and care for one another in the nation's capital. And Chicago.

We already knew that BP and its folks were significant contributors to the record $750-million war chest of Barack Obama's 2007-08 campaign.

Now, we learn the details of a connection of Rahm Emanuel, the Chicago mayoral wannabe, current Obama chief of staff, ex-representative, ex-Clinton money man and ex-Windy City political machine go-fer.

Shortly after Obama's happy inaugural,  eyebrows rose slightly upon word that, as a House member, Emanuel had lived the last five years rent-free in a D.C. apartment of Democratic colleague Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and her husband, Stanley Greenberg.

For an ordinary American, that would likely raise some obvious tax liability questions. But like Emanuel, the guy overseeing the Internal Revenue Service now is another Obama insider, Tim Geithner, who had his own outstanding tax problems but skated through confirmation anyway by the Democratic-controlled Congress.

Remember this was all before the letters BP stood for Huge Mess. Even before the Obama administration gave BP a safety award.

Now follow these standard Washington links if you can:

Greenberg's consulting firm was a prime architect of BP's recent rebranding drive as a green petroleum company, down to green signs and the slogan "Beyond Petroleum."

Greenberg's company is also closely tied to a sister Democratic outfit -- GCS, named for the last initials of Greenberg, James Carville, another Clinton advisor, and Bob Shrum, John Kerry's 2004 campaign manager.

According to published reports, GCS received hundreds of thousands of dollars in political polling contracts in recent years from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Probably just a crazy coincidence. But you'll never guess who was the chairman of that Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee dispensing those huge polling contracts to his kindly rent-free landlord.

-- Andrew Malcolm

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/06/rahm-emanuel-bp-gul-oil-spill.html

Title: Bar Exam
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on July 13, 2010, 07:51:40 PM

Senator From Stir

Posted 07:04 PM ET
Elections: A new study says Minnesota's freshman senator squeaked out a recount victory with illegal votes cast by convicted felons. Is this why Democrats are trying so hard to have all felons vote?

An 18-month study conducted by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group, has found that at least 341 felons in largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul voted illegally in the 2008 Minnesota Senate race. This was the campaign that culminated with a six-month recount that gave the victory to former "Saturday Night Live" comedian Al Franken over incumbent Republican Norm Coleman.

The final recount vote in the race showed Franken beating Coleman by a scant 312 votes, with the illegal votes cast by felons possibly being Franken's margin of victory. Critics are already saying this is a partisan attempt to rewrite history.

Dan McGrath, Minnesota Majority's executive director, says the evidence is irrefutable.

"We took the voting lists and matched them with conviction lists and then went back to the records and found the roster lists," McGrath said, "where voters sign in before walking to the voting booth, and matched them by hand."

The Minnesota recount was conducted under the auspices of Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, who has extensive ties to the Acorn organization that's been under repeated investigation for vote fraud and was endorsed by the community activist group in 2006.

In the legendary Florida 2000 vote, around 5,000 convicts voted illegally, about 80% of whom were registered Democrats. If the more than 600,000 felons in Florida had been able to vote legally, it's likely Al Gore would have been elected president.

In the 2004 gubernatorial race in Washington, the Seattle Times identified 129 felons in King and Pierce counties alone who were recorded as having voted in the Nov. 2 election. In that election, Democrat Christine Gregoire was found, after three recounts, to have beaten Republican Dino Rossi by a margin of 129 votes.

Democrats want and have pushed for convicted felons to vote. As then-Sen. Hillary Clinton put it a few years back in joining Sen. John Kerry and the usual suspects in introducing the Count Every Vote Act: "Felons who have repaid their debt to society" need not and should not be further punished.

A bill, H.R. 3335, introduced by Rep. John Conyers, Michigan Democrat, would allow convicted felons not now in jail, including those in "residential community treatment centers" as well as those on probation or parole, to vote. The bill would let Conyers' wife, a former Detroit City Council member who pleaded guilty to felony charges of bribery, vote after she completes her sentence.

The bill is co-sponsored by Rep. Alcee Hastings, a disgraced former federal judge who was removed for corruption and perjury. Other co-sponsors include the ethically challenged Charlie Rangel, who's been accused of tax fraud, and Barney Frank, whose partner was alleged to have run a prostitution ring out of his apartment.

If we are serious about the adage that crime does not pay, it shouldn't pay at the ballot box either. The thought that a sitting U.S. senator might owe his seat to the fraudulent voting of convicted felons should give everyone pause.

Title: Electoral process, voter fraud: Al Franken's election count
Post by: DougMacG on July 14, 2010, 09:35:16 AM

BBG,  Thanks for a great followup on that story.  People may forget that Norm Coleman won that contest prior to the false and uneven recount and some may not realize that the tampered result changed the governing power in Washington, not just changed the occupant of that seat.

Bringing forward a link from a previous page, I think this documentary by the Twin Cities ABC affiliate was the definitive record of that re-count, especially the part where the ACORN and Move-on-dot-org endorsed secretary of state said he couldn't comment on their findings because he didn't bring his reading glasses to the interview!  This story was buried even by that station after it aired.

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S1222327.shtml?cat=5

Back to BBG's post, how is it that we can find known fraud greater than the margin of so-called victory and, if not overturn the result, at least PROSECUTE THE CRIMES.  Knowingly tampering with our electoral process at the ballot box seems to me to be a form of treason.

Title: How to Steal Elections
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on July 14, 2010, 10:11:29 AM

A little more detail for you, Doug:

Democrat Voter Fraud is Far More Widespread Than You Think

 By Fred Dardick  Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Last week I wrote an article titled How Obama Used an Army of Thugs to Steal the 2008 Democratic Primary that introduced the conservative community to the movie “We Will Not Be Silenced”, made by Democrat activist Gigi Gaston two years ago. Her video documented widespread voter fraud committed by Obama supporters during the 2008 Democratic primary election to secure the nomination for Obama over the popular vote winner Hillary Clinton.

The story went viral and 24 hours later Fox News asked Gaston to appear on the Sunday morning program Fox and Friends. For the first time many Americans saw for themselves first hand accounts from Democrats who personally witnessed “the disenfranchising of American citizens by the Democratic Party and the Obama Campaign.”


 
As explained on the We Will Not Be Silenced website, “‘Change’ from Chicago encouraged and created an army to steal caucus packets, falsify documents, change results, allow unregistered people to vote, scare and intimidate Hillary supporters, stalk them, threaten them, lock them out of their polling places, silence their voices and stop their right to vote.”

Because of the program and other recent events concerning voter intimidation, including the Black Panther incident in Philadelphia and testimony from J. Christian Adams on the Department of Justice’s unwillingness to pursue voter related crimes committed by African Americans, people around the country are finally waking up to the fact that Democrat voter fraud is a far, far bigger problem than anyone had ever realized.

Some conservatives have mistakenly interpreted these events as only affecting Democratic primaries and aren’t concerned about the possibility of vote theft in a general election.
But they would be wrong.

While the voter fraud documented in Gaston’s film primarily involves Democratic caucuses, the bigger story here isn’t a single primary, but the bag of tricks that Democrats use to influence elections of all kinds.

Earlier in the week Fox News ran a story showing how illegal votes by felons in Minnesota were enough for Democrat Al Franken to beat Republican candidate Norm Coleman and claim the Senate seat.

Millions had voted in the Minnesota election, but at the end of the day all it took was 341 criminals to disenfranchise an entire state.

How to Steal an Election
What we are seeing is the transplantation of Chicago politics to communities throughout the nation that are completely unprepared for the level of fraud and intimidation that can be generated by thousands of unethical Democrats, including private citizens, local, state, and federal officials, and politicians, convinced that breaking the law is okay as long as the “right” candidate wins.

On July 6, American Thinker published an article by Lee Cary about an interview with a Chicago political machine insider. It contained the following warning:

“In Chicago, the Precinct Captains watch to see who votes and who doesn’t. Then, at the end of the day, others will cast votes for those who haven’t shown up to vote, all under the direction of the Precinct Captain. If the actual voter shows up later, they’re given someone else’s card. The Republican poll watchers don’t stop this. Hell, most of them are actually Democrats.”

The Democrat Voter Fraud Playbook is as follows:

ACORN registers the names, legitimate or not.
Black Panther, SEIU and other “community organizer” groups intimidate people, especially minorities, from voting Republican.
Voter lists remain unscrubbed of felons, dead people, and illegal immigrants.
On Election Day, precinct workers submit any unused ballots for Democrat candidates.
Democrat officials and politicians pretend like nothing happened.
It’s as easy as that to steal an election.

An Army of Republican Poll Watchers Will Be Needed this November
The voter fraud stories so far are just the tip of a very large iceberg. No one really knows the full extent of the problem and the Democratic Party is counting on Americans to shrug it off as just another conservative conspiracy theory.

But take it from a lifelong Chicagoan, it’s not just Bosnia that needs election observers to keep voter fraud in check.

The dropping of voter intimidation charges by Department of Justice political appointees against billy club wielding Black Panthers sends the message to the Democrat community that mass voter fraud can continue without fear of legal reprisal.

Justice officials know full well that if they were to start digging around this Pandora’s Box of fraud, many influential Democratic organizations (especially ACORN) and politicians will be implicated. So they go straight to Step #5 from above and pretend like there’s nothing to see.

While the problem may be substantial, there is one way Republicans can fight back: Keep a close eye on voting locations. Election fraud only works if citizens remain ignorant to the problem and unwilling to become involved in the voting process.

Considering the importance of the upcoming November elections, an army of Republican poll watchers, especially in minority neighborhoods which are often treated like never ending vote generating machines by unscrupulous Democrat politicians, will be needed to prevent liberals from once again stuffing ballot boxes and gaming the system.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25349

Title: All this fight needs is the mud , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 17, 2010, 08:25:59 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsErSzAoHA8

Title: WhisleBlower Files FEC Complaint: ACORN-Obama Campaign Illegal Coordination
Post by: DougMacG on July 28, 2010, 08:46:59 AM

Candidate Obama lied in a Presidential debate about his (illegal) relationship with ACORN.

Anita Monchief released ACORN's version of the Obama Donor list that is more complete than anything the FEC or public had: http://emergingcorruption.com/   Obama has denied this is the list.  She has put it out now for the public to judge.

The purpose of Obama giving the secret list to ACORN was for them to work the list again and get around the laws regarding maxed-out presidential donors for additional contributions. 

She went to the New York Times MONTHS before the election with the list.  They wouldn't report anything they found to be "game changing" so close to the election.  Now she is filling a formal FEC complaint:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkupQ-otwyg[/youtube]

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/07/24/revealed-the-obama-donor-list/

"As a confidential source for the New York Times, I turned this document over to reporter Stephanie Strom months before the 2008 presidential elections and though the list includes information more complete than what the Obama campaign turned over to the Federal Election Commission, the NYT decided to bury the story."

"Strom and I used pseudonymous e-mail addresses while communicating and in 2008, Strom wrote:"

    “I’m calling a halt to my efforts. I just had two unpleasant calls with the Obama campaign, wherein the spokesman was screaming and yelling and cursing me, calling me a rightwing nut and a conspiracy theorist and everything else…”

After this weeks revelations about the efforts of the liberal media to cover-up or spike stories damaging to Obama, Strom’s next words are even more telling:

    “What’s happened is that the campaign has answered some of my questions on the record — but when I sought on-the-record answers to my questions about the meeting and about the list, the campaign insisted on speaking only on background. When I asked why, I got the barrage I described earlier. Clearly, I’ve hit a nerve with what you’ve told me. The campaign knows that having the allegations of meeting attributed to ‘former employees’ — and there are more than one of you talking — and having an anonymous denial of the meeting makes it harder for me to get it into the paper.”

In 2008 the liberal media provided the cover needed for Obama to get elected, but two years later, questions remain about his relationship with ACORN and it has been clear that Obama has lied repeatedly to the American people. Its time to get Obama and ACORN on the record about what really happened with the donor lists in 2007 and 2008.

The release of the Obama donor list to the public will be followed by a formal complaint to the FEC, which both Obama and ACORN will have to respond to – on-the-record.

In 2009, the Democrat controlled Judiciary Committee heard testimony from attorney Heather Heidelbaugh, who read my 2008 testimony against ACORN into Congressional record. Evidence, and sworn testimony were among the facts ignored by the members of the committee:

    “Based on the testimony, Project Vote, ACORN and other ACORN affiliated entities illegally coordinated activities with the Obama presidential campaign, converting the expenditures by Project Vote, ACORN and ACORN affiliated entities to illegal, excessive corporate contributions to the Obama presidential campaign, in violation of federal law.”

Video from the final 2008 debate, ACORN answer at the 2 minute mark, but watch it all for context and see: Lie, lie, lie.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mTx-9FmgRM[/youtube]

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on July 28, 2010, 09:29:56 AM

This lady has some courage.

Being a whistleblower against a President, especially this one, is sure to bring heat on her life.

The left will make her pay for this, personally, financially, emotionally, and in every possible to make her suffer.

Many criticize whistleblowers for doing it for money.  I don't know the circumstances of why this person is doing it.

But as long as they are telling the truth they deserve to make money.  Otherwise no one will come forward and have their life ruined for ideology alone. (or very rare).

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on July 28, 2010, 12:11:40 PM

CCP, I don't know anything about her either but I also suspect she will be known (and attacked) soon.  I know that on Obama's statements he is more false than true on every point.  This will spill over to media issues quickly because so far nine out of nine hits searching 'Google News' with her name point to blog or opinion sites, not network, wire or newspaper coverage. 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 08, 2010, 08:08:54 AM

I am on my mom's apple computer and don't know how to do cut and paste on it, but in today's WSJ's Political Diary it says it looks like absentee ballots were used in the city of Bell CA's very lightly voted election to push through the changes necessary for the mayor to make $800k and the police chief to make nearly $500k.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: prentice crawford on August 10, 2010, 01:32:26 AM

Woof,
 Since there's nothing here that mentions Bush or Cheney, I'm guessing the Press and News Media can't find anything news worthy to investigate or to uncover like connections to corruption at the highest levels of government.  :-P But I place it here in the raw just in case.

   www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5184 (http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5184)

      www.muckety.com/George-Soros/4166.muckety (http://www.muckety.com/George-Soros/4166.muckety)  


  www.libertychick.com/2009/05/08/rathke-acorn-seiu-the-tides-foundation-oh-my/

   www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6072661-barack-obama-george-soros
                              

                              P.C.  
          



  

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on August 17, 2010, 07:31:47 AM

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/08/16/facts-obama-doesnt-want-you-to-connect/

Very good work here.

Title: Citizen Fraud Investigators
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on September 26, 2010, 07:04:47 AM

Citizen groups unmasking Dem voter fraud

Ed Lasky
We do the job because the government and media lackeys will not. Massive alleged voter fraud is uncovered by a group of concerned citizens down in Texas. The culprit? The Democrats and Barack Obama's favorite "union" - the thugs at the Service Employees International Union.

A group of people took it upon themselves to work at polling places in 2008 and observed - and were shocked - by what they perceived to be voter fraud. Their next step was to create a citizen-based grassroots group to collect publicly available voting data and analyze what they found (with the help of donated computers and volunteer helpers). They admit they did not know what they were doing at first but where there is a will there is a way.
Reports Fox News (the unlackey network):

"The first thing we started to do was look at houses with more than six voters in them" Engelbrecht said, because those houses were the most likely to have fraudulent registrations attached to them. "Most voting districts had 1,800 if they were Republican and 2,400 of these houses if they were Democratic . . .

"But we came across one with 24,000, and that was where we started looking."

"Vacant lots had several voters registered on them. An eight-bed halfway house had more than 40 voters registered at its address," Engelbrecht said. "We then decided to look at who was registering the voters."

Their work paid off. Two weeks ago the Harris County voter registrar took their work and the findings of his own investigation and handed them over to both the Texas secretary of state's office and the Harris County district attorney.

Most of the findings focused on a group called Houston Votes, a voter registration group headed by Steve Caddle, who also works for the Service Employees International Union. Among the findings were that only 1,793 of the 25,000 registrations the group submitted appeared to be valid. The other registrations included one of a woman who registered six times in the same day; registrations of non-citizens; so many applications from one Houston Voters collector in one day that it was deemed to be beyond human capability; and 1,597 registrations that named the same person multiple times, often with different signatures.

 

Minnesota also has a citizens group that had enough of being abused and took matters in their own hands to reveal that the Minnesota Senate race that gave us the hapless fool Al Franken was also rent with voter fraud that powered his victory over Norm Coleman. Secretary of States are supposed to monitor elections to ensure honesty in voting.

But with George Soros and the shadowy Democracy Alliance working to elect friendly to fraud Secretary of States across the nation, how likely are we to have truly honest elections? Thankfully, in the freshest expression of democracy in many years, we have citizens stepping up to the plate and hitting some homers.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/09/citizen_groups_unmasking_dem_v.html at September 26, 2010 - 09:02:03 AM CDT

Title: From where's the money?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 11, 2010, 03:52:20 PM

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/2010/10/11/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on October 11, 2010, 05:59:21 PM

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/10/11/dems-and-foreign-funny-money/

The Obama White House has been an echo chamber for the Soros-funded Center for American Progress from Day One — from bashing Fox News, attacking talk radio, and pimping “media justice” and the Orwellian Fairness Doctrine, to crusading for the government health care takeover using Astroturfed doctors and taxpayer-funded operatives installed in the health care bureaucracy.

Team Obama has gotten away with its left-wing myna bird routine. Until now.

Mimicking the Center for American Progress attacks on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Soros suck-up-in-chief himself accused Republicans last week of benefiting from “money from foreign corporations” — which liberals claim the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is funneling into political ads. Democrat clown prince Al Franken is leading a Senate inquisition against the Chamber. Endangered Democrat candidates across the country are dutifully parroting the line. From here in my home state of Colorado:

    Democrats are swinging hard at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for potentially spending foreign money to support Republican campaigns across the country, including Ken Buck in Colorado’s U.S. Senate race.

    The chamber has spent more than $400,000 in Colorado on ads attacking Sen. Michael Bennet, according to campaign-finance records.

    Bennet spokesman Trevor Kincaid called on Buck’s campaign to reject the chamber’s help and disavow the ads allegedly made with “tainted foreign money.”

    “Why won’t Ken Buck stand up against the practices of these shady special interests orchestrating attacks on his behalf?” Kincaid said.

It’s triple-snort-worthy to see the party that cries “RAAACISM” whenever conservatives question their shady foreign funny money suddenly sounding the alarm over non-U.S. campaign cash. Guess we are all “nativists” now, eh, President Obama?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 11, 2010, 08:18:27 PM

BO was given a free pass on massive amounts of foreign donations entering his campaign, yet the claims here are so vacuous that even Pravda on the Hudson (POTH=NY Times) is saying there is no basis in fact here.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 12, 2010, 08:04:01 AM

Yeah, WaPo had an editorial today to the same effect.

Title: Mail Union's Ballot in the Mail
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 12, 2010, 10:13:22 AM

Add "incompetence" to the thread head:

Postal Union Election Delayed After Ballots Lost in the Mail
Published October 07, 2010 | FoxNews.com

Irony alert.

The American Postal Workers Union has extended its internal election after thousands of ballots appeared to have gotten lost . . . in the mail.

The union's election committee was supposed to be counting those ballots this week in downtown Washington, D.C., following a tradition mail-in election. But the union announced that only about 39,000 ballots were turned in -- and that "a large number of union members had not received their ballots."

As Federal News Radio first reported, the union has responded by extending the deadline to Oct. 14.

Workers now have until close of business Thursday to ask for a new ballot. It's unclear whether the mail mix-up will become an eleventh-hour campaign issue.

The union of postal clerks is separate from the National Association of Letter Carriers, which comprises postal workers who deliver the mail.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/07/postal-union-election-delayed-ballots-lost-mail/

Title: BO's foreign money can of worms
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2010, 12:20:55 PM

Return to the Article

 



October 19, 2010


Obama's foreign money can of worms


Thomas Lifson

The Democrats, including President Obama, have embarked on a disastrous
campaign impugning the US Chamber of Commerce as a source of nefarious
foreign money corrupting our campaigns. Not only has the accusation
failed to resonate, it has opened a door that Democrats would prefer
remain closed. And because Washington Post writer Marc A. Thiessen has
taken up the question, it will be impossible to contain the very valid
questions raised:

...one of the largest labor unions in America, the Service Employees
International Union (SEIU), ... is spending lavishly to elect Democrats.
The SEIU claims 100,000 members in Canada
<http://www.seiu.ca/2010/05/leader-in-us-healthcare-reform-applauds.php>
. According to SEIU's 2008 constitution
<http://www.seiu.org/images/pdfs/Con.BylawsFinal3.4.9.pdf> , dues
include $7.65 per month per member that must be sent to the SEIU
International in the United States. This means that the SEIU takes in
nearly $9.2 million per year from foreign nationals -- almost 10 times
the amount the Chamber receives from its affiliates abroad.

 

Is any foreign money being used to fund the SEIU's anti-Republican
campaign efforts? According to the Wall Street Journal, "The Service
Employees International Union, one of the nation's fastest-growing labor
unions, acknowledges that it can't be certain that foreign nationals
haven't contributed
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487033585045755445830241808
88.html>  to its $44 million political budget to support pro-labor
Democrats." The SEIU is not the only union that takes in money from
foreign members. According to the Canadian Department of Human Resources
and Skills Development
<http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/eng/labour/labour_relations/info_analysis/union_
membership/index2009.shtml> , the United Steel, Paper and Forestry,
Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers has
280,000 Canadian members; the United Food and Commercial Workers has
more than 245,000; the Teamsters has more than 108,000; the Laborers'
International Union of North America has more than 68,000; and the
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has more than 57,000.
How much do these foreign union members send to the United States? If
the constitutions of their unions are anything like SEIU's, it could be
tens of millions of dollars. Is any of that money being used to help
elect Democrats this November?

 

Unions have another source of foreign cash: dues from illegal
immigrants. In an April 2007 speech, uncovered by the conservative Web
site RedState, SEIU Executive Vice President Eliseo Medina boasts how
his union's rolls are loaded with illegal immigrants
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZlsScws6xUc> .
Medina declares proudly: "SEIU is the largest union of immigrant workers
in the country, and a number of them are undocumented."

 

Hat tip: Ed Lasky

 

 

 

  <http://www.washingtonpost.com>

NEWS <http://www.washingtonpost.com/?nav=pf>  | LOCAL
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/?nav=pf>  | POLITICS
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/?nav=pf>  | SPORTS
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/sports/?nav=pf>  |
OPINIONS <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/opinions/?nav=pf>
| BUSINESS
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/business/?nav=pf>  | ARTS
& LIVING
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artsandliving/?nav=pf>  |
GOING OUT GUIDE <http://www.washingtonpost.com/gog/?nav=pf>  | JOBS
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wl/jobs/home?nav=pf>  | CARS
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/cars/?nav=pf>  | REAL
ESTATE <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/realestate/?nav=pf>
|SHOPPING
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-adv/shopping/front.html?nav=pf> 

 

Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations

By Matthew Mosk
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 29, 2008; A02

Sen. Barack Obama
<http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/> 's
presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable
prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on
how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a
contributor's identity, campaign officials confirmed.

Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign
has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent
potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its
accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its
books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.

The Obama organization said its extensive review has ensured that the
campaign has refunded any improper contributions, and noted that Federal
Election Commission rules do not require front-end screening of
donations.

(READ MORE: Murkowski embraces outsider status with write-in campaign)
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/10/AR20101
01002759.html> 

In recent weeks, questionable contributions have created headaches for
Obama's accounting team as it has tried to explain why campaign finance
filings have included itemized donations from individuals using fake
names, such as Es Esh or Doodad Pro. Those revelations prompted
conservative bloggers to further test Obama's finance vetting by giving
money using the kind of prepaid cards that can be bought at a drugstore
and cannot be traced to a donor.

Title: Election Fraud Uncovered by Patriotic Citizens … Who Promptly Get Sued
Post by: G M on October 23, 2010, 10:46:20 AM

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/election-fraud-uncovered-by-patriotic-citizens-who-promptly-get-sued/?singlepage=true

Election Fraud Uncovered by Patriotic Citizens … Who Promptly Get Sued
Election watchers True the Vote have found disturbing amounts of fraud in Harris County, Texas. Rather than support their important work, the Texas Democratic Party (among others) is suing them. (And don't forget to join PJM's voter-fraud watch!)
October 23, 2010 - by Hans A. von Spakovsky

Talk about denial! A group of liberal activists is making the media rounds, assuring reporters and editors that election fraud is a fairy tale. Nothing serious, they assert, nothing to see here. Too bad for them that citizens in Houston, energized by the Tea Party movement, have formed a group called True the Vote. Their hard work has demonstrated that, in some parts of the country at least, our election system is still infested with problems.

True the Vote is composed entirely of volunteers — hundreds of them. They have pored over election records in Harris County, Texas, looking for signs of fraud. And they have found plenty. Indeed, their initial research into only a very small portion of the voter registration records has led them to ask the U.S. Justice Department’s Voting Section to conduct a federal investigation.

In a letter asking for an official inquiry, True the Vote discusses potential widespread forgery in voter application forms. For instance, it seems from the applications that someone suspiciously signs the letter “J” with a quirky “3” inside the loop. The “3” shows up in multiple signatures for different voters with the names Jenard, Jamark, Jamarcus, and Jones.

True the Vote reports that at least four noncitizens have been registered to vote in Harris County. The group provided Justice with the actual voter registration forms where applicants marked “NO” to the question: “Are you a U.S. Citizen?” The group also provided the voter registration numbers of these confessed noncitizens. Yes, astonishingly, Harris County registered them to vote anyway. They are now on the rolls and able to participate in the upcoming midterm elections.

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 was supposed to stop this from happening. But this federal legislation is only as good as the Justice Department’s willingness to enforce it. If Harris County is registering noncitizens, then it is violating numerous provisions of federal law, including those that prohibit the registration of foreigners to vote in federal elections.

True the Vote uncovered other types of fraud as well. The group forwarded to DOJ seven voter registration forms with applicant names different from the signature name. For example: Ta’mackayn Harrison’s application was signed by “Bra Kelly.” Jason King’s was signed by “Jemma Noel.” Yet Harris County inexplicably approved all of these applications. Jason King, aka Jemma Noel, is now on the voter rolls in Houston.

The citizens group also found multiple registrations for individual voters. For example, True the Vote provided the Justice Department government documents showing that at least four persons, including Jose Gomez and Victor Nickerson, had registered to vote multiple times successfully.

These problems were found by True the Vote in just a small sampling of the county’s voter registration list. How many other, similar problems would turn up in a comprehensive review? Don’t forget: every vote counts. Which also means that every legitimate vote cancelled out by a fraudulent vote should be a concern to anyone interested in fair elections and protecting the right to vote.

This sort of thing can happen only when election officials flout Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act, which requires them to clean up their voter registration lists. But this Department of Justice seems to have no interest in enforcing these laws. In testimony before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, DOJ whistleblowers Christopher Coates and J. Christian Adams revealed that Obama Justice Department political appointee Julie Fernandes instructed the Voting Section that no such cases were to be brought. That directive gives free rein to voter registration fraud. Bogus registrants can now cast a fraudulent vote with confidence that the election police are asleep.

For years, the far left has insisted that voter fraud really doesn’t exist, or at least that claims about it are overblown. In so doing, the left has willfully blinded itself to the truth. But the arrival of True the Vote is helping expose the lies of these election fraud deniers.

Its “Army of Davids” approach brings to bear hundreds of volunteers to spend hundreds of hours examining documents and searching for patterns, like the mysterious “3” that afflicts so many letter “J’s” in Houston, or finding vacant lots at the registered addresses of multiple voters. Moreover, it means hundreds will serve as election judges and poll watchers on election day. True the Vote is the election fraud denier’s worst nightmare, because the group is helping prove definitively that fraud is real and too often overlooked by election officials.

Houston has an ACORN-like group, Houston Votes, that harvests thousands of suspect voter registration forms. If some of the fraud uncovered by True the Vote was done by deputy registers working for Houston Votes, they should be prosecuted. And it won’t be too hard to figure out — every deputy registrar that roams the community must be approved by the clerk in Harris County and is issued an identification number. Bogus applications can, and will, be traced back to the particular registrars.

Of course, this may explain why True the Vote has been hit with a lawsuit by the Texas Democratic Party, an ethics complaint by Texans for Public Justice, and another lawsuit (for defamation) by Houston Votes and the Houston lawyer behind the voter registration drive that turned in multiple problematic registration forms (Harris County estimated over 7,000). That same organization has also sued Harris County — claiming the county is barred from correcting the voter registration problems!

So has the Eric Holder-run Justice Department acted on the evidence of electoral fraud gift-wrapped, tied in a bow, and delivered to them? No. He and his partisan retinue in the Civil Rights Division have instead reportedly opened up an investigation of True the Vote!

When early voting started in Texas, liberal blogs ran scandalous headlines that True the Vote had been targeted by the Department of Justice, and related that Justice officials have started interviewing voters about the behavior of poll watchers — something confirmed by a Justice spokesman. This is curious because it seems, through leaks, to inject the DOJ into the election directly. It is all the more curious given internal DOJ limits on election-eve actions. The DOJ’s own election crimes manual, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses, states:

    Another limitation [on election investigations] affects voter interviews. Election fraud cases often depend on the testimony of individual voters whose votes were co-opted in one way or another. But in most cases voters should not be interviewed or other voter-related investigation done, until after the election is over. Such overt investigative steps may chill legitimate voting activities. They are also likely to be perceived by voters and candidates as an intrusion into the election.

The leaking of the information about DOJ’s investigation to a friendly liberal blog was even stranger, and more ethically suspect. And what a contrast between how quickly Justice announced it was investigating complaints made by the Texas Democratic Party about poll watchers, and DOJ’s complete silence about True the Vote’s request for an investigation of the voter registration fraud discovered in Harris County.

Hopefully, True the Vote will not be deterred from its investigation of registration fraud by the seemingly coordinated attempts to intimidate it by the Justice Department, the Texas Democratic Party, and Houston Votes. Fortunately, the Liberty Institute has agreed to defend True the Vote from the specious claims being made against it.

Voter fraud practitioners should have something to worry about. True the Vote may be coming to a town near you soon. Though it is focused on Harris County for 2010, it plans to go national in 2011. The model it has developed is robust, effective — and to the chagrin of the wrongdoers — completely legal. After the congressional midterms, it will hold a nationwide summit of other citizens ready to start election integrity operations in the rest of the nation.

The country could use such dedication in 2012. The Obama Justice Department has demonstrated a shocking willingness to ignore laws protecting the security and integrity of elections. That should comes as no surprise given both the increasingly partisan approach to law enforcement undertaken by this Department under Eric Holder’s leadership, and the dogged determination of Holder’s ideological comrades who deny that voter fraud occurs, or that common sense measures like voter ID are needed.

In the great American tradition of self-reliance, citizen watchdogs across the country may stand watch in 2012. If the government proves incapable of protecting electoral integrity, the people can.

Hans A. von Spakovsky is a Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation (www.heritage.org) and a former commissioner on the Federal Election Commission.

Title: POTH on vote fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 27, 2010, 11:00:57 AM

Fraudulent Voting Re-emerges as a Partisan IssueBy IAN URBINA
Published: October 26, 2010

WASHINGTON — In 2006, conservative activists repeatedly claimed that the problem of people casting fraudulent votes was so widespread that it was corrupting the political process and possibly costing their candidates victories.

This Milwaukee sign was criticized as intended intimidation.
The accusations turned out to be largely false, but they led to a heated debate, with voting rights groups claiming that the accusations were crippling voter registration drives and reducing turnout.

That debate is flaring anew.

Tea Party members have started challenging voter registration applications and have announced plans to question individual voters at the polls whom they suspect of being ineligible.

In response, liberal groups and voting rights advocates are sounding an alarm, claiming that such strategies are scare tactics intended to suppress minority and poor voters.

In St. Paul, organizers from the Tea Party and related groups announced this week that they were offering a $500 reward for anyone who turned in someone who was successfully prosecuted for voter fraud.

The group is also organizing volunteer “surveillance squads” to photograph and videotape what it suspects are irregularities, and in some cases to follow buses that take voters to the polls.

In Milwaukee last week, several community groups protested the posting of large billboards throughout the city that show pictures of people behind jail bars under the words “We Voted Illegally.” The protesters said the posters — it was not clear who paid for them — were intended to intimidate people from voting.

In Houston, a Tea Party group called the King Street Patriots recently accused a voter registration group, Houston Votes, of turning in voter registration applications with incorrect information.

Voting rights advocates say they are worried.

“Private efforts to police the polls create a real risk of vote suppression, regardless of their intent,” said Wendy R. Weiser, director of the Voting Rights and Elections Project at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. “People need to know that any form of discrimination, intimidation or challenge to voters without adequate basis is illegal or improper.”

Voter fraud and voter-registration fraud are, of course, different.

While many states have voter registration records riddled with names of dead people, out-of-date addresses and other erroneous information, there is little evidence that such errors lead to fraudulent votes, many experts note.

A report by the public-integrity section of the Justice Department found that from October 2002 to September 2005, the department charged 95 people with “election fraud”; 55 were convicted.

Among those, fewer than 20 people were convicted of casting fraudulent ballots, and only 5 were convicted of registration fraud. Most of the rest were charged with other voting violations, including a scheme meant to help Republicans by blocking the phone lines used by two voting groups that were arranging rides to get voters to the polls.

Even so, the fear of stolen votes remains, as does the fear of missing votes — particularly in light of a decrease, compared with 2006, in voter-registration applications in swing states.

About 43 percent fewer new voters have registered in Wisconsin this year than in 2006, while in Indiana, the decrease has been about 35 percent. Significant drops have also been seen in Ohio (25 percent), North Carolina (28 percent), Florida (27 percent) and Maryland (21 percent), according to state election data collected by the Brennan Center.

Voting experts say several factors explain the trend.

Voter enthusiasm is low now, and fewer groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or Acorn, are engaged in drives to sign people up. Acorn collected about 550,000 voter-registration applications across the country in 2006, mostly from low-income and minority Americans, and 1.3 million in 2008.

But in March, the organization closed down after accusations by two conservative activists that low-level Acorn employees had advised them on how to hide prostitution activities and avoid taxes. The group was also battered by conservatives for having submitted some voter registration cards with incorrect, duplicate or false information.

=================
Page 2 of 2)



The housing crisis may also have dampened voter registration. More than three million properties were foreclosed this year, a 30 percent increase from 2008, and people who have been forced out of their homes may be not be able establish residency to vote.

Many states have also enacted laws in recent years that make registration drives more difficult, with stricter reporting and filing deadlines for voter registration groups.

“It has been an uphill fight in a lot of states to register people this year,” said Elisabeth MacNamara, national president of the League of Women Voters.

Ms. MacNamara said the group’s Georgia chapter faced an additional burden because of a new state law requiring voters to prove citizenship. The chapter does not have a copier machine, so the expense of duplicating documents like birth certificates or driver’s licenses falls to unpaid volunteers.

Most of the new barriers to registration are likely to hurt Democrats more than Republicans. Historically, these registration drives have focused on voters in poorer areas and minority communities, which tend to vote Democratic.

The Obama administration has tried to take steps to lessen the dependence on independent voter registration groups, while also broadening voter participation among poorer and minority voters.

In June, the Justice Department released new guidelines for the “motor voter” law, emphasizing that all public-assistance applicants must be given the opportunity to register to vote, and that state employees must offer to help them.

Still, independent voter registration groups say that they still play an important role, and that scare tactics are making their work harder.

“There is an intentional effort here to suppress participation,” said Jim George, a lawyer for the Texans Together Education Fund, the parent organization of Houston Votes.

Houston Votes, whose registration drive has mostly focused on Latino neighborhoods, did find at least one paid canvasser submitting fraudulent applications, Mr. George said, and that person was immediately fired. He added that the groups’ financing for voter registration work had dried up because of insinuations by the King Street Patriots that Houston Votes was tied to the New Black Panther Party.

“Houston Votes has nothing whatsoever to do with the Black Panthers,” Mr. George said. “But you make a claim like that, and funding dries up, even if the claim isn’t true.”

Mr. George explained that during a meeting, the King Street Patriots had shown a picture of the Houston Votes office and stated its address before adding that this was the new location of the Black Panthers.

Hiram Sasser, a lawyer for the Liberty Institute who represents the King Street Patriots, denied the claim but when presented a video of the incident, he said that his client had actually made a mistake and did not realize the office was tied to Houston Votes.

Leo Vasquez, the Republican tax assessor-collector and voter registrar in Harris County, Tex., which includes Houston, said that of about 25,640 registration applications submitted by Houston Votes, about 5,500 had problems.

The Texas Democratic Party has filed a lawsuit against Mr. Vasquez, accusing him and the voter registration office of illegally rejecting voter applications.

The fight occurs against the backdrop of a contest for governor in which a large turnout in Harris County would be vital to the effort by the Democratic candidate, Bill White, to defeat Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican.

Title: Stacked Deck?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 27, 2010, 07:24:16 PM

Nevada voting machines automatically checking Harry Reid's name; voting machine technicians are SEIU members
By: Mark Hemingway
Commentary Staff Writer
10/26/10 6:12 PM EDT
Clark County is where three quarters of Nevada's residents and live and where Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's son Rory is a county commissioner. Rory is also a Democratic candidate for governor.
Since early voting started, there have been credible reports that voting machines in Clark County, Nevada are automatically checking Harry Reid's name on the ballot:
Voter Joyce Ferrara said when they went to vote for Republican Sharron Angle, her Democratic opponent, Sen. Harry Reid's name was already checked.

Ferrara said she wasn't alone in her voting experience. She said her husband and several others voting at the same time all had the same thing happen.

"Something's not right," Ferrara said. "One person that's a fluke. Two, that's strange. But several within a five minute period of time -- that's wrong."

Clark County Registrar of Voters Larry Lomax said there is no voter fraud, although the issues do come up because the touch-screens are sensitive. For that reason, a person may not want to have their fingers linger too long on the screen after they make a selection at any time.
Now there's absolutely no independently verified evidence of chicanery with the voting machines (yet), but it is worth noting that the voting machine technicians in Clark County are members of the Service Employees International Union. The SEIU spent $63 million in elections in 2008 and is planning on spending $44 million more this election cycle -- nearly all of that on Democrats. White House political director Patrick Gaspard is formerly the SEIU's top lobbyist, and former SEIU president Andy Stern was the most frequent visitor to the White House last year.
Just in Nevada, the SEIU has given a lot to groups that are heavily vested in the state -- in just one prominent example, the SEIU gave $500,000 to the Patriot Majority PAC, which has spent $1.3 million against Reid's opponent Sharron Angle. They've and have dropped large sums directly on candidates:
NV-3
Joe Heck (R)
Oppose
$140,000.00
NV-3
Dina Titus (D)
Support
$344,984.00
NV-Senate
Sharron E. Angle (R)
Oppose
$225,000.00
Now the county voting technicians aren't unique here -- many of Clark County's employees are also represented by the SEIU. But it is worth mentioning, the SEIU is hyperpoliticized and has seen its fair share of corruption. (It certainly seems more questionable than Diebold, the voting machine manufacturer with Republican ties that was at the center of many conspiracy theories on the left during the Bush administration.)
Unions increasingly have a major financial stake in election outcomes, both as a matter of their own election expenditures, and as a function of what they stand to gain if their legislative agenda is enacted. Should they really be responsible for tabulating the votes? That's certainly something voters ought to think long and hard about.
Below is Clark County's SEIU contract -- On Page 75, in Appendix A, voting machine technicians are listed as positions represented by SEIU.


Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Voting-machines-in-Clark-County-Nevada-automatically-checking-Harry-Reids-name-Voting-machine-technicians-are-members-of-SEIU-105815608.html#ixzz13cGL7vA2


SEIU contract: http://www.scribd.com/doc/40191899/Contract-SEIU

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 28, 2010, 07:22:03 AM

"In St. Paul, organizers from the Tea Party and related groups announced this week that they were offering a $500 reward for anyone who turned in someone who was successfully prosecuted for voter fraud.

The group is also organizing volunteer “surveillance squads” to photograph and videotape what it suspects are irregularities, and in some cases to follow buses that take voters to the polls."
----

For one thing it is a slap in the face to the elected MN Sec of State from moveon.org that private groups need to advertise that vote fraud is a felony, and a call to action for citizens that the camcorder capability in your cell phone is strong weapon for law enforcement and deterrence - be ready to use it.  Volunteer to be an election judge and everyone be as aware as you can of everything happening around you when you go to vote.

For years they have been saying, what could be wrong with making it easier to vote.

Numbers of prosecuted cases may be low, but numbers of false votes cast all too often exceed the margin of victory.

Title: Jimmy Carter to the rescue- don't hold your breath
Post by: ccp on October 28, 2010, 12:21:28 PM

Oh where oh where is our beloved Jimmy Carter the savior from and investigator from and of voter fraud of the century?

LOL

In NJ it is so easy to vote.  Apply on line get ballot in mail and send in.

Does it get to where it is supposed to go and get counted.  Nobody knows.

Who in there right mind doesn't think voter fraud isn't rampant especially in a union goon/organized crime state like Jersey? 

Title: POTH: Nudge
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2010, 07:59:07 AM

Over the past few days, thousands of Democratic-leaning voters nationwide — including the young people, minorities and unmarried women who were a crucial part of Barack Obama’s 2008 coalition and whom the party is desperate to rouse again on Tuesday — received a message in their mailboxes that effectively said: we’re keeping an eye on you. The mailers are the handiwork of Hal Malchow, a political consultant who is acting on a theory that first intrigued him four years ago. Before the 2006 Michigan gubernatorial primary, three political scientists isolated a group of voters and mailed them copies of their voting histories, listing the elections in which they participated and those they missed. Included were their neighbors’ voting histories, too, along with a warning: after the polls closed, everyone would get an updated set.

After the primary, the academics examined the voter rolls and were startled by the potency of peer pressure as a motivational tool. The mailer was 10 times better at turning nonvoters into voters than the typical piece of pre-election mail whose effectiveness has ever been measured. Malchow, a 58-year-old former Mississippi securities lawyer who managed Al Gore’s first Senate campaign and went on to start a direct-mail firm, read the academics’ study and wanted to put the device to work. But he had trouble persuading his firm’s clients — which over the years have included the Democratic National Committee and the A.F.L.-C.I.O. — to incorporate such a tactic into their get-out-the-vote programs. All feared a backlash from citizens who might regard the mailer as a threat from someone seeking their vote.

Then, as New Jersey prepared to elect its governor last fall, Malchow experimented with less ominous language, an idea he adopted from the Fordham political scientist Costas Panagopoulos. He removed all mention of neighbors and offered instead an expression of gratitude for having voted in the past — while still making it clear that recipients’ voting habits would continue to be monitored. “We hope to be able to thank you in the future for being the kind of citizen who makes our democracy work,” read the letter to more than 11,000 New Jerseyites.

Malchow found that the softer tone, while less effective than the original mailer,increased turnout among recipients by 2.5 percentage points. The D.N.C. ran a similar experiment during the special election in Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District this spring, with a letter from Senator Bob Casey telling voters that “our records indicate that you voted in the 2008 election” and thanking them for their “good citizenship.” By employing the device on a larger scale, for dozens of candidates and independent groups this fall, Malchow aims to deliver votesthat would otherwise be lost to Democrats.

An increasingly influential cadre of Democratic strategists is finding new ideas in the same place Malchow did: behavioral-science experiments that treat campaigns as their laboratories and voters as unwitting guinea pigs. The growing use of experimental methods — Heather Smith, president of Rock the Vote, calls them “prescription drug trials for democracy” — is convulsing a profession where hunches and instinct have long ruled. Already, experimental findings have upended a lot of folk wisdom about how votes are won. The most effective direct mail might not be the most eye-catching in the mailbox but the least conspicuous. It is better to have an anonymous, chatty volunteer remind voters it’s Election Day than a recorded message from Bill Clinton or Jay-Z. The most winnable voters may be soft supporters of the opposition, not the voters who polls say are undecided. (“Undecided” may just be another word for “unlikely to vote.”)

Most of the activity on the left revolves around the Analyst Institute, a firm quietly founded in 2007 by A.F.L.-C.I.O. officials and liberal allies, whichseeks to establish a set of empirically proven “best practices” for interacting with voters. The group’s executive director, a behavioral scientist named Todd Rogers, has managed dozens of experiments around the country this year. Their lessons have shaped how Democrats are approaching and cajoling the voters they think are on their side but who haven’t yet shown that they will act on their beliefs on Election Day.

Nearly all of the Analyst Institute’s research is private, shared only among the participating groups. The institute’s Web site is almost comically empty, and the group’s name — two abstract nouns, cryptically conjoined — evokes a C.I.A. front. There seem to be two types of political operatives in Washington: those who think Rogers is a genius transforming their field and those who have never heard of him.

The experimental movement in politics began a decade ago, when the Yale political scientists Alan Gerber and Donald Green conducted a study testing the relative effectiveness of basic political tools. As the 1998 elections approached, Gerber and Green partnered with the League of Women Voters to split 30,000 New Haven voters into four groups. Some received an oversize postcard encouraging them to vote, others the same message via a phone call or in-person visit. One control group received no contact whatsoever. After the election, Gerber and Green examined Connecticut records to see who actually voted. The in-person canvass yielded turnout 9.8 percent higher than for voters who were not contacted. Each piece of mail led to a turnout increase of only 0.6 percent. Telephone calls, Gerber and Green concluded, had no effect at all.

The findings were published in 2000 and quickly circulated among campaign operatives, who saw academics assailing many of their business models. A turf battle began within the political-consulting community: direct-mail vendors happily cited the Gerber-Green findings to argue candidates would waste money on phone calls.

Hal Malchow — who had previously approached the Democratic National Committee to propose using experimental controls to measure mail to voters but was repeatedly rebuffed — thought the Gerber-Green study was “the most important event in politics for a long time,” he says. “Eighty percent of what we’ve done in the past doesn’t work.” As the mail vendor for the A.F.L.-C.I.O., Malchow found a natural partner for his ideas in Mike Podhorzer, the organization’s deputy political director. Podhorzer saw Gerber and Green, who see themselves as researchers and not partisan advocates, as kindred spirits in a worldwide battle for knowledge between two camps he thought of as “gurus” versus “data.” As he says, “Until you get into a more rigorous approach, you are essentially left with what we had, which is that everything you did in a winning campaign was a good idea and everything that you did in a losing campaign was a bad idea.”

=============

Podhorzer and Malchow began trying to adapt the Gerber-Green methods to the particular challenges faced by the A.F.L.-C.I.O., which regularly runs one of the largest independent campaign operations, almost always on behalf of Democrats. “Finding out the day after the election that Treatment A was the best is of limited value to an organization like ours,” Podhorzer says. “We’re actually trying to win the election.”

During the 2004 campaign, Podhorzer wanted to gauge voter reactions to his organization’s election messages in near-real time. A good poll shows how the electorate has moved over time, but it cannot isolate the effect of any individual appeal — and certainly not that of a single mailed leaflet, one of labor’s favorite tools for reaching member households. Focus groups offer a rich impression of how certain voters respond to that leaflet, but only the instant reaction of someone being paid $100 to have one. A focus group cannot say anything about whether a typical voter will even notice the brochure if it shows up in the mail wedged between a birthday card and a water bill.

Experiments provided a solution. The A.F.L.-C.I.O. planned to mail members monthly in 2004, and Podhorzer set out to design a “continuous feedback loop” testing different messages with small samples and then sending the most influential ones to a much larger target audience. As he examined the results, Podhorzer became even more frustrated with conventional polling. Asked if they would be more or less likely to vote for a candidate who favored shipping jobs overseas — a typical way of auditioning a promising line — voters across the board would tell pollsters that it made them “less likely.” But a draft leaflet about Bush’s policies had little impact on autoworkers who received it; they already knew what the union wanted them to think about the subject. Construction workers, however, didn’t know as much, and their minds changed. Experiments allowed Podhorzer to see which voters actually moved, not just count those who said they might.

Democrats have not been alone in experimenting with data-driven politics. As Dave Carney, once George H. W. Bush’s White House political director, prepared to guide the 2006 re-election campaign of Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, he invited Gerber and Green to conduct their experiments from within the campaign’s war room. Perry had spent more than $25 million to win a full term in 2002, much of it on broadcast advertising, and Carney thought a rigorous experimental regime could help “assure donors that we’re using their money as best as possible — spend it different, spend less of it.” Gerber and Green asked two political scientists who had informally advised George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election, James Gimpel and Daron Shaw, to collaborate on the project. Carney invited the quartet he called “our four eggheads” to impose experimental controls on nearly every aspect of campaign operations.

Perry won easy re-election in 2006, and their findings profoundly altered his 2010 tactics. Perry’s primary campaign this year sent out no direct voter-contact mail, made no paid phone calls, printed no lawn signs, visited no editorial boards and purchased no newspaper ads. His broadcast advertising strategy was informed by a 2006 experiment that isolated 18 TV media markets and 80 radio stations and randomly assigned each a different start date and volume for ad buys from a $2 million budget earmarked for the experiment. Public-opinion changes from the ads were then monitored with tracking polls. Carney estimates that the research saved Perry $3 million in this year’s primary campaign, and he still beat Kay Bailey Hutchison by 20 points. On Tuesday, the value of Perry’s unusually empirical approach to electioneering will be tested again, this time in a tough race against the Democratic nominee, Bill White, the former mayor of Houston.

After Bush’s 2004 re-election, Podhorzer invited other scientific-minded progressive operatives to A.F.L.-C.I.O. headquarters to share their research.Very few members would be recognizable to cable-news viewers; the group almost entirely bypassed the brand-name consultants whom campaigns like to unveil in press releases. “It’s not the big names on the door,” says Maren Hesla, who directed Emily’s List’s Women Vote! campaign. “It’s all the — God love them — geeky guys who don’t talk to clients but do the work and write the programs.”

The unofficial society called itself the Analyst Group, and it grew by word of mouth. By the time Democrats reclaimed Congress in 2006, as many as 60 people showed up for the regular lunches. In 2007, Podhorzer and his Analyst Group circle established the Analyst Institute, designed to operate with a scholarly sensibility but with the privacy of a for-profit consulting firm. Podhorzer became chairman and looked for an executive director. Gerber suggested Todd Rogers, on whose dissertation committee he had served.

Rogers, who had just turned 30, was a former college-lacrosse player from the Philadelphia suburbs who earned a joint degree in organizational behavior and psychology in connection with Harvard Business School after performing studies that examined the way individuals managed their queues on services like Netflix. Rogers argued that this type of research — on how time delays alter preferences — could help policy makers shape policy design on issues like carbon taxes, which involve balancing your ideal preferences (watching documentaries, having a smaller carbon footprint) with your actual choices (watching action movies, buying an S.U.V.).

Shortly before Pennsylvania’s April 2008 presidential primary, Rogers scripted a phone call that went out to 19,411 Democratic households in the state. The disembodied call-center voice said it had three questions. Around what time do you expect you will head to the polls on Tuesday? Where do you expect you will be coming from when you head to the polls on Tuesday? What do you think you will be doing before you head out to the polls?

================

Rogers did not care what voters’ answers were to the questions, only whether they had any. He was testing a psychological concept known as “implementation intentions,” which suggests that people are more likely to perform an action if they have already visualized doing it. The subject was on a long list of psychology concepts that Rogers took to Washington. Many had been demonstrated only in situations outside politics or examined by psychologists only in laboratory settings. Enamored of the psychologist Robert Cialdini and the behavioral economist Richard Thaler, Rogers thought their research methods could be applied to elections. And Rogers saw the advantages of doing academic-style work outside the academy: he faced no financing restrictions or the need to navigate a university’s human-subjects review board.

This June, two years after the Pennsylvania experiment, Rogers traveled to Pittsburgh to pre–sent the findings at a Carnegie Mellon behavioral-science conference. Before a room of professors and graduate students, Rogers explained that asking people about their voting plans increased turnout by 4 percentage points. A closer look, however, showed the effects were unevenly distributed. The self-predictive phone calls had little impact on multiple-voter households. But for those living alone, the effect was tremendous: turnout jumped by nearly 10 percentage points. The reason, Rogers surmised, was that making plans is a collaborative activity; spouses and roommates already talk through issues like child care as a condition of voting. For those who live alone, rehearsing their Election Day routine with a stranger helped them make a plan.

Once done, Rogers took a seat next to Richard Thaler, who draped a paternal arm across his back. In 2006, Thaler welcomed Rogers into the Consortium of Behavioral Scientists, a secretive group that helped Democrats apply academic research to policy making and advised party leaders, including Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, on election-year tactics. Two years later, Thaler — a University of Chicago colleague of Obama’s — helped to bring many consortium members together, including Rogers, to informally advise Obama’s presidential campaign.

By that fall, Rogers’s implementation-intention device had become a standard campaign tool for many left-leaning groups, along with scripts declaring things like “turnout is going to be high today.” Rogers’s experiments have shown that voters respond better to everyone-is-doing-it messages emphasizing high turnout than don’t-be-part-of-the-problem appeals describing how few Americans vote.

Rogers spends a lot of time trying to convince activists that the central premise of randomized experiments — deciding not to contact a control group of voters — will not torpedo their short-term priority of winning elections. Meanwhile, a new Democratic establishment has brought the data-driven crowd in from the outside. Since Obama’s election, operatives with Analyst Group ties have moved into key party jobs and now attend meetings as representatives of the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

While political experiments have proved successful at isolating what gets people to vote, they have been less useful at finding out how voters decide among candidates. Partly for that reason, while the Analyst Institute’s findings and sensibility inform how permanent institutions like unions operate, they have yet to transform candidate’s campaigns, where most money is spent in the least targetable way possible: on broadcast TV time. Rogers has been designing experiments to assess Internet advertising, whose effectiveness has been traditionally gauged by click-throughs and sign-ups that do little to measure the ads’ impact on more-passive viewers. For a study Rogers oversaw during Minnesota’s 2008 Senate campaign, an independent group bought Yahoo! banner ads introducing an issue invisible from the campaign dialogue elsewhere: an obscure vote by the Republican Norm Coleman against financing a rural antidrug program. Through polling, Rogers discovered that those who saw the ads were more likely than others to believe that Coleman could have done “more to stop meth use.”

But experimental politicking is not always so provocative. Indeed, groups following Analyst Institute findings often end up abandoning their flashiest tools for more staid ones. The America Votes coalition has dropped get-out-the-vote robocalls. Rock the Vote has found e-mail and text messages arriving from unexciting senders like “Election Center” often do better than those with livelier “from” lines. Malchow has discovered that voters pay less attention to the glossy four-color brochures designed to “cut through” mailbox clutter than they do to spare envelopes evoking a letter from the tax man or a jury-duty summons. “People want information, they don’t want advertising,” Malchow says. “When they see our fingerprints on this stuff, they believe it less.”

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Freki on November 01, 2010, 04:11:55 PM

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-dc-hacking-future-online-voting.html

D.C. hacking raises questions about future of online voting
November 1, 2010 By Sean Greene
For the upcoming election, Washington, D.C., was preparing to allow some voters to send their ballots in over the Internet. It's a good thing election officials tested the system first.

 
Just two days after the District of Columbia Board of Elections and Ethics opened the application for the public to experiment with this fall, the system was hacked. Unbeknownst to D.C. officials, a team of computer scientists from the University of Michigan took control of the website and changed the code to make it play the school's fight song.
The fight-song gag was the part of the hacking that elections officials discovered themselves. More troubling is what they didn't notice.
That was revealed at a recent D.C. Council committee hearing, where J. Alex Halderman, a University of Michigan professor who led the hacking effort in order to demonstrate the system's security flaws, testified that his team had in fact wrested complete control over the elections board's server. Halderman produced 937 pages of names, addresses and PIN numbers of test voters who had signed up to try out the system. Had it been a real election, Halderman said, he could have changed the votes on ballots or revealed voters' supposedly secret choices on the Internet. Additionally, Halderman's crew wasn't the only one rooting around in the D.C. system. They noticed other attacks occurring, originating in China and Iran.
In response, the elections board decided to shelve the idea of having voters submit ballots online. Eligible voters in the military and others living overseas can still use the system to receive blank ballots, rather than waiting for them in the mail. But they'll have to print the ballots out and mail them back to Washington.
While the D.C. episode was a setback for voting over the Internet, elections experts disagree on what it means for the future. Some say the District's experience demonstrates what computer scientists have been saying for years -- that the Internet in its current state cannot allow for secure online voting. Others, including D.C.'s top elections official, still see potential in online voting. In fact, the state of Arizona and eight counties in West Virginia aren't giving up plans to go ahead with their own online voting experiments on November 2.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on November 01, 2010, 04:16:45 PM

But think of the time and energy the dems could save by letting China and Iran hack the vote. No more need for the unions and Acorn.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 01, 2010, 08:42:55 PM

Nice find Freki.  I wonder why I haven't read about it in the POTH? :x

Title: New BPs in TX
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2010, 04:25:04 AM

Pasting here GM's post from the 2010 election thread:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/breaking-video-soon-new-black-panthers-commit-outrageous-violations-of-texas-voting-law/

BREAKING VIDEO: New Black Panthers Commit Outrageous Violations of Texas Voting Law
They spoke with election officials inside polling places. After these discussions, white poll watchers were either denied admittance or ejected. White election judges were also removed, under threat of calling the police for trumped-up complaints.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2010, 06:09:08 AM

"I do believe the decisions made need to be reexamined and maybe some arrests made"

Do you believe there is the slightest chance of that actually happening?  The BO DOJ actually undid a successful prosecution brought by the Bush DOJ against the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia wherein the acts in question were fully caught on video (go back in this thread to find all this)

As has already been covered, the current DOJ believes that the voting rights laws are not for the benefit of white people-- but the larger point is that the very legitimacy of the electoral process in many parts of America is under serious attack.

Title: The electoral process, 380,000 vote double count in Minneapolis
Post by: DougMacG on November 03, 2010, 08:53:03 AM

"Doug: Keep us posted on that please!"

No worries.  The error that allowed Hennepin County (Mpls and S and W suburbs), a county larger than 8 states, to be counted twice and not noticed was due to a computer glitch.  The R candidate for Gov was down 12 points while this was discovered, now losing by less than 1/2% going into automatic recount - to be overseen by re-elected MN Sec State Mark Ritchie of moveon.org roots.  An overcount of 380,000 went unnoticed, but everything else is fine, we are assured.  :-(   http://kstp.com/article/stories/s1820929.shtml

Prior to this election, Dems had super-majorities in both houses held in check by a somewhat moderate R Governor (Tim Pawlenty). Interestingly, all the statewide races were won by Dems, but the precincts outside of ACORN and Urban League vote count control swung so far the other way the R's took both the state House and State Senate for the first time since party designations were put on the ballot.

Title: Ignorant, Unprincipled, or Incompetent? I
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on November 11, 2010, 10:10:55 AM

Not much of a fan of the American Spectator--listening to Emmett Tyrrell warble makes me bilious--but this piece is a comprehensive indictment of Eric Holder and his DOJ.

Justice, Denied

By Quin Hillyer from the November 2010 issue

Under attorney general Eric Holder, the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) is dangerously politicized, radically leftist, racialist, lawless, and at times corrupt. The good news is that it's also often incompetent. This means the Holderites can bungle their leftist lawlessness so badly that even the most reticent of judges are obliged to smack them down.

The abuses by the Holderites are legion. They range from DOJ's infamous abandonment of the already-won voter-intimidation case against several New Black Panthers to multi-faceted assaults on traditional standards of voting rights and obligations; from a growing list of lawsuits deliberately destructive of border security and citizenship laws to outrageously race-based bullying tactics; from efforts to undermine military discipline and state sovereignty on homosexual-related issues to the dangerous obsession with terrorists' "rights" to the detriment of national security; and, finally, to the selection of judges openly contemptuous of the existing law-all while dedicated to a vision of judge-imposed "universal justice" based not on the text of American statutes but instead on the reigning cultural standards of coastal and international elites. While doing all this, the Holderites operate the least transparent DOJ in decades, treat congressmen and independent agencies with contempt, and claim breathtakingly spurious "privileges" against disclosure of public information.

This isn't law enforcement and it isn't justice, but instead is subversive of both.

The politically moderate blogger and law professor Ann Althouse, who voted for Barack Obama, wrote a reaction to a November 2009 Holder testimony before the Senate that could stand as a far broader condemnation of his qualities. Holder, she wrote, "is utterly pathetic here. Either he knows damned well what he's doing and he's lying or he's outrageously unqualified for his job."

The New Black Panther case, which concerns the attempts of two club-wielding gang members to intimidate voters outside voting stations in Philadelphia in the 2008 election, provides a perfect window into the modus operandi of the Holder Justice Department, one which has far wider implications than just the question of whether two crackpot thugs deserved to receive stiff sanctions for clear, unambiguous attempts at voter intimidation. How clear? Consider the words of Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project. He told me on September 17 that he had not delved deeply into the case, but had seen the videos and was generally aware of the controversy: "I thought that that definitely raised very serious questions about what was going on. I think that if people were doing the same things while wearing white robes and hoods, most other people would be outraged by it -- certainly very concerned about the propriety of it."

Well, of course. Yet all along, the question asked by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which conducted an in-depth study of the matter, was a bigger one: whether case was indicative of a broad policy change at DOJ. Whistle-blowing attorney J. Christian Adams told the commission it was, and he was backed to the hilt on September 24 by his former Justice Department colleague (and onetime ACLU stalwart) Christopher Coates in riveting testimony to the commission -- and, long before that, backed in general terms by at least three other former DOJ officials.

What Adams, Coates, and the others say, and back up with a fair amount of strong circumstantial evidence combined with firsthand experience, is twofold. Their first charge is that the Holderites have consciously adopted a practice of refusing to enforce civil rights laws when the perpetrators are black (or maybe Latino) and the victims are white (or Asian). It's a charge certainly in keeping with Holder's own words to the Washington Post in 1996 that a black man's "race defines him more particularly than anything else. Black people have a common cause that requires attending to." Mr. Holder elaborated: "It really says that…I am not the tall U.S. Attorney, I am not the thin U.S. Attorney. I am the black U.S. Attorney.… There's a common cause that bonds the black U.S. Attorney with the black criminal or the black doctor with the black homeless person."

No wonder the Obama administration rushed, just a month after taking office, to file a brief effectively on behalf of the city of New Haven, Connecticut, to defend its refusal to promote, on purely racial grounds, white firefighters who had by objective standards earned the higher positions. On the same day, the Holder Justice Department ordered Dayton, Ohio, to hire a specific number of black policemen and firemen-a racial quota, pure and simple. In an Alabama-based case in September, meanwhile, a federal judge ridiculed DOJ's clumsy attempt to dismiss a challenge to the controversial Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act -- which requires certain jurisdictions, and only those jurisdictions, to secure "pre-clearance" from the department for any change in voting procedures, even as small as moving a polling place from a school gym to the same school's cafeteria. Federal district judge John Bates wrote that the Holderites were "unable to articulate any reason" for one of its positions, and that they could "point to no authority" for another contention. He blasted them for "fishing expeditions," and wrote that a conclusion in their favor "would be absurd."

Nothing, though, was more absurd than the Section 5 ruling by Loretta King-one of the chief racialists at DOJ and one of the major crusaders in favor of dropping the Black Panther case -- that a black-majority town in North Carolina would not be allowed to hold nonpartisan municipal elections. Even though the majority of black precincts in this majority-black town wanted no party affiliations on the label, Ms. King decided, in effect, that the black townies in Kinston, N.C., were too stupid to know their own interests. If voters don't know which candidates are Democrats, she ruled, black voters would be unable to elect their "candidates of choice" -- who, by her definition, could only be Democrats.

Sixth Sense: Seeing Dead People…Voting

THE SECOND CHARGE made by Adams, Coates, and others is that DOJ voting rights official Julie Fernandes said in a section-wide meeting that the department would not enforce laws requiring removal of dead people and felons from voting rolls because those laws do nothing to help (Democratic) turnout.

Sure enough, the department dropped a long-running case against Missouri for the state's failure to do just that. Not only that, but Adams-after resigning in protest from DOJ-took private action in September to sue (or threaten suits against) 16 states when DOJ itself would not do its job on this front. Adams explained at Pajamas Media:

South Dakota, Texas, Mississippi, Kentucky and Indiana report in excess of a dozen counties with more registered voters than living people old enough to vote. Having more voters than living humans tells you something is wrong. In West Virginia, one county reported 113% of the voting age population was registered to vote....Ponce de Leon wasted his time looking for the fountain of youth in Florida-he should have gone to Maryland, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Oregon, or Tennessee. These states report that they didn' t remove a single dead voter from 2006 to 2008. Some of the dead registered voters were resurrected on election day and cast ballots.

These are obvious signs of major violations, yet DOJ -- completely in line with the alleged statements from Fernandes -- refused to do its duty to enforce the law.

It also coincides with other indications that DOJ is bizarrely eager to help felons, a notoriously Democratic constituency, vote, while showing an extreme lack of enthusiasm for assuring the votes of military personnel, who, polls show, more often vote for Republicans. As the Washington Times editorialized on July 28 and several times thereafter, the department failed in numerous ways to ensure full implementation of a 2009 law mandating that states mail overseas military ballots at least 45 days before Election Day -- in order to ensure time for delivery both ways, to and from often extremely remote locales.

Eric Eversole, director of the Military Voter Protection Project and a former DOJ Voting Section attorney, warned of the problem in September, telling me: "Some of the attorneys in the section are openly hostile to the military and, at the very least, are unsympathetic to the sacrifices of our service members."

So angry about all this is Republican Sen. John Cornyn of  Texas, the military voting law's co-author, that he called for congressional hearings on the matter, placed a lasting "hold" on the nomination of close Holder friend James Cole to be deputy attorney general, and wrote Holder a scathing September 16 letter that accused Holder and company of "a shameful failure to honor the heroic service of those who defend America."

Indeed, the department failed for more than a year to update its website to reflect the new law protecting military voters -- but it spent what must have been an immense amount of taxpayer-supported staff time building a 2,314-word web page telling felons how to recover their voting privileges. Yet the department enjoys no statutory authority to deal with felon voting at all. Who needs the law when you can bolster the numbers of a key Democratic constituency?

Undermining National Security

OF COURSE, this Justice Department has shown its disdain for military and security considerations in numerous other ways as well. The first came on the Don't Ask/Don't Tell (DADT) rule on homosexuals in the military. Whatever one's views of the wisdom of the policy, it remains the law of the land and DOJ is obliged to defend it. But Edward Whelan of the Ethics and Public Policy Center has written at great length explaining how the Holderites were derelict on this. "It [DOJ] failed to seek Supreme Court review of a rogue Ninth Circuit ruling that subjected DADT to heightened scrutiny," he told me. "And when trial on DADT took place, DOJ called no witnesses and failed to offer any serious defense of DADT. The district judge's ruling against DADT relied heavily on DOJ's failings."

Those failings perhaps pale in comparison to the outright defiance of security concerns with regard to the trials of terrorist detainees. Holder's decidedly premature announcement that the 9/11 conspirators detained in Guantanamo Bay, including the mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, would be tried in New York City has actually slowed the course of justice.

Former terrorist prosecutor Andrew McCarthy quite arguably has been the most eloquent expositor of this thesis. "From a legal standpoint, it makes no sense to try the al Qaeda quintet in civilian court," he wrote in the November 22, 2009, New York Daily News. "Eleven months ago, these men were prepared to plead guilty in their military commission and proceed to execution. Yet the Obama administration pulled the plug on that commission. This was a transparent sop to the left, which wants to judicialize war-fighting and is repulsed by the intelligence-centric, prevention-first counterterrorism strategy that has protected us for eight years from a reprise of the 9/11 atrocities. Now, our enemies will be given a full-blown civilian trial with all the rights of the American citizens they are sworn to kill. They will get a year or more to sift through our national defense secrets."

Title: Ignorant, Unprincipled, or Incompetent? II
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on November 11, 2010, 10:11:16 AM

All of this was made more problematic when the Justice Department was forced, after much stonewalling, to acknowledge just how many of the new Holder team had done legal work for the detainees. At least nine had done so, and at least another five worked for firms that did significant detainee defense work. They include Jennifer Daskal, who was known as a particularly fervid defender of those detainees. They include Eric Columbus, who worked for the detainee in the landmark case of Boumediene v. Bush and who now is senior counsel for the deputy attorney general. This gives him at least some supervisory authority over both the Criminal and National Security divisions at DOJ-the very divisions involved with deciding how to handle the convincingly accused terrorists.

Moreover, as first reported by the Washington Times on November 22, 2009, "Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, No. 3 official in the Justice Department, had to recuse himself on at least 13 active detainee cases and at least 26 cases listed as either closed or mooted," presumably because of his former law firm's efforts on their behalf. To further quote the Washington Times:

The extent of the recusals raises questions about whether the attorney general has enough unbiased advisers around him to have made good judgments about how to try Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other detainees. He certainly did seem terribly ill-informed when asked basic questions at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday about how Miranda rights for detainees would be treated in civil courts and if any enemy combatant from a foreign battlefield had ever been tried in American civil courts. Columnist Charles Krauthammer justly called Mr. Holder's responses "utterly incoherent." If the incoherence stems from an inherent bias among President Obama's appointees at the Justice Department, senators and the American public have the right to know it.

Illegal Alien Nation

MANY PEOPLE SEE illegal immigration as a national security issue, too. As with DADT and with an even worse sabotage of the Defense of Marriage Act by declaring that the act is not "rationally related to any legitimate government interests in procreation and child-rearing," the Obama administration on immigration has gone far beyond its obvious right to pursue its favored policy objectives through the legislative process; instead, it has used the power of the Justice Department to make a mockery of legitimate legislative enactments.

"It is one thing, and totally appropriate, to pick policy priorities that are in line with the administration you serve," said Robert Driscoll, another former DOJ attorney, who has represented famed Maricopa County sheriff Joe Arpaio against Obama administration harassment. "Are particular investigations or prosecutions being undertaken or avoided to advance the president's political allies? Unfortunately, there are too many examples even beyond Black Panthers that raise questions.… All of these cases raise concern that the ‘political' influence at DOJ, which has always been reflected in the priorities and policy choices of any attorney general, has begun to influence the front-line decision-making regarding individual cases and investigations."

So it was that the Holder DOJ has taken the position that (to quote a Washington Times editorial) "Sheriff Arpaio should not set up a phone tip line to search for immigration violators, and he is not allowed to tell the public about federal immigration enforcement policies even if he is merely disputing demonstrable falsehoods told about him; yet the Justice Department can set up an anonymous tip line to gather evidence against the sheriff." Even though a 2008 investigation by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency found that the sheriff and ICE officials had an "excellent" working relationship, DOJ is now suing Arpaio for supposedly discriminating against Hispanic inmates. The DOJ lawsuit looked even more absurd when, in late September, an audit from the U.S. Marshals Service gave Arpaio's treatment of inmates the highest grades possible in every single category-including for prevention of, yes, discrimination against detainees.

So it was that DOJ also has sued Maricopa County Community Colleges for requiring that non-citizens produce "green cards" to prove they are here legally. Since such visiting workers are by law supposed to carry the cards with them at all times anyway, it defies belief to think it's illegal for an employer to ask to see it.

And so it was, most infamously, that DOJ sued the state of Arizona to block its law that merely provides for the state's police officers to apply and enforce already existing federal law. Kris Kobach, yet another former DOJ official, actually drafted the law in question. He argues, quite convincingly, that "lawsuits are being used to stop those who stand in the way of President Obama's political agenda, which is to allow illegal aliens who have not violated other criminal law (other than their immigration crimes) to remain unlawfully present in the United States."

Abuses of Power

WHAT KOBACH DESCRIBES, and what ample evidence attests to, is a serious misuse of power under the false color of law. The New Black Panther case is almost a perfect microcosm of this Holderite habit -- in multiple ways. It featured political interference in a case already won. It featured officials dropping a case without even reading the briefs. The two lawyers acting in political-appointee capacity who were most directly involved in dropping the case have both been sanctioned by courts for ethical breaches. Both have been believably accused, under sworn testimony by a highly respected witness, of consciously refusing to enforce civil rights laws to benefit white people.

The department's press secretary told lies about the case, saying no political appointees were involved even as she e-mailed back and forth with a key political appointee as the case's point person. The department's head gave false testimony under oath at least twice, flagrantly misleadingly telling Congress that the maximum allowable penalty was imposed on the Panthers and falsely telling the U.S. Civil Rights Commission that no political appointees contributed to the decisions. The Holderites stonewalled to the press by denying Freedom of Information Act requests; DOJ claimed "privileges" from disclosing public information without naming some of the privileges and without coming close to justifying others; and DOJ ignored lawful subpoenas by the Civil Rights Commission that by law it was bound to honor. When leading congressmen of impeccable reputation again and again wrote Holder for answers, he arrogantly shunted their letters to underlings to answer -- and the underlings told howling falsehoods in their replies. Worst of all, Holder's team directly and knowingly abused at least two award-winning career DOJ attorneys by transferring one three states away and forcing the other to bear personal legal expenses because the Holderites would neither allow him to respond to a lawful subpoena nor provide legal defense for him to avoid it.

And those are just the highlights, or rather lowlights, of a massive abuse of justice, all on behalf of an otherwise limited-location example of voter intimidation by two convicted violent felons who liked to pose with dangerous weapons and talk hateful, racist tommyrot about "killing crackas" and needing to "kill they babies."

By February 15 of this year, even Martin Peretz, editor in chief of the liberal New Republic and staunch Al Gore supporter, had seen enough of Eric Holder's embarrassing and abusive tenure, for multiple reasons. "Poor Eric Holder," Peretz wrote as the lead sentence of his blog, The Spine, that day. "The fact is that he is none too smart…and none too versed in constitutional issues."

And none too honest, either. But profoundly dangerous to the cause of equal justice.

Quin Hillyer is a senior editorial writer at the Washington Times and senior editor of The American Spectator.

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/11/02/justice-denied

Title: Shell Game
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on November 12, 2010, 10:34:51 AM

The Unresolved House Races, Part Three
By Jim Geraghty
Posted on November 10, 2010 3:11 PM
As optimistic as the Ellmers and Buerkle campaigns seem, the developments described by the campaign of Republican Joe Walsh in Illinois’s 8th district are pretty alarming, as they try to hold on to a lead over incumbent Democrat Melissa Bean.

“We are in the fight of our lives as we count ballots in Cook County,” says Nick Provenzano, the campaign manager for Walsh who is now signing his messages, “Spokesman for Congressman-elect Joe Walsh, Illinois’ 8th District.”

Provenzano offers a description of an exceptionally odd ballot-counting process: “On Election Night, there were six precincts that were still not counted at 1 a.m. We discovered that they had problems in the polling place and were moved to nearby Elgin, Illinois to count the ballots.  At some point in the middle of the night all six precincts – representing thousands of votes — had been moved to Cicero, Illinois for ‘safe keeping’ . . . . We immediately dispatched legal counsel to ensure the chain of custody was not compromised and we have been chasing ballots ever since. On Friday evening, the Bean campaign approached the Cook County Clerk’s Office, requested and received a list of all outstanding absentee ballots with name, address, and phone numbers. As alarming as that was, they also asked for and were provided an exact image of a blank absentee ballot.”

“Identifying potential mischief, the Illinois GOP dispatched volunteers to track down these voters to ensure no foul play was occurring with these outstanding ballots,” Provenzano continues. “What they found was alarming. They documented their findings on affidavits and they were submitted to law enforcement for review.”

The affidavits describe one voter who had not lived at the listed address in the past 15 years; a voter who a caregiver said “could not respond to questions because of dementia,” and a group of ballots sent to a Clearbrook home for the mentally disabled in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.

“We continue to have a lead over Rep. Bean as the Cook County absentee ballots continue to trickle in,” Provenzano says. “The deadline/postmark date for ballots to be valid was November 1st. Therefore, it would be alarming to have large amounts of ballots arrive in the mail over the next few days.  How long should it take the U.S. Postal Service to deliver a ballot from suburban Schaumburg to Chicago? It has been nine days since the deadline has come and gone.  If large amounts of ballots do arrive nine days later, we’ll let you know and together we can alert America to what is happening here in Cook County.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/253015/unresolved-house-races-part-three

Title: WSJ: CA's AG race
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2010, 09:42:16 AM

By JOHN FUND
The race to determine who will be the attorney general of California is still too close to call. Democrat Kamala Harris, San Francisco's district attorney, leads Republican Steve Cooley, the DA for Los Angeles County, by 31,000 votes out of nearly nine million cast. And there are more than 750,000 ballots left to count.

The tabulation process has led to a full-fledged food fight between the candidates and has roped in Dean Logan, the controversial voter registrar of Los Angeles County. Ms. Harris claims that Cooley officials have crowded election workers "and aggressively attempt(ed) to have ballots disqualified" in Los Angeles County. Cooley aides counter that election workers in Los Angeles are being far too sloppy in comparing signatures on provisional ballots with voter registration cards on file for that person. They allege that in some instances no comparison is being made.

Attorneys for Mr. Cooley also complain that county workers are contacting voters by phone to fill out incomplete voter registration forms in order that their provisional ballots can be made legal, a step that's not part of the county's written procedures for counting ballots. They also claim that Mr. Logan's staff has held private meetings with Harris representatives and given them access to rejected provisional ballots.

Mr. Logan rejects all of the allegations. "I don't believe there's been anything raised at this point that is a significant concern," he told the Los Angeles Times. But Mr. Logan made similar soothing statements in 2004 when he presided over one of the great meltdowns of U.S. elections during his previous tenure as elections chief of King County, Washington, which includes Seattle. The Washington governor's race that year entered the ranks of electoral infamy when Democrat Christine Gregoire was declared the winner over Republican Dino Rossi by 132 votes out of 2.7 million cast after three recounts.

The mess in those recounts made the Florida 2000 battle look orderly. In King County alone, there were more than 3,500 unaccounted-for ballots or voters. Some precincts had more ballots than voters, for a total of 2,900 extra ballots. Other precincts have more voters than ballots, for a total of 800 extra voters.

Other irregularities abounded. The Seattle Times reported that 129 felons illegally voted in King and Pierce counties. Some 55,000 optical-scan ballots (on which the voter marks a bubble) in King County were "enhanced" so that the voters' supposed intent could be determined, with no uniform standard governing the process. And in an eerie parallel to Mr. Cooley's complaints in the AG race in California, National Review noted that at least 348 provisional King County ballots — which were supposed to be closely inspected to see if they were legitimate — were directly fed into machines and counted. Bob Williams of Washington state's Evergreen Freedom Foundation concluded that Mr. Logan was guilty of "practiced incompetence" in his unwillingness to follow proper recount procedures.

In July, 2005 the King County Independent Task Force on Elections, a body set up to probe the county's vote-counting problems, concluded that Mr. Logan was "ill equipped" to make the changes needed to restore public trust and confidence in elections. A year later, Mr. Logan quietly resigned to take his new job in Los Angeles County.

Mr. Logan's track record should raise concerns that proper procedures for vote counting are once again not being fully followed in California's AG race. If prompt action to ensure the integrity of the election process isn't taken now, we may see calls for Los Angeles County to appoint its own task force to investigate Mr. Logan's "practiced incompetence."

Title: US Dept. of SOCIAL Justice and Reparations
Post by: G M on December 02, 2010, 01:07:32 PM

http://biggovernment.com/jcadams/2010/12/02/pigford-and-new-black-panthers-friends-at-doj/

Pigford and New Black Panthers: Friends at DOJ
by J. Christian Adams

At the Justice Department, one man has played a central role in two of the most controversial racialist policies of the Obama Administration – Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli.  This bundler of huge campaign contributions for the Obama Campaign is now the second highest ranking Presidential appointee at the Justice Department.  Perrelli is best known for his central role in dismissing the slam dunk voter intimidation case brought and dropped against the New Black Panther Party.  But the leftist Perrelli has outdone himself.

This week, the House passed a $4.6 billion payout to American Indians and black farmers as part of a settlement of alleged race discrimination claims.  BigGovernment.com has reported extensively, on the “Pigford II” settlement and how it promotes fraud.  Worse than fraud, it represents a race-driven political payoff by the Obama Administration to a favored political constituency.

Nothing happens in Washington like the Pigford settlement without the Justice Department.  The DOJ, acting as the nation’s law firm, was intimately involved in piloting the Pigford settlement through Congress and reaching similar settlements with other identity politics plaintiffs.  Perrelli ran the show at Justice in all of these efforts.

In fact, a large portion of  the settlement windfall escapes Congressional approval entirely because Perreilli’s shop at DOJ also approved a similar but separate settlement with Hispanic farmers. Instead of a Congressional appropriation, Hispanic farmers will be paid out of an existing “judgment fund.”

Like the black farmers, Hispanic farmers made claims of racial discrimination in the administration of Agriculture Department loans.  But Hispanic farmers added noisy street protests outside of the Justice Department’s headquarters.  No wonder Perrelli’s DOJ made a settlement offer of $1.3 billion in this lawsuit.  And over $680 million will flow to Indian claimants as part of the Perrelli approved “Keepseagle” lawsuit settlement.

Billions of taxpayer dollars will now flow to black, Hispanic, women and Indian farmers, or those who thought about farming.  In the administration of the original Pigford settlement in the 1990’s, even city dwellers who never farmed received payouts.  After all, the “discriminatory” policies discouraged them from becoming farmers.

The Justice Department usually plays hardball when it comes to monetary settlements.  In fact, the DOJ lawyers, including Perrelli, have an ethical obligation to protect the interests of the United States.  But like the New Black Panther dismissal, none of old rules apply anymore.

Change means change.

Perrelli became the administration cheerleader for a colossal payout to the Hispanic, Indian and black farmer claimants.  And just like the Pigford and Keepseagle claimants, the New Black Panthers seemed to have friends in high places inside Justice.

Perrelli played the central role in rushing a resolution to these claims before the Republicans took control of the purse strings in January.  Instead of fighting hard to limit the exposure of the United States, the claimants had a fellow traveler on the opposite side of the negotiating table.

Similarly, Perrelli was behind the dismissal of the already won DOJ case against the New Black Panthers who organized and ran an armed voter intimidation effort the day Obama was elected. Justice officials acted as advocates for the New Black Panthers more than they sought to protect the ballot box from armed thugs.

Did Perrelli’s zeal to have the case dismissed have anything to do with the New Black Panther’s endorsement of candidate Obama during the primaries?

Judicial Watch sued the DOJ under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain Black Panther documents.  They uncovered stacks of emails between Perrelli and his top political lieutenants supervising the lawsuit.  They reveal Justice Department political appointees, including Perrelli, intimately involved behind the scenes in driving the dismissal.

Of course the documents contradict testimony given under oath over and over again to Congress and the Civil Rights Commission that only career civil servants were involved in the dismissal.  This accuracy-challenged testimony came from both Attorney General Eric Holder and Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez.

Perrelli was the Justice official most responsible for the sketchy windfall settlements to black, Indian and Hispanic farmers.   Instead of protecting the interests of the United States, he helped line the pockets of the President’s closest political allies.  This is hardly surprising to anyone who followed Perrelli’s central role in ensuring that the New Black Panthers escaped sanctions for armed voter intimidation.  You can’t beat having friends in high places.

Title: Eric Holder: Black Panther case focus demeans 'my people'
Post by: G M on March 02, 2011, 05:39:32 AM

http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/0311/Eric_Holder_Black_Panther_case_focus_demeans_my_people.html

Eric Holder: Black Panther case focus demeans 'my people'

Attorney General Eric Holder finally got fed up Tuesday with claims that the Justice Department went easy in a voting rights case against members of the New Black Panther Party because they are African American.

Holder's frustration over the criticism became evident during a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing as Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) accused the Justice Department of failing to cooperate with a Civil Rights Commission investigation into the handling of the 2008 incident in which Black Panthers in intimidating outfits and wielding a club stood outside a polling place in Philadelphia.

The Attorney General seemed to take personal offense at a comment Culberson read in which former Democratic activist Bartle Bull called the incident the most serious act of voter intimidation he had witnessed in his career.

"Think about that," Holder said. "When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, to compare what people subjected to that with what happened in Philadelphia, which was inappropriate....to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line for my people," said Holder, who is black.

Holder noted that his late sister-in-law, Vivian Malone Jones, helped integrate the University of Alabama.

"To compare that kind of courage, that kind of action, to say some Black Panther incident is of greater concern to us, historically, I think just flies in the face of history," Holder said with evident exasperation.

In a series of questions and comments earlier in the hearing, Culberson insisted that race had infected the decision-making process. "There’s clearly overwhelming evidence that your Department of Justice refuses to protect the rights of anybody other than African-Americans to vote," the Texas Republican said. "There's a double standard here."

Title: Re: The electoral process, corruption etc. Energy Lobbying
Post by: DougMacG on March 14, 2011, 08:35:32 AM

This might as well go under corruption since that is what is implied when we chart lobbying dollars against subsidies won.

a) Oil drilling is banned nearly everywhere in and around this country while we drive, fly and transport products everyday.  It isn't necessarily a special favor sought to petition the government for the right to ask nicely for their industry to be legalized or to argue against banning it.  If congress has the power to close your business, it seems you might have some right to ask them not to.  The less cynical view is that these policies we make are based on the political views of the elected officials and the electorate more than from comparing piles of lobby dollars, but who knows..  My bias is toward legalizing production until we are ready to prohibit consumption.

b) Much of what were described as subsidies to the oil industry were in fact rules that allowed monies disbursed (sometimes called business expenses) to be counted against monies taken in to calculate taxable income.  There are technical accounting issues at stake here that could easily be settled with a simpler tax code for all companies.  Every company and industry fights to sort out what needs to be expensed over its useful life and what is expensed as it is incurred and paid.  Considering congress' and the administration's willingness to shut down any and all energy production at any time and with every news story, I would think any assumption that an investment has a productive life beyond the current fiscal year is fatally flawed.  My leaning is toward equal protection under the law, a bizarre concept that, if tried, would drastically reduce special interest lobbying of all types.

c) The slanted journalistic conclusion that oil companies pay low taxes always seems to ignore that we excise the f*ck out of their product at the pump.  This is money the consumer is willing to pay that the producer does not receive, in what way is that not a tax on the oil and gas industry?  The idea that it goes directly and exclusively to roads used begins to remind me of the social security lockbox.  In years where where anti-energy interest groups allege an oil company has paid absolutely no tax, they always ignore the plethora of other taxes, excise taxes, property taxes, state taxes, employment taxes etc.etc.  Just the need to lobby is a tax on the system IMO.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on March 14, 2011, 08:47:08 AM

Businesses do not pay taxes, no matter how hard the politicians might try. Consumers pay the taxes on the businesses imposed by politicians.


"Sock it to the eeeeeevil oil companies! Hey, why is gas so expensive???"

Title: Who's up for sabotaging the economy?
Post by: G M on March 22, 2011, 10:39:01 AM

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/03/22/former-seiu-official-demanded-action-to-destabilize-banking-system-overthrow-capital/

Former SEIU official demanded action to destabilize banking system, overthrow capitalism

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 07, 2011, 01:32:10 PM

Pasting this here from the Union thread.  Lets use this thread for discussing Wisconsin election.

On Fox it is pointed out that in Wisconsin one of six states to allow voter registration the same day as election day.  You needn't show valid ID.  A "neighbor" can simply act as a witness vouching for you.  We will not hear a peep from Jimmy Carter who flies around the world pretending he is watching for voter fraud. 

***Officials throughout Wisconsin were conducting their county canvasses on Thursday, the final review of voting records that will allow the state to certify this week's closely watched elections.

But the certification, which could come Thursday, is unlikely to bring closure in the passionately fought contest for a seat on the state Supreme Court, where union-backed challenger JoAnne Kloppenburg leads over incumbent David Prosser by just 204 votes and a recount is virtually inevitable.

It would be the first statewide recount in Wisconsin in more than 20 years and could begin next week if Prosser, a former Republican member of the assembly, requests it.

To help officials prepare for it, the state's Government Accountability Board sent out a memo on Wednesday to county clerks and members of Milwaukee's county election commission.

The memo stressed that local officials needed to "maintain all memory device and programing for the April 5, 2011 Spring Election in its original form. Please do not erase and transfer memory devices."

"We are in unprecedented times in many respects," the memo read, "but particularly with regard to a potential statewide recount, which has not occurred since 1989 ... A thorough completion of the County Board of Canvass at this time may reconcile inconsistencies and issues that will likely save you time and effort in the pending recount process."

With 100 percent of the state's precincts reporting, and all absentee, provisional and write-in votes tallied, Kloppenburg, an assistant state attorney specializing in environmental affairs, had edged out Prosser 740,090 votes to 739,886, according to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel newspaper and WTMJ-TV.

Kloppenburg insisted throughout the race that she would be an impartial and independent judge if elected to the high court.

But the contest was widely seen as a referendum on Republican Governor Scott Walker and controversial curbs on collective bargaining he and his GOP allies in the legislature recently passed.

Because Prosser is a Republican who had expressed support for Walker last fall, opponents of the anti-union measure characterized him as a proxy for the governor and his anti-union policies, which have triggered massive protests here and 16 recall campaigns targeting lawmakers who supported and opposed the measure.

Under Wisconsin law, for a recount to take place Prosser would have to request it, which he is expected to do.

The costs of a recount are covered by the state if the vote difference is less than one half of 1 percent. The results from the Kloppenburg-Prosser contest fall well within that range.

(Reporting by James B. Kelleher)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on April 08, 2011, 02:22:14 PM

Well it seemed the crats were ahead by 200.  Obviously they were preparing to gather thousands of fradualant union workers to show up register and vote the same day.
Who would not think they wouldn't go busing in people from out of state for this purpose?

I wonder if the Repubs held back these votes 7,500 till the last minute in order to prevent Crat fraud - rushing to bring in phoney voters at the last minute to overcome the vote deficit.  Just a thought.

In any case the election results are great news.  The demagogues at MSLSD last night were less than smiling all night and ignored this story and clogged the station with ranting about Glenn Beck instead.

Let's hope this is only the first success in a long line of reversals culminating on taking back the Senate and White House.



 
Was the Wisconsin Supreme Court election really 'stolen'?
ShareretweetEmailPrint– Fri Apr 8, 11:04 am ET
New York – Democrats cry foul after the discovery of 14,000 misplaced ballots hands near-certain victory to Republican David Prosser

The Democratic battle to elect a liberal judge who could help strike down Gov. Scott Walker's anti-union law in Wisconsin's Supreme Court has been dealt a serious blow after a batch of misplaced votes handed almost certain victory to the Republican candidate. The election between Republican Justice David Prosser and his Democratic challenger, JoAnne Kloppenburg, failed to produce a clear winner on Tuesday, but a Republican county clerk admitted Thursday night that she'd overlooked 14,000 votes in her district. While the "lost" votes give Prosser a 7,582-vote lead over Kloppenburg, the incident has triggered suspicions of electoral fraud, even though county Democrats affirmed the votes' veracity. Was the Wisconsin election stolen?

Yes. The GOP rigged this election: It's no coincidence that this "clerical error" gave Prosser almost the exact number of votes that he needed to avoid a state-funded recount, says Cieran at The Daily Kos. The Wisconsin GOP obviously figured they'd "add a few extra votes in a friendly area," and "steal the election." This "attempted fraud" must not be allowed to stand. A recount would reveal their shady tactics.
"Why Prosser needed EXACTLY +7500 votes"

Democrats are just being sore losers: This "conspiracy theory" doesn't hold much water, says William A. Jacobson at Legal Insurrection. The vote canvassing isn't finished, so the "spread could change" yet. If the GOP was really "targeting the precise number needed" to nix a recount, the plan "unfolded way too early." You can't blame the Dems for trying, though. "If a Democratic clerk found 7,500 votes for Kloppenburg, we'd be screaming bloody murder." 
"They have not thought through the conspiracy theory"

The clerk did act suspiciously, though: Kathy Nickolaus, the county clerk in question, has a "history of secretive and erratic handling" of results, says John Nichols at The Nation. She was responsible for skewed results in a 2006 Assembly race, and tallies votes on her home computer. What's more, she "apparently knew of this 'mistake' for 29 hours before reporting it." Who needs a conspiracy theory? "The facts raise the questions."
"GOP clerk 'finds' votes to reverse defeat of conservative Wisconsin justice"

Well, this kind of mistake is not unprecedented: So Nickolaus apparently "has some history of human error when it comes to managing vote databases," says John Hayward at Human Events. That doesn't mean she's a "vote-manufacturing tool of the Koch brothers." Given the "primitive voting system" used in Wisconsin, we shouldn't really be surprised. This error should be recognized for what it was: a simple mistake. 
"Wisconsin fallout"

View this article on TheWeek.com
Get 4 Free Issues of The Week

Other stories from this topic:

Twitter Take: The latest tweets on the 'Wisconsin protests'
Opinion Brief: Wisconsin teachers in revolt: Who will win the budget showdown?
Opinion Brief: Wisconsin's no-show Democrats: Courageous or cowardly?
Like on Facebook - Follow on Twitter - Sign-up for Daily Newsletter


Follow Yahoo! News on Twitter, become a fan on FacebookShareretweetEmailPrintExplore Related ContentGo to page 1Go to page 2Go to page 3Previous PageNext Page Article: Wis. court challenger raising recount dollars … Republican Justice AP . Play Video  Video: Prosser Addresses Supporters … David Prosser In Wisconsin Supreme Court …
- Wisconsin's election for a state Supreme Court seat is headed for a recount, with a … Full Story The Christian Science Monitor
 
Photo: Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate JoAnne … Wisconsin Supreme Court ProtectOurElections.org Calls for …
- WASHINGTON, April 8, 2011 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- In a stunning development … Full Story PR Newswire

Photo: Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate JoAnne … Wisconsin Supreme Court . Play Video Video: Tales of survival in devastated Japan … recount . Play Video Video: Kloppenburg Comments On Attack Ads … David Prosser Photo: Sue Gatterman, seated second from left, … Wisconsin Supreme Court Man who threatened lawmaker headed …
- A Pennsylvania man who pleaded guilty to threatening the No. 2 Republican in … Full Story Reuters
Democrat Has Tiny Lead in Symbolic …
- JoAnne Kloppenburg has a tiny lead of 204 votes over David Prosser in the … Full Story The Atlantic Wire
. Play Video Video: Prosser Says He's 'Independent, Unpredictable' … David Prosser
Editor's PicksMore Slideshows »

Warnings in stone
Rare World War II German bomber found intact
Landmine awareness
Bring your granny to work day
More on Politics - Opinion
How Donald Trump Has the Edge Over Other GOP Presidential Candidates ContributorNetwork Strong Reasons Why Donald Trump May Be the 45th President of the United States ContributorNetwork Politicians' Quotes on Budget Debate Focus on Bickering, Ideology, and Gamesmanship ContributorNetwork More »
 More...
Opinion Video: Grapevine: Obama's Friend Arrested FOX News Opinion Video: Pinheads on Parade FOX News Opinion Video: Uncut: Jon Kyl 'On the Record' FOX News
14 CommentsShow:  Newest FirstOldest FirstHighest RatedMost Replied    Post a Comment Comments 1 - 10 of 14FirstPrevNextLast3 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this commentRWolf 1 hour ago Report Abuse We need a whistle blowers reward for voter fraud. A significant reward tied to automatic jail time for the person or persons committing the fraud. They get jail time you get reward.
I know it must take a special low life type person to do it, but as far as I am concerned people who use the mentally disabled to cast votes are committing voter fraud and should receive at least 6 months in jail and loose voting privileges for life. I don’t care what party they are with.
Replies (2)
1 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 0 users disliked this commentMike 24 minutes ago Report Abuse i wonder why no one cared when this happened with al franken?
Reply
2 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 1 users disliked this commentRobertM 45 minutes ago Report Abuse U.S. Justice Department needs to get involved. Perhaps Wisconsin also needs international election observers to determine whether or not future elections are fair, just like other 3rd world countries.
Reply
3 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 2 users disliked this commentdocmellow 49 minutes ago Report Abuse Ah. Poor democrats. They weren't smart enough in Wisconsin to steal the election like they did with Al Franken and all the suddenly found votes there that put him into office. Now the democrats are having it done to them and they don't like it. Boo Hoo for them.

What goes around comes around.
Reply
2 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 2 users disliked this commentSoothsayer 56 minutes ago Report Abuse The short answer is yes...is was NEARLY stolen before they found the missing votes. This kind of crap is ops normal for Democrats. Only surprise is that it didn't work.
Reply
5 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 5 users disliked this commentRWolf 1 hour ago Report Abuse Most likely the unions ran in several thousand from out of state anyway.
According to the news the Wis. Voting rules are pretty loose and with the unions that’s an open invitation. Acorn would be proud of them.
No telling how many people with Alzheimer’s cast votes for the Dem’s.
Reply
1 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 1 users disliked this commentderekk 1 hour ago Report Abuse it was stolen before they found the hidden votes.
Reply
5 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 6 users disliked this commentDanny 1 hour ago Report Abuse Aw, poor Wisconsin democraps. To bad they didn't have Acorn there signing up tombstone names like they did for Obama! Luckily for the Republicans, illegal immigrant voters are still to small a population to help the democraps steal elections! Hey democraps, quit screaming thief and look in the mirror for the real crooks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
4 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 6 users disliked this commentmredder4 1 hour ago Report Abuse It stinks to high heaven, and when something stinks, you get rid of it. Wisconsin voters will now need to look ahead to the next election that will allow them to address their issues with the GOP liars in office there. Rest assured, even if the results stand, this will only motivate Democrats further for 2012 when the broader electorate comes back to the polls and people are made aware of just how the GOP is running Wisconsin, through trickery and fraud.
Replies (1)
4 users liked this comment Please sign in to rate this comment up. Please sign in to rate this comment down. 6 users disliked this commentcaldude1010101 1 hour ago Report Abuse It sure looks very suspicious and I'm not surprised the Dems are crying foul.

In CA, you have to sign a ledger before you vote stating that you are the person who resides at the specified address. Not sure if that applies in Wisconsin or not.

If so, match the number of signatures with the number of votes. If they equal, then there is no controversy.

If they don't equal, then every vote cast in that county should be thrown out.
Replies (1)
Comments 1 - 10 of 14FirstPrevNextLast
Post a Comment
Sign in to post a comment, or Sign up for a free account.
Most Viewed - Opinion
Have we outsourced sexual harassment? The Christian Science Monitor Glenn Beck’s Own End Times Foretold The Nation Bachmann and Palin: Rivals or allies? The Week THANKS FOR RAISING MY TAXES -- WHAT ELSE CAN I DO FOR YOU? Ann Coulter Would a government shutdown derail the economic recovery? The Week All Most Viewed »
 Daily Features
 
All Comics »
 Opinions & Editorials: Diverse views on news from the right, left, and center.
All Opinion »
 Elsewhere on the Web
The Christian Science Monitor: US human rights report looks at China with concern The Christian Science Monitor: Natalie Portman is a warrior in 'Your Highness': movie review ABC News: Teen Killed on Highway Named After Father Subcategory Headline List
The Week
Showtime's 'Gigolos' reality series: Guilty pleasure or primetime porn? at The Week – 36 mins agoThe brightest space explosion in history at The Week – 59 mins agoDoes pollution cause brain damage? at The Week – 1 hr 14 mins agoWhy isn't it cheaper to raise kids? at The Week – 1 hr 35 mins ago More The Week »
 Sponsored Links
Compare Chevy Camaro
 Explore the Amazing 2011 Chevrolet Camaro. Get Details and Specs Now.
www.Chevrolet.com/Camaro
 
Mustang Accessories
 Save on Interior, Exterior Styling, Apparel & More - Free Shipping.
www.AmericanMuscle.com
 
Do NOT Buy Car Insurance!
 1 Trick your Auto Insurer hides from you for extremely cheap rates.
www.LifestyleJournal.com
 
Yahoo! News on Facebook
Featured
Glenn Beck lost it
Opinion: Beck's broadcasts perfectly rode wave of fear.
» More from Washington PostCivil War myths
Fact Check: Why the South seceded from the Union.
» More from Washington PostThe Ticket
A Yahoo! News blog obsessively devoted to politics.Lawmakers' looming ordeal
The Capitol Hill shutdown slumber party.
» More from The Daily BeastCharlie's angels
Why are women supporting Charlie Sheen?
» More from ABC NewsEducationYahoo
Jobs for People Who Hate PeopleDon't like working with others? That's no problem in these 7 jobs.
Change Careers to Get HappierHate your job? See how you can make the career change you crave.Yahoo! News Navigation
Home U.S. Business World Entertainment Sports Tech Politics Science Health Travel Most Popular Odd News Opinion
Yahoo! News NetworkRSS News Alerts Weather Alerts Site Map Help Feedback Copyright © 2011 The Week

Copyright © 2011 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.Questions or CommentsPrivacy PolicyAbout Our AdsTerms of ServiceCopyright/IP Policy
 

Title: WSJ: WI election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 10, 2011, 07:13:53 AM

Democracy can be a messy business, but it shouldn't be as big a mess at it's been this week in Wisconsin. A nail-biter of a state supreme court election turned into a political uproar on Thursday with the discovery of 14,000 previously overlooked votes in conservative-leaning Waukesha County. The new totals gave incumbent Justice David Prosser a lead of some 7,500 votes over challenger and union favorite JoAnne Kloppenburg and guaranteed weeks if not months of more political heartburn.

Democrats pounced on the new totals, claiming the error must be evidence of partisanship, and state assembly minority leader Peter Barca suggested that Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus's long-time Republican affiliation made the incident "troubling." He's right on competence grounds, though perhaps not on the partisanship. One of Ms. Nickolaus's Democratic colleague attests that overlooking all of the votes in Brookfield, a Milwaukee suburb, was a computer mistake, not a fraud, and that the vote count is accurate.

We're glad to hear it, but the sudden appearance of thousands of missing votes takes place in a hyperpartisan environment with mistrust already high. Before the disappearing ballots were discovered, Ms. Kloppenburg had made a speech declaring victory. Wisconsin voters will rightly wonder how someone could overlook all of the votes in a major suburb.

Democracy requires trust to work, and GOP Governor Scott Walker would be wise to call for an independent review of what happened, as well as hearings on the state's election system. Wisconsin's same-day registration laws have already created a low bar for voter identification that increases the opportunity for fraud. The vote counting technology and process also need an upgrade.

Some will say that county clerks who supervise elections should be nonpartisan, but the lack of labels can merely disguise partisanship. Some on the right and left will say judges shouldn't have to endure elections, but the problem here wasn't who was on the ballot but how the ballots were counted. Retention elections are one way voters can keep the judiciary accountable. If judges want to avoid elections, then they should accept term limits.

Mr. Walker has become union enemy number one after his reforms to government collective bargaining, though Mr. Prosser's apparent victory shows the argument is far from settled. The Governor can now use the Waukesha blunder as an opportunity to work in a bipartisan way to restore public trust in elections.

Title: Add your Name to the Incumbent's Enemies List
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on April 22, 2011, 02:59:42 PM

New Evidence on the Costs of Mandating Disclosure

Posted by John Samples

Over the next few years, most arguments about campaign finance regulation will be about extending mandated disclosure to some of the independent spending freed up by the Citizens United decision.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, James L. Huffman offers a unique perspective on mandated disclosure: he was a candidate for the U.S. Senate last year. He argues that mandated disclosure means incumbents know who funded the campaigns of their challengers.  Incumbents do not have to actually threaten anyone; disclosure plus circumstances means a cautious businessperson will stay clear of electoral participation. Huffman also claims that some people who might have contributed to his campaign heard from associates of his opponent who said contributing to Huffman might be a bad idea.

We have heard such testimony before about the malign effects of disclosure. George Soros said some potential contributors to his efforts to unseat former President George W. Bush stayed on the sidelines because of concerns about publicity (see James V. Grimaldi and Thomas B. Edsall, “Super Rich Step Into Political Vacuum; McCain-Feingold Paved Way for 527s” The Washington Post, October 17, 2004).  Now we have a Senate candidate citing “dozens” of examples of a similar chilling of political speech.

Some might think incumbent protection is no longer a problem since 69 House seats changed hands in 2010 (and a similar number in the two previous House elections). If you think that, please recall that the House has 435 seats, all of which could potentially change hands. Yes, the advantages of incumbency have become somewhat smaller in recent years. But those advantages remain significant, and disclosure does increase the risk of contributing to a challenger, especially when the odds are overwhelming that those now in office will win re-election.

What should be done? Huffman notes that many Americans consider mandated disclosure to be all benefits and no costs. We might begin by gaining a more realistic view of the disclosure calculus. That more realistic view should include the costs of disclosure including lower participation and the ways mandated disclosure make public debates more irrational. At a minimum, existing disclosure thresholds should be dramatically raised. Forcing disclosure of the names of those who contribute less than $1,000 serves no public purpose.

We also should not mandate disclosure of the names of those who support speech independently of candidates and the parties. The only justification for such a mandate would be educating the voters. In other words, voters are thought to look for cues about who to vote for by considering who spends money on speech favoring a candidate. Does that seem plausible? If not, forced disclosure of independent spenders would not be constitutional. If Congress nonetheless enacts disclosure for independent spending, the U.S. Supreme Court should rigorously consider both the end served by such laws and the relationship between the means of disclosure to that end. Does disclosure of independent spending really educate any voters? If so, what about the costs to free speech identified by Professor Huffman? Once we set aside conventional pieties, does forcing people to tell government officials about their political activities really offer much to nation? Or does such coercion do little more than indulge those who equate politics with the pleasures of preaching hatred of those they despise?

Last year I wrote a Cato policy analysis of the justifications for disclosure after Citizens United.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/new-evidence-on-the-costs-of-mandating-disclosure/

Title: Voter ID
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2011, 05:40:32 AM

On Thursday, the Wisconsin legislature sent a bill requiring photographic identification for voting to Gov. Scott Walker's desk. This follows the enactment of an even stricter law in Kansas a few weeks ago.

Drafted by my office, Kansas's Secure and Fair Elections Act combined three elements: (1) a requirement that voters present photo IDs when they vote in person; (2) a requirement that absentee voters present a full driver's license number and have their signatures verified; and (3) a proof of citizenship requirement for all newly registered voters. Although a few states, including Georgia, Indiana and Arizona, have enacted one or two of these reforms, Kansas is the only state to enact all three.

Other states are moving in the same direction. The Texas legislature sent a photo-ID bill to Gov. Rick Perry's desk last Monday. And next year Missouri voters will get a chance to vote on a photo-ID requirement.

Immediately after the Kansas law was signed in April, critics cried foul. They argued that voter fraud isn't significant enough to warrant such steps, that large numbers of Americans don't possess photo IDs, and that such laws will depress turnout among the poor and among minorities. They are wrong on all three counts.

Voter fraud is a well-documented reality in American elections. To offer a few examples, a 2010 state representative race in Kansas City, Mo. was stolen when one candidate, J.J. Rizzo, allegedly received more than 50 votes illegally cast by citizens of Somalia. The Somalis, who didn't speak English, were coached to vote for Mr. Rizzo by an interpreter at the polling place. The margin of victory? One vote.

In Kansas, 221 incidents of voter fraud were reported between 1997 and 2010. The crimes included absentee-ballot fraud, impersonation of another voter, and a host of other violations. Because voter fraud is extremely difficult to detect and is usually not reported, the cases that we know about likely represent a small fraction of the total.

My office already has found 67 aliens illegally registered to vote in Kansas, but when the total number is calculated, it will likely be in the hundreds. In Colorado, the Secretary of State's office recently identified 11,805 aliens illegally registered to vote in the state, of whom 4,947 cast a ballot in the 2010 elections.

View Full Image

Ocean/Corbis
 .Evidence of voter fraud is present in all 50 states, and public confidence in the integrity of elections is at an all-time low. In the Cooperative Congressional Election Study of 2008, 62% of American voters thought that voter fraud was very common or somewhat common.

Fear that elections are being stolen erodes the legitimacy of our government. That's why the vast majority of Americans support laws like Kansas's Secure and Fair Elections Act. A 2010 Rasmussen poll showed that 82% of Americans support photo ID laws. Similarly, a 2011 Survey USA poll of Kansas voters showed that 83% support proof-of-citizenship requirements for voter registration.

Critics of these laws nevertheless make outrageous arguments against them. New York University's Brennan Center, which stridently opposes all photo ID laws, claims that a whopping 11% of the American voting-age public—that means tens of millions of people—don't possess a photo ID. It bases this number on a survey it conducted in 2006.

However, we don't have to rely on implausible estimates when the actual numbers are readily available. In Kansas, my office obtained the statistics, and they tell a very different story. According to the 2010 census, there are 2,126,179 Kansans of voting age. According to the Kansas Department of Motor Vehicles, 2,156,446 Kansans already have a driver's license or a non-driver ID. In other words, there are more photo IDs in circulation than there are eligible voters. The notion that there are hundreds of thousands of voters in Kansas (or any other state) without photo IDs is a myth.

Carrying a photo ID has become a part of American life. You can't cash a check, board a plane, or even buy full-strength Sudafed over the counter without one. That's why it's not unreasonable to require one in order to protect our most important privilege of citizenship. But just in case any person lacks a photo ID, Kansas's law provides a free state ID to anyone who needs one. Other states have included similar provisions in their photo-ID laws.

Some opponents of election security laws also declare that they are part of a sinister plot to depress voter registration and turnout, especially among minority voters who are more likely to vote Democrat. Here too the facts do not support the claim. Georgia's photo ID requirement was in place for both the 2008 and 2010 elections, when turnout among minority voters was higher than average. Likewise, Arizona's proof-of-citizenship requirement for registration has not impeded minority voters from registering.

If election security laws really were part of a Republican scheme to suppress Democratic votes, one would expect Democrats to fight such laws, tooth and nail. That didn't happen in Kansas, where two-thirds of the Democrats in the House and three-fourths of the Democrats in the Senate voted in favor of the Secure and Fair Elections Act. They did so because they realize that fair elections protect every voter and every party equally.

No candidate, Republican or Democrat, wants to emerge from an election with voters suspecting that he didn't really win. Election security measures like the one in my state give confidence to voters and candidates alike that the system is fair.

Mr. Kobach is the Kansas secretary of state. He is also the co-author of Arizona's SB 1070 illegal immigration law and former Counsel to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on May 23, 2011, 05:48:18 AM

Funny how the left has no problem requiring ID for firearms purchases and state run healthcare that will require some sort of ID, but not voting.....

Gee, if I didn't know better, I'd think they were for voter fraud.  :roll:

Title: Samuel Adams 1781
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 25, 2011, 06:21:28 AM

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual - or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country." --Samuel Adams, in the Boston Gazette, 1781

Title: The electoral process, vote fraud: MN Voter ID Bill with 80% Support Vetoed
Post by: DougMacG on May 27, 2011, 08:57:43 AM

I would like to put this under progressivism but we already have a category for voter fraud.  Voter ID is a very important issue here brought to light in the Al Franken recount because it is illegal in a recount not to count again all the illegal votes that were cast.  As I wrote in my first post in this thread, when ACORN block workers tried to drag me in against my will to vote in South Minneapolis where I did not live, they had people on the block already setup to vouch for me.  No identification, pre-registration or anything else is required. Unlike the questioning techniques used by Israeli El Al airlines, MN election judges use an on-site registration scrutiny technique called Minnesota-nice.   Ballots are available in English, Hmong, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Vietnamese, and people who will vouch for you are standing by.
----------
New MN Governor vetoes Voter ID bill.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/05/029110.php
John Hinderacker at Powerline:

In 2010, control over Minnesota's government flipped: Republicans captured both the Minnesota House and Senate, while Democrat Mark Dayton replaced Tim Pawlenty as governor. The Republican legislature passed legislation to reform the state's voting system, in part by requiring photo identification. The law provided for issuance of free voter IDs to any legitimate voters who, for whatever reason, have no driver's license or other form of identification. Minnesotans, aware that voter fraud has likely played a key role in recent elections, overwhelmingly support the law: the Star Tribune's Minnesota Poll, which routinely tilts left, found 80 percent support.

Nevertheless, Governor Mark Dayton vetoed the bill yesterday. That a Democratic governor is willing to fly in the face of overwhelming public opinion, even as he is fighting a budget battle with the legislature that likely will lead to a slowdown in state government, says volumes about where the Democratic Party stands on the issue of voter fraud.

In 2008, Minnesota Republicans were traumatized by the Coleman-Franken race, which Al Franken eventually won by a few hundred votes. National attention focused on the recount, which was scrupulously fair. The problem was that, as with any recount, all you can do is count for a second time the votes that were cast illegally on election day. I have no doubt that more legal voters voted for Norm Coleman than Al Franken, but once the ballots are in the box, there is nothing that can be done. Hence the urgency of the voter ID law.

Until now, Minnesota has had lax laws that facilitate voter fraud. Not only does the state have same-day registration, there is also an absurd system whereby a resident of a precinct can "vouch" for as many as 15 people who are not registered in the precinct and have no identification that would otherwise allow them to register. This means that the Democrats can station an operative at a polling place, bus in students from Wisconsin, illegal immigrants, etc., and allow them to vote illegally by having their operative vouch for the whole busload.

For many years, Republicans have been trying to tighten up Minnesota's voting laws to prevent voter fraud. But they have never been able to get such a bill through the legislature, since the DFL has controlled the state's Senate since Senate races were first made partisan. This year, for the first time, the Republicans are in a position to carry out the will of the overwhelming majority of Minnesotans by reforming an electoral system that is designed to encourage fraud. The fact that the Governor Dayton felt compelled to veto those reforms confirms that voter fraud remains a significant component of the Democratic Pary's electoral strategy.

Title: POTH propaganda
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 29, 2011, 07:27:06 AM

MIAMI — Less than 18 months before the next presidential election, Republican-controlled statehouses around the country are rewriting voting laws to require photo identification at the polls, reduce the number of days of early voting or tighten registration rules.

 
Republican legislators say the new rules, which have advanced in 13 states in the past two months, offer a practical way to weed out fraudulent votes and preserve the integrity of the ballot box. Democrats say the changes have little to do with fraud prevention and more to do with placing obstacles in the way of possible Democratic voters, including young people and minorities.
Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin and Gov. Rick Perry of Texas signed laws last week that would require each voter to show an official, valid photo ID to cast a ballot, joining Kansas and South Carolina.

In Florida, which already had a photo law, Gov. Rick Scott signed a bill this month to tighten restrictions on third-party voter registration organizations — prompting the League of Women Voters to say it would cease registering voters in the state — and to shorten the number of early voting days. Twelve states now require photo identification to vote.

The battleground states of Ohio and Pennsylvania are among those moving ahead on voter ID bills, part of a trend that seems likely to intensify the kind of pitched partisan jousting over voting that has cropped up in recent presidential races.

When voters in predominantly black neighborhoods in Florida saw their votes challenged in the contested Bush-Gore election of 2000, Democrats made charges of disenfranchisement. (What Pravda on the Hudson forgets to mention here is that-- if I have this right-- the previous mayoralty election in Miami was voided due to vote fraud.) In 2008 Acorn, a group organizing minority and low-income communities, became a particular target, with Republicans asserting that Acorn was trying to steal the election with large voter-registration drives, some of which were found to be seriously flawed.

Democrats, who point to scant evidence of voter-impersonation fraud,  say the unified Republican push for photo identification cards carries echoes of the Jim Crow laws — with their poll taxes and literacy tests — that inhibited black voters in the South from Reconstruction through the 1960s. Election experts say minorities, poor people and students — who tend to skew Democratic — are among those least likely to have valid driver’s licenses, the most prevalent form of identification. Older people, another group less likely to have licenses, are swing voters.

Republicans argue that the requirements are commonplace.

“If you have to show a picture ID to buy Sudafed, if you have to show a picture ID to get on an airplane, you should show a picture ID when you vote,” Gov. Nikki Haley said this month when she signed the bill into law in South Carolina, using a common refrain among Republicans.

Changes to voter law tend to flow and ebb with election cycles as both Democrats and Republicans scramble to gain the upper hand when they hold power. The 2010 midterm election was a boon to Republicans, who now control 59 chambers of state legislatures and 29 governorships. In some states, like Florida and Texas, Republicans hold overwhelming majorities. This has allowed the bills to move forward.

Republicans have tried for years to get photo identification requirements and other changes through legislatures, said Daniel Tokaji, a law professor at Ohio State University and an expert in election law. Similar bills were introduced over the past decade, but were largely derailed in the aftermath of a political battle over the Bush administration’s firing of several United States attorneys whom Republicans had criticized for failing to aggressively investigate voter fraud.

“That’s what really killed the momentum of more states’ enacting voter ID laws,” Mr. Tokaji said. “Now with the last elections, with the strong Republican majorities in a lot of states, we’re seeing a rejuvenation of the effort.”

Republicans say that large jumps in the immigrant population have also prompted them to act to safeguard elections.

“Over the last 20 years, we have seen Florida grow quite rapidly, and we have such a mix of populations,” said State Representative Dennis K. Baxley, the Florida Republican who wrote the law to tighten third-party registration here. “When we fail to protect every ballot, we disenfranchise people who participate legitimately.”

Taken together, the state-by-state changes are likely to have an impact on close elections, Mr. Tokaji said.

================

Page 2 of 2)



“Remarkably, most of these significant changes are going under the radar,” he added. “A lot of voters are going to be surprised and dismayed when they go to their polling place and find that the rules have changed.”

Most of the measures would require people to show a form of official, valid identification to vote. While driver’s licenses are the most common form, voters can also request free photo IDs from the Department of Motor Vehicles or use a passport or military identification, among other things.
But Democrats say thousands of people in each state do not have these. The extra step, they add, will discourage some voters who will have to pay to retrieve documents, like birth certificates, for proof to obtain a free card. If voters do not have the proper identification on Election Day, they can cast provisional ballots in most states but must return several days later to a local board of elections office with an ID.

A few state bills and laws also shave the number of early voting days, a move that Democrats say would impact Democratic voters once again. In the 2008 presidential election, a majority of those who cast early votes did so for President Obama. In Florida, the number of days is reduced but the number of hours remains the same.

Democrats point to state figures showing that there are few proven cases of voter impersonation (This is rather disingenuous; isn't the real issue phony registrations?) and question why budget-conscious Republicans would want to spend taxpayer dollars on a problem that is isolated.

“There is not one documented case that has been presented to us, and we had numerous hearings,” said race-baiting scum bag and State Senator Brad Hutto of South Carolina, a Democrat. “Republicans have to have some reason to do this because it doesn’t sound good to say, ‘We don’t want Latinos or African-Americans voting.’ ” 

But Republicans counter that detecting and proving voter impersonation is tricky under current law precisely because few states require photo identification. Plus, they add, there is no evidence that the requirement reduces minority participation. In Georgia, where photo IDs became a requirement in 2007, minorities voted in record numbers in 2008 and 2010.

Turnout among Hispanic voters jumped 140 percent in the state in 2008 and 42 percent among blacks compared with 2004, a change attributed in part to President Obama’s candidacy. Two years later, in the midterm election, turnout also rose among Hispanics and African-Americans, according to data from the Georgia secretary of state.

But with the presidential election campaign season already under way, Democrats say they are taking no chances. The Democratic Governors Association started a Voter Protection Project this month to educate voters and encourage them to speak out against the measures. It also began running online advertisements.

Title: Electoral process, corruption etc: John Edwards indicted. For what?
Post by: DougMacG on June 04, 2011, 10:26:27 AM

Unlike the fact that no liberal commentator came to the side of Scooter Libby, where investigators knew the first day that no underlying crime was committed, I found this piece by John Hinderacker at Powerline posted just after the indictment.  Less surprisingly Washington Post editorial has the same take on it today.  They all have to include the fact that wow is he scum.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/06/029161.php

 In Defense of John Edwards
June 3, 2011 12:44 PM

John Edwards has been indicted for alleged violations of the campaign finance laws. Not, as you might assume, because he spent campaign funds to support his mistress, Rielle Hunter. Rather, because third parties ("Bunny" Mellon and Fred Baron) gave an Edwards aide money to support Ms. Hunter and, ultimately, Edwards' baby with her, and to keep Hunter and the baby out of sight. The theory is that Mellon and Baron spent this money to help Edwards' presidential campign, and the amounts they gave to Ms. Hunter exceeded individual donor limits, and were not reported to the Federal Elections Commission.

The indictment includes this paraphrase of the relevant law:

    The Election Act's contribution limit applied to anything of value provided for the purpose of influencing the presidential election, including...(c) payments for personal expenses of a candidate unless they would have been made irrespective of the candidacy.

That appears to be a fair summary of Sec. 113.1(g)(6) of the Federal Elections Act.

The government's theory is that the money that third parties gave for the support of Ms. Hunter constituted campaign contributions because it went for Edwards' "personal expenses" and would not have been given but for Edwards' presidential candidacy. One could object, of course, that the money went for Rielle Hunter's personal expenses, not Edwards'. Is supporting a mistress a "personal expense[] of a candidate" under the election law? I suppose you could argue that one either way.

Whether Mellon and Baron would have supported Rielle Hunter even if Edwards were not running for president is a fact question. It is certainly plausible that they would not have been willing to contribute $1,000,000 to Hunter's support unless they thought it might enable Edwards to become president.

One wonders why Edwards needed to go to third parties to get funds to support Hunter and her baby and to keep them out of sight. He had plenty of money. The answer presumably is that even a man of Edwards' wealth couldn't come up with a million dollars without his wife noticing.

I am no fan of John Edwards, but this prosecution strikes me as unfortunate. Based on a quick review, it does not seem to be an indefensible application of the campaign finance laws, although the government's theory, as Edwards' lawyer put it, is "novel and untested." But what's the point? The campaign finance laws are intended to keep candidates on a level playing field. (Some would say they are mainly intended to promote the re-election of incumbents, but that is a debate for another day.) The money that was spent here didn't go for campaign ads or get-out-the-vote efforts. It was invisible to voters. It allowed Edwards to keep his wife (and voters too, of course) in the dark about his girlfriend and baby and relieved Edwards of the need to support them. Those are hardly noble objectives, but is policing this sort of misconduct really the function of campaign finance laws?

The prosecutors tried to gild their dubious lily by including in the indictment the allegation that Edwards "made false statements" "on national television." This was alleged to be one of the "overt acts" in furtherance of Edwards' criminal conspiracy. But lying to reporters isn't a crime; if it were, we would have a hard time staffing Congress. (Anthony Weiner is just the latest in a long line of politicians who illustrate the point.)

This prosecution strikes me as another step in the Criminalization of Nearly Everything. Edwards is disgraced and deserves to be. But if he didn't otherwise commit a crime in trying to get away with hiding his mistress and child--a desperate gamble, at best--the fact that some of his friends tried to help him shouldn't turn his sleazy behavior into a felony.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 04, 2011, 10:57:26 AM

One of the purposes of the Campaign Finance Laws is for we the people to know to whom the candidate is indebted.  Surely Edwards would be deeply indebted to those in question here.  Yes?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 04, 2011, 11:39:41 AM

"One of the purposes of the Campaign Finance Laws is for we the people to know to whom the candidate is indebted.  Surely Edwards would be deeply indebted to those in question here.  Yes?"

The favors and exposure of indebtedness point makes sense.  Not all of that can be codified.  My guess is that the law was written to tell us who pays for the paid advertising and direct campaign expenses of the candidacy.  Paying the mistress and child is construed here as assisting the campaign and there is some truth to that.  It was also a case arguably of trying to help the man personally, trying to protect his family, or ostensibly trying to help the woman and the child, knowing that Edwards was unable to do that himself.

On the legality of it all, I guess we will see.  If guilty, fine.  If the result is not guilty then we can discuss whether this was a wise use of resources.

On the larger indebtedness question, all his money should be given back to the healthcare industry as the causes in his class action law suits all turned out to be junk science.

An obvious phony turned out to be an obvious phony.  Also funny is that the National Enquirer got this story right from the beginning and everyone else got it wrong.  As Jay Leno says, they check, re-check and check again before they go to print.  Unlike NY Times etc. happy to repeat gossip and publish unverified claims from leftist blogs regularly.

The most impressive part of the story was that in the end Elizabeth Edwards in her time of need, needed him out.

No new bimbo eruptions for 2012.  But it's early...

Title: John Adams, Inaugural Address 1797
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 09, 2011, 03:10:05 PM

"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections." --John Adams, Inaugural Address, 1797

Title: Corruption in the FCC?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 30, 2011, 06:37:36 PM

A reliable friend sends me the following:
====================

A start up company called Lightsquared has managed to get a waiver  from the FCC to move forward with a mobile phone network.  Preliminary tests have shown interference with the GPS system despite protests from government agencies and others concerned about integrity of the GPS system.  Why have they  got so far with the FCC in spite of tests showing clear damage to the GPS system?  Payoffs, of course.  The following from an Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association blog following the issues.  Http://blog.aopa.org/aopanow/?p=823
 
I’m really curious as to the background relationships between President Obama, Julius Genachowski (FCC chairman, recess appointment by Barack Obama), Philip Falcone (Manager at Harbinger Capital Partners who have a 40% venture interest in LightSquared). Seems like some aggressive investigative reporting would likely turn up some unsavory facts, particularly in light of the huge amount of money involved – likely trillions in the long term.

Response by someone who is doing his homework:
 
A commentator expressed his curiosity about the relationships between the White House, the FCC, and Philip Falcone. They have an interesting history.

Phil Falcone, the founder of hedge fund Harbinger Capital Partners, is currently under criminal and civil investigations by the Security Exchange Commission and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan for allegedly failing to disclose $113 million in personal loans he took from his hedge fund to pay personal taxes. The Wall Street Journal has also reported that investigators are looking into allegations that Mr. Falcone allowed some clients to redeem funds from his hedge fund during the financial crisis of 2008, while preventing others from doing so.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Falcone and Harbinger scored big gains for investors in 2007, but the fund has since shrunk from $26.5 billion to $9 billion from losses and client withdrawals. As of last November, the fund was off 15% for the year, and investors like Goldman Sachs and Blackstone Group had put in requests to withdraw funds.

Also important, investors have expressed increasing concerns over Falcone’s plans to launch the LightSquared venture. The majority of Harbinger’s declining assets are pledged to this venture, which many believe is risky and underfunded. Experts believe that building this network can require as much as $40 billion, but there is a credible report that “Harbinger reckons with a suitable flexible FCC… it can get the network operable for something in the region of $6 billion.”

None of Falcone’s plans would be successful, however, unless the Administration and the FCC intervened on his behalf. Over the past year, a series of unusual decisions, questionable meetings, and procedural anomalies at the FCC and the White House highlight Falcone’s growing influence in the government.

Without going into pages of detail here, the FCC delayed publicly disclosing some of its dealing with Harbinger/LightSquared for weeks or months, and still has not disclosed some of them at all. An April 21, 2010 letter to FCC Chairman Genachowski from Senators Hutcinson, DeMint, Vitter and Brownback resulted in nothing more than a non-responsive letter from Genachowski on May 10. (Some of that has to do with a Harbinger/SkyTerra merger that is a critical piece of the LightSquared venture.)

Meanwhile, Falcone developed his government influence. According to White House visitor access logs, on September 22, 2009, Falcone and LightSquared CEO Sanjiv Ahuja personally visited the White House and met with the Chief of Staff at the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). One day later, the Harbinger/SkyTerra merger agreement was signed.

On September 30, 2009, one week after his September 2009 White House visit, Falcone contributed $30,400 to the DSCC, the maximum legal individual contribution limit to a party committee. His wife, Lisa Falcone, contributed an additional $30,000 to the DSCC on the same day. LightSquared’s CEO Sanjiv Ahuja also contributed $30,000 to the DNC in September 2010.

On January 21, 2010, Falcone visited the White House again, this time for an appointment with John Holdren, the Director of the OSTP.

In addition to well-timed political contributions to the DSCC at the height of merger review discussions, Falcone/Harbinger also secured the assistance of a lobbying firm, the Palmetto Group, via Harbinger’s legal counsel, to lobby Congress and the FCC. Steve Glaze, lobbyist with the Palmetto Group, was registered to lobby the FCC directly on mobile satellite services on Falcone’s/Harbinger’s behalf. Steve Glaze is married to Terri Glaze, a senior staffer at the FCC.

On January 12, 2011, the National Telecommunications and Information Authority (housed within the Department of Commerce) sent a letter to FCC Chairman Genacholski objecting to the waiver. There was also a letter from Danny Price, Director of Spectrum and Communication Policy at the Department of Defense, stating that the FCC should defer action on the waiver request and place the application under a Notice of Prosed Rule-Making (NPRM).

The United States GPS Industry Council (USGPSIC) also raised concerns in a letter. Notable, that letter included serious concerns about interference with E911 and law enforcement GPS applications.

Nonetheless, the FCC, on delegated authority, officially granted LightSquared’s request for a waiver. In granting the waiver, the FCC chose to issue a license modification for LightSquared because of what they term “unique” circumstances, instead of modifying its rules to apply to all providers. That essentially guarantees that Falcone, and only Falcone, receives this special treatment.

We can only speculate whether or not these “unique” circumstances are related to Falcone’s September 30, 2009 meeting with the White House, and subsequent political contributions to the DSCC. But the outcome of the FCC’s action means that other companies will not be able to take advantage of the same loophole.

In addition to the GPS issue, the ramifications of the FCC’s favoritism to Falcone and LightSquared are enormous. Consider other competitive nationwide mobile providers. Take Clearwire, for example. They purchased terrestrial spectrum at auction for substantial sums, and they have invested millions more to build out their 4G network. And now, thanks to the FCC, their competitor LightSquared is given the same terestrial spectrum for free, and is essentially exempt from requirements to invest and build out a competing network. The message to companies like Clearwire is clear: Companies who play by the rules, create jobs, and invest in building out competing networks are now at risk of seeing their plans entirely upended by the FCC’s arbitrary “unique” circumstances in favor of a competitor who developed the right political influence and who made the right political financial contributions.

Federal agencies have a special responsibility to not only avoid conflicts of interest, but to avoid even the appearance of conflicts. No fair-minded person could look at the record so far and not believe that intervention and investigation are not warranted.

Title: corruption etc: The revolving door between govt and lobbying
Post by: DougMacG on July 11, 2011, 09:45:52 AM

I was surprised to learn the lead industry 'lobbyist'(?) managing the campaign of a group called the Sensible Food Policy Coalition, which includes General Mills, Kellogg, PepsiCo, and Time Warner, fighting against some of the Michelle Obama food initiatives, is Anita Dunn, former White House communications Director.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/healthcare/former-white-house-staffer-fights-obama-obesity-efforts-20110710

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 11, 2011, 12:27:01 PM

Wow- wonder what Mao and Ghandi would say , , ,

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on July 11, 2011, 05:36:51 PM

 :-) Very Funny! That flew right over my head until a while after I narrowed down that it had to be aimed at my Anita Dunn post.  ("Two of my favorite political philosophers Mao (70 million dead) and Mother Theresa, two people I turn to most.") I'm sure Mao, Ghandi and Anita Dunn would all say - go for it Anita! If you can make a buck Anita from your fame and contacts at the highest levels and help the marketers of over-processed cereals sell heaping helpings of processed sugar and empty calorie neutered grains by using cartoon characters and every other means available to get children to rot their teeth and their brain every morning, what the hell do you care.  Take the money!  'Go find your own Calcutta.'  They were all Marxists until someone handed them their first million or two.  Pissing off Michelle Obama also might expose here other side.  'You fight your war [Michelle Obama], and I'll fight mine.  You figure out what's right for you... You fight your war and you let them fight theirs':

http://www.freedomslighthouse.com/2009/10/glenn-beck-reveals-video-of-anita-dunn.html

I knew I should have put it on the Glen Beck thread!

Title: SEIU tactics
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 18, 2011, 01:39:10 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/report-seiu-intimidation-manual-uncovered-detailing-unions-dirty-tactics/

Title: John Adams 1797
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2011, 05:01:26 AM

"In the midst of these pleasing ideas we should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections." --John Adams, Inaugural Address, 1797

Title: POTH goes after Cong. Darrell Issa
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 15, 2011, 02:58:03 AM

Congressman Darrell Issa is doing an outstanding job of investigating Operation Fast & Furious (see the Gun Rights thread) to the discomfort of Baraq, AG Holder, et al.  Of course it is a coincidence that Pravada on the Hudson is now going after him. :roll:  That said, things such as placing and voting on earmarks that happen to benefit a property you have bought is not my idea of the right way to do things.
=============
VISTA, Calif. — Here on the third floor of a gleaming office building overlooking a golf course in the rugged foothills north of San Diego, Darrell Issa, the entrepreneur, oversees the hub of a growing financial empire worth hundreds of millions of dollars.


Just a few steps down the hall, Representative Darrell Issa, the powerful Republican congressman, runs the local district office where his constituents come for help.
The proximity of the two offices reflects Mr. Issa’s dual careers, a meshing of public and private interests rarely seen in government.
Most wealthy members of Congress push their financial activities to the side, with many even placing them in blind trusts to avoid appearances of conflicts of interest. But Mr. Issa (pronounced EYE-suh), one of Washington’s richest lawmakers, may be alone in the hands-on role he has played in overseeing a remarkable array of outside business interests since his election in 2000.
Even as he has built a reputation as a forceful Congressional advocate for business, Mr. Issa has bought up office buildings, split a holding company into separate multibillion-dollar businesses, started an insurance company, traded hundreds of millions of dollars in securities, invested in overseas funds, retained an interest in his auto-alarm company and built up a family foundation.
As his private wealth and public power have grown, so too has the overlap between his private and business lives, with at least some of the congressman’s government actions helping to make a rich man even richer and raising the potential for conflicts.
He has secured millions of dollars in Congressional earmarks for road work and public works projects that promise improved traffic and other benefits to the many commercial properties he owns here north of San Diego. In one case, more than $800,000 in earmarks he arranged will help widen a busy thoroughfare in front of a medical plaza he bought for $10.3 million.
His constituents cheer the prospect of easing traffic. At the same time, the value of the medical complex and other properties has soared, at least in part because of the government-sponsored road work.
But beyond specific actions that appear to have clearly benefited his businesses, Mr. Issa’s interests are so varied that some of the biggest issues making their way through Congress affect him in some way.
After the forced sale of Merrill Lynch in 2008, for instance, he publicly attacked the Treasury Department’s handling of the deal without mentioning that Merrill had handled hundreds of millions of dollars in investments for him and lent him many millions more.
And in an era when the auto industry’s future has been a big theme of public policy, Mr. Issa has been outspoken on regulatory issues affecting car companies, while maintaining deep ties to the industry through the auto electronics company he founded, DEI Holdings.
He has a seat on its board, and his nonprofit family foundation, which seeks to encourage values like “hard work and selfless philanthropy,” has earned millions from stock in DEI, which bears his initials. Mr. Issa’s fortune, in fact, was built on his car alarm company, and to this day it is his deep voice on Viper alarms that warns potential burglars to “please step away from the car.”
In recent months, The New York Times has examined how some lawmakers have championed particular industries, pushing measures to protect and enrich supporters. In Mr. Issa’s case, it is sometimes difficult to separate the business of Congress from the business of Darrell Issa.
Mr. Issa, 57, did not respond to repeated written requests in the last three weeks to discuss his outside interests. In the past, he has said his business background has made him a better lawmaker. In at least one Congressional matter, however, he recused himself after being advised of a potential conflict.
But perhaps his clearest statement on the issue came last year amid Toyota’s recalls of millions of automobiles with dangerous acceleration problems. Then, Mr. Issa brushed aside suggestions that his electronics company’s role as a major supplier of alarms to Toyota made him go easy on the automaker as he led an investigation into the recalls.
“If anything,” the congressman said, “Toyota probably got a harder time by having an automobile supplier sitting up there on the dais saying ‘Hold it, I’m not letting you off the hook now.’ ”
A Powerful Gadfly
As the influential chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, Mr. Issa has proven both a reliable friend to business and a constant annoyance to an Obama administration that he sees as anti-business. Even before formally taking over the committee in December, he made headlines by asking 150 businesses and trade groups to identify regulations that they considered overly burdensome, and he has issued numerous subpoenas on his own authority in investigating programs he believes are harmful.
(Page 2 of 4)
His pro-business policies usually align closely with those of the firms he has worked with in his wide-ranging business career both before and after he joined Congress. Congress has historically had more than its share of millionaires from storied American fortunes, from the Rockefellers to the Kennedys. But typically, those members lower their business profiles considerably and limit their active dealings to avoid potential conflicts of interest and the political repercussions that might follow from private business decisions.
Senator John D. Rockfeller IV, Democrat of West Virginia, for one, has much of his money in blind trusts, run by outside trustees. And Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, has a number of family and marital trusts for money generated largely through the fortune of his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry.
Mr. Issa, who grew up in a hardscrabble neighborhood near Cleveland and now owns homes north of San Diego and in Washington, has assets totaling as much as $725 million, outstripping by some measures even Mr. Rockefeller and Mr. Kerry. (Because lawmakers must disclose their assets only within broad dollar ranges, public reports do not allow for precise figures.)
According to his filings, Mr. Issa’s minimum wealth doubled in the last year, and he appears flush with cash: he bought dozens of mutual funds in 2010 worth as much as $80 million, managed by Wall Street powerhouses, without selling off any securities.
Mr. Issa’s transactions cover many pages in his annual disclosure reports, as he has traded huge volumes of stock funds and municipal bonds on a weekly or even daily basis. In 2008 alone, he traded some 360 securities totaling between $650 million and $2 billion.
Those investments have often produced sharp profits.
In one 2008 sale, months before the stock market crashed, his family foundation earned $357,000 on an initial investment of less than $19,000 — a return of nearly 1,900 percent in just seven months, the foundation reported to the Internal Revenue Service. It reported acquiring the security, then known as AIM International Small Company Fund, at a cost basis representing a tiny fraction of the market value.
In addition, Mr. Issa sold at least $1 million in personal holdings in the same fund that year but was not required to report what he paid.
Invesco, as the AIM fund’s manager is now known, told The Times it did not provide Mr. Issa’s foundation the steep discount. That suggests the foundation may have acquired the shares from a third-party broker.
A former government official said House ethics committee officials quietly inquired into Mr. Issa’s business interests last year because of possible conflicts in his electronics connections.
While the exact focus of those inquiries is not known, Mr. Issa’s ties to the industry are well established: in each of his first five years in Congress, he reported accepting free trips to Las Vegas from the Consumer Electronics Association for its annual convention. Such corporate-sponsored trips were allowed at the time, but Congressional rules have tightened since.
The inquiries did not produce sufficient evidence of ethics problems to move forward, the former official said.
Standards for determining a financial conflict are murky. House members are generally restricted from using their positions “for personal gain” or on matters in which they have a direct financial interest. But a 2009 ethics committee ruling added to the ambiguity, finding there is no prohibition on the mere “appearance” of a conflict.
There are also restrictions on taking salaries from certain businesses. While Mr. Issa’s wife draws a salary at their property management company, Mr. Issa — the firm’s president — does not.
A Balancing Act
Lawmakers must also avoid outside work that can pose a “time conflict,” and “detract from a member’s full time and attention to his official duties,” the guidelines say. By all accounts, these rules were designed to promote the notion of a full-time legislature.
Mr. Issa’s outside interests certainly appear to have kept him busy. Associates describe him as actively involved in business decisions, particularly in his auto electronics firm. His office did not discuss how he balances the time demands of Congress and his outside businesses. His management company, Greene Properties, which he runs with his wife from the office down the hall from his Congressional office in Vista, has acquired more than two dozen properties in the last five years, valued at up to a total of $80 million.
Page 3 of 4)
In nearby Carlsbad, a new office complex he owns advertises for prospective tenants. A few miles away, a Hooters restaurant rents space in another building he owns. Nearby, his medical complex bustles with doctors and patients and has few vacancies.
 “Issa’s a smart businessman,” said Dean Tilton, a local real estate broker. “We haven’t seen real estate prices this low in 20 years, and he’s taking advantage of that.”
The hard-hit San Diego area has also benefited from federal money Mr. Issa brought through earmarks, which allow lawmakers to award money for their own pet projects. Indeed, more than two dozen of Mr. Issa’s properties are within five miles of projects he has personally earmarked for road work, sanitation and other improvements, an analysis by The Times shows.
His medical complex, for instance, sits directly along West Vista Way, a busy corridor scheduled for widening with $815,000 in funds Mr. Issa earmarked. The congressman bought the complex in 2008, soon after securing the first of two earmarks for the two-mile project and unsuccessfully seeking millions more. The assessor’s office now values the complex at $16 million, a 60 percent appreciation.
Mr. Issa owns a number of commercial properties near the planned $171 million expansion of State Route 76. The project, intended to ease traffic for tens of thousands of commuters, was helped by $245,000 in his earmarks.
A regional transportation official said the earmarks supplemented state financing to move the projects along.
Local leaders say they are just grateful for the money, regardless of any suggestions locally in San Diego that Mr. Issa stands to benefit.
“I don’t really blame the guy,” said John Aguilera, a Vista city councilman. “As a politician, that’s his job to bring a slice of the pie back home, and as a businessman, he’s going to invest in the areas that he champions.”
Some ethics experts wonder, however, whether Mr. Issa’s business interests invite problems.
“The idea is you’re supposed to be a full-time congressman,” said Robert M. Stern, who runs the nonprofit Center for Governmental Studies in California. “There may not be a direct conflict of interest, but it creates an appearance that he is trying to influence a policy on issues where he has an investment.”
In 2009, as earmarks became a damaging symbol of Congressional abuse, Mr. Issa joined other lawmakers in pledging to discontinue them. And in recent weeks, he has attacked “the culture of government overspending” in pushing for deep cuts in the national debt.
Mr. Issa’s dual roles reach beyond earmarks.
At a House hearing in 2008 on a much-debated proposal to merge the satellite radio companies Sirius and XM, despite objections on competitive grounds, Mr. Issa praised the “viable combined market” the deal would create as he questioned Sirius’s chief executive and talked of opportunities for expansion.
What Mr. Issa did not mention was that his electronics firm was then in a lucrative partnership with Sirius to distribute its audio products.
While Mr. Issa sold off his controlling interest in DEI soon after he was elected, he remains a board member with a half-million shares in the firm held by his family trust. His management firm also receives $2 million a year for leasing DEI its Vista plant.
DEI’s partnership with Sirius, which continued after the merger, caused friction with competitors. In a lawsuit settled out of court, U.S. Electronics accused Sirius and DEI of freezing it out of the market through anticompetitive practices that relied on “a web of deception, threats and lies” aimed at “the enrichment of certain of its officers and directors.”
When a watchdog group, the Center for Public Integrity, asked Mr. Issa about his role in the merger, his office said the congressman’s participation in the House hearing posed no conflict because his founding of DEI was “public knowledge.” But after advice from House ethics lawyers, Mr. Issa avoided any votes on the issue afterward.
Page 4 of 4)
With its brand-name audio and electronics products, DEI caught the eye of an equity company, Charlesbank Capital, which bought the company in June for $305 million, or $4.45 a share — nearly three times the presale price. The premium promises a payday of at least $2 million for Mr. Issa’s foundation, which has already earned more than $10 million from sales of DEI stock. (Mr. Issa is now a defendant in a lawsuit brought by DEI shareholders; the suit claims the deal was structured to give him and other directors a “windfall not shared by other stockholders.”)
Ties to Merrill Lynch
The lines between Mr. Issa’s many interests have also become entangled in his frequent criticism of regulators and his frequent defense of Wall Street. At a series of hearings in 2009, Mr. Issa accused Treasury officials of a “cover-up” of their role in Bank of America’s $50 billion purchase of Merrill Lynch months earlier. Most pointedly, he accused Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, of bullying Bank of America “behind closed doors” into buying Merrill Lynch at bargain rates and then lying about it.
“I for one,” Mr. Issa told the Fed chairman, “am looking at Main Street America, the stockholders who in some cases got less than they would have gotten through other means. This includes Chrysler, General Motors and, of course, Bank of America and Merrill Lynch.”
Mr. Issa did not mention his own extensive links to Merrill Lynch.
In a television interview days later, however, he said: “I bank at Merrill Lynch. I’m very well aware that every broker there, all the people who were stockholders, were furious that they were in fact being fire-saled to them.”
And Mr. Issa is no ordinary Merrill customer.
His transactions there have totaled more than a billion dollars in the last decade, records show. In the aftermath of the firm’s acquisition in September 2008, in fact, he bought and sold at least $206 million in Merrill Lynch mutual funds in the next 15 days, records show.
His ties to the bank deepened last year, records show, as Merrill Lynch gave him two “personal notes” for lines of credit worth at least $75 million.
Likewise, Mr. Issa has aggressively defended Goldman Sachs, another Wall Street giant.
When the Securities and Exchange Commission brought a major lawsuit charging Goldman with fraud last year, Mr. Issa fired back by opening an investigation. The timing of the lawsuit, he said, smacked of a “partisan political agenda” meant to help President Obama and bolster a bill overhauling financial regulations.
His charge drew nationwide attention, putting regulators on the defensive, but the S.E.C. inspector general later found “no evidence” of political meddling.
Mr. Issa came to Goldman’s defense again last month in a letter to regulators complaining about restrictions on financial firms. Broker dealers “such as Goldman Sachs” faced “a substantial reduction in leverage” because of excessive capital requirements, he wrote.
As with Merrill Lynch, Mr. Issa is keenly interested in Goldman’s performance.
A few weeks before opening his inquiry into the Goldman lawsuit, in fact, he bought another large batch of shares in one of the firm’s high-yield mutual funds, records show. By the end of the year, his stake in Goldman’s fund was worth as much as $25 million.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 25, 2011, 11:06:01 AM

"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our Liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections. If an election is to be determined by a majority of a single vote, and that can be procured by a party through artifice or corruption, the Government may be the choice of a party for its own ends, not of the nation for the national good." --John Adams, Inaugural Address, 1797

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 30, 2011, 12:44:19 PM

From the not-always reliable NEWSMAX

Outrage as Obama Names New Voter Initiative After ACORN
Monday, 29 Aug 2011 06:49 PM

By David A. Patten and Jim Meyers

Government watchdogs are blasting the Obama campaign’s decision to name its 2012 voter-registration initiative “Project Vote” — the same name as a group closely linked to the discredited ACORN organization.

Members of ACORN were caught on undercover video giving two supposed clients detailed instructions on how to commit fraud, and ACORN faced a number of voter-registration fraud cases following the 2008 election.

Use of the Project Vote name by the Obama campaign is “truly astonishing,” Tom Fitton, president of the conservative Judicial Watch good-government group, tells Newsmax. “We knew President Obama was the president from ACORN. And if this isn’t an indication of it, we don’t know what is.”

ACORN-linked Project Vote is a Washington, D.C.-based 501c3 nonprofit organization that supports voter-registration drives in “historically underrepresented communities.”

But there is “no wall of separation” between Project Vote and the well-known ACORN organization, according to Matthew Vadum, the Capital Research Center editor who wrote “Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts Are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers.”

He calls Project Vote “the branch of ACORN that’s most notorious for voter fraud.”

Vadum wrote in an American Spectator piece on Monday: “On registration and mobilization campaigns, ACORN and Project Vote work together to the point where it is a difficult, if not impossible, to tell the difference. They share staff, office space, and money.”

As an example he cites Project Vote’s field director, listed on its website as Amy Busefink. In November, she pled no contest to two counts of conspiracy to commit the crime in Nevada of compensation for registration of voters. In January, she received a year of probation and a $4,000 fine. Vadum calls that incident “a major ACORN-approved voter fraud conspiracy.”

Vadum tells Newsmax that the use of the Project Vote name for Obama’s new voter-registration drive “says the Obama campaign is up to the same old tricks, that they’re not afraid of being called out by the media.

They know that they can continue to operate with impunity, encouraging voter fraud, and they’re not going to be held accountable.”

The decision to employ the Project Vote name was clear in a recent email from the Obama campaign: "Project Vote will embark on a voter registration effort to maximize voter participation. Project Vote will drive our campaign strategy — from paid media, to digital outreach, to grassroots organizing and voter registration efforts — to communicate with and engage key demographic groups."

Adopting a name so closely linked to ACORN, and President Obama’s political career, could hardly be an accident, says Fitton.

“It collapses the façade that there was any distinction between the Obama campaign and Project Vote in 2008.”

Fitton speculates adopting the “Project Vote” name is intended as a “dog-whistle” to the Democratic base.

He adds: “If the Obama campaign was intent on trying to disassociate itself from the criminal activity which took place with its vendor last time, which was ACORN, using the name of their partner seemingly would be the wrong way to do it.”

Obama has had well-documented ties with ACORN. In the 2008 race, his campaign paid $832,000 for voter-registration services in key primary states to Citizen Consulting Inc., an ACORN umbrella group that Fitton describes as “an ACORN front.” The money was initially reported to the Federal Election Commission as payments for “staging, sound, lighting.” The reports were corrected after their true nature was revealed by a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review expose.

In 1995, Obama helped represent the group in a lawsuit that forced Illinois to adopt a bill relaxing the standards for establishing voter eligibility, and he helped train ACORN’s staff in Chicago.

Obama’s 2008 campaign relied heavily on expanding the electorate and registering new voters. His political strategists have indicated it will be a key component of his re-election effort as well.

Fitton says the Project Vote name shows that the Obama campaign plans to continue running its 2008 campaign playbook, despite the fraud associated with voter-registration activities that cycle.

“It should alert people to the fact that Project Vote hasn’t gone away,” he says. “One of the big misconceptions has been that ACORN and Project Vote, which had been associated with voter registration issues in 2008, disappeared as a result of the scandals, as a result of the videos. And they haven’t disappeared — the state ACORN groups are still operational, and obviously Project Vote is still using the ACORN method to register voters.”

Vadum, whose book documents 54 voter-fraud convictions stemming from the 2008 elections, tells Newsmax that he expects ACORN to be just as active in the 2012 campaign as it was in 2008, although under a different brand. ACORN’s state chapters have reconstituted themselves under new names, he says, and its affordable housing arm is now receiving money from HUD under a new name.


© Newsmax. All rights reserved.


Read more on Newsmax.com: Outrage as Obama Names New Voter Initiative After ACORN
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: prentice crawford on September 04, 2011, 01:03:50 AM

  (AP) Kinde Durkee, who heads Durkee & Associates in Burbank, was arrested Friday afternoon by the FBI on a criminal complaint filed by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Sacramento, said U.S. Attorney's Office spokesman Thom Mrozek. No further details were available.

The arrest was first reported by the Orange County Register (http://bit.ly/q9KhrN).

A phone message left at Durkee's office by The Associated Press was not immediately returned. She is expected to appear in a Southern California court Tuesday.

State Sen. Lou Correa of Santa Ana told the Register the FBI notified him late Friday that he was one of many victims. Correa said he believes he has lost hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign funds. Durkee had been his campaign treasurer since 1995.

Federal Election Commission records show Durkee is treasurer for U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein and U.S. Rep. Loretta Sanchez of Orange County, a host of state assemblymen and senators, city councilmen and political action committees.

The California Fair Political Practices Commission has taken action against her four times, mainly for failing to report transactions or information, and sent her a dozen warning letters. She also stipulated to a violation from San Diego's Ethics Commission.

Durkee's website said the business specializes in political accounting and has been operating since 1972.

                                        P.C.

Title: S. Adams on voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 27, 2011, 03:19:49 AM

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual -- or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country." --Samuel Adams, in the Boston Gazette, 1781

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 30, 2011, 12:45:31 PM

I'm not a big fan of Thomas Friedman but I would go along with this suggestion for the answer to occupy wall street: "4) U.S. congressmen [and Presidents] should have to dress like Nascar drivers and wear the logos of all the banks, investment banks, insurance companies and real estate firms [and unions] that they’re taking money from.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/opinion/sunday/friedman-did-you-hear-the-one-about-the-bankers.html?_r=1

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 30, 2011, 02:09:03 PM

I don't think even Gov. Chris Christie is fat enough for there to be enough room.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on October 30, 2011, 02:16:30 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 30, 2011, 02:09:03 PM

I don't think even Gov. Chris Christie is fat enough for there to be enough room.

Bwahahahahahahaha!!!! 

Title: Hey, Botox ain't cheap....
Post by: G M on November 14, 2011, 07:19:16 AM

http://biggovernment.com/whall/2011/11/13/revealed-pelosi-blocked-credit-card-reform-while-investing-millions-in-exclusive-visa-stock-offering/

REVEALED: Nancy Pelosi Blocked Credit Card Reform While Investing Millions in Exclusive Visa Stock Offering
by Wynton Hall

Former Speaker of the House–and current Minority Leader–Nancy Pelosi apparently bought $1 million to $5 million of Visa stock in one of the most sought-after and profitable initial public offerings (IPO) in American history, thwarted serious credit card reform for two years, and then watched her investment skyrocket 203%.
 
The revelation appears in Throw Them All Out, the new book by investigative journalist and Breitbart editor Peter Schweizer, which was the focus of 60 Minutes on CBS this evening, and which is featured in this week’s issue of Newsweek.
 




Schweizer’s investigation of Pelosi and other members of Congress–from both parties–raises a critical question:  should it be legal for lawmakers to buy stocks in companies directly affected by their legislative efforts?
 


In early 2008, Nancy Pelosi and her real estate developer husband, Paul, were given an opportunity to buy into a Visa IPO. It was a nearly impossible feat–one that average citizens almost certainly could never achieve. The vast majority of purchase opportunities went to institutional investors, large mutual funds, or pension funds.
 
Despite Pelosi’s consistent railing against credit card companies, on March 18, 2008, the Pelosis bought between $1 million and $5 million (politicians do not have to report the exact amounts, only ranges) worth of Visa stock at the IPO price of $44 per share. Two days later, the stock price rocketed to $65 per share, yielding a 50% profit. The Pelosis then bought Visa twice more. By their third purchase on June 4, 2008, Visa was worth $85 per share.
 
How did Nancy Pelosi snag one of the most coveted initial public offerings in history? The facts are still emerging. Yet according to Schweizer, corporations that wish to build congressional allies will sometimes hand-pick members of Congress to receive IPOs. Pelosi received her Visa IPO almost two weeks after a potentially damaging piece of legislation for Visa, the Credit Card Fair Fee Act, had been introduced in the House. If passed, the bill would have cut into Visa’s profits substantially by lowering so-called “interchange fees,” the 1% to 3% charge retailers pay Visa when customers use Visa cards for purchases. Interchange fees are a critical source of revenue for the four credit card companies–$48 billion in 2008, to be exact.
 
If the Credit Card Fair Fee Act had been passed into effect, it would have amended antitrust laws to require credit card companies to enter negotiations with merchants over interchange fees, and it would have given the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission the power to arbitrate if the two sides failed to come to an agreement. For that reason, Visa and the other credit card companies strongly opposed the bill.
 
The Credit Card Fair Fee Act was exactly the kind of bill one would think then-Speaker Pelosi would have backed. “She had been outspoken about antitrust problems posed by insurance, oil, and pharmaceutical companies,” Schweizer notes, “and she was vocal about the need for controlling interest rates individual banks charged to use their credit cards.”
 
Initially, the Credit Card Fair Fee Act cleared the Judiciary Committee on a 19-16 vote, and the National Association of Convenience Stores began lobbying for a vote on the floor of the House. “It is imperative to tell your Representatives to request a vote on the House Floor from Nancy Pelosi,” the association urged its members. Still, with at least ten percent of the Pelosi family’s entire stock portfolio invested in a single stock, Nancy Pelosi clearly had a vested interest in ensuring that Visa’s profits were protected. And that is exactly what she accomplished. Despite broad public support for the bill—77% in one study—Pelosi saw to it that the bill never made it to the House floor.
 
Shortly thereafter, a second bill limiting collusion by the credit card companies on interchange fees was proposed. The Credit Card Interchange Fee Act of 2008, while not as strong as the first bill, would have required greater transparency from credit card companies in informing customers how much they were paying in interchange fees. Yet again, reports Schweizer, “this second bill suffered the same fate as the first, never making it to the House floor.”
 
By 2009, both bills had garnered even broader bipartisan support and were reintroduced. Under Speaker Pelosi, however, neither bill lived to see a vote on the House floor.
 
Pelosi eventually supported something called the Credit Card Reform Act. Curiously, the all-important interchange fees went untouched by that legislation. Instead, the bill stated that the interchange fee issue should simply be “studied.” The bill’s other measures would not affect Visa but rather its client banks. In short, the Credit Card Reform Act ensured that Visa and the other credit card companies dodged a potentially costly bullet.
 
None of that, however, prevented Pelosi from grandstanding. She publicly declared that the Credit Card Reform Act sent a “strong and clear message to credit card companies” that they would be held to account for their “anti-consumer practices.”
 
In the wake of the bill’s passage, the Pelosis’ shares of Visa stock rose. Indeed, according to Throw Them All Out, “the IPO shares they had purchased soared by 203% from where they began, while the stock market as a whole was down 15% during the same period.”
 
Nancy Pelosi is hardly the only member of Congress to be given IPOs, but Pelosi has been especially “lucky” at landing them. She and her husband have participated in at least 10 lucrative IPOs throughout her career. In 1993, Pelosi purchased IPO shares in a high-tech company named Gupta, watched the stock price leap 88% in 24 hours, then seized the profits by selling the stock the next day. The Pelosis did the same thing with Netscape and UUNet, resulting in a one-day doubling of their initial investment. Other fast and lucrative IPO flips included Remedy Corporation, Opal, Legato Systems, and Act Networks.
 
Schweizer says Nancy Pelosi’s financial disclosure forms typically mask the precise dates of her stock buys. He cites the Pelosis’ December 1999 stock purchase of between $250,000 and $500,000 in shares from high-tech company OnDisplay. A few months later, OnDisplay was bought by Vignette, which resulted in up to $1 million in capital gains for the Pelosis. What was unusual about the transaction is that Vignette’s IPO was underwritten by a major campaign contributor and longtime friend of Nancy Pelosi, William Hambrecht.
 
Throw Them All Out also chronicles the Pelosis’ $100,000 IPO purchase of Clean Energy Fuels at roughly $12 a share. Schweizer alleges that as Speaker of the House, Pelosi pushed several bills beneficial to the company.
 
Similarly, in November 2007, Pelosi bought $500,000 in the IPO for Quest Energy Partners before proceeding to champion the natural gas-related legislation that stood to significantly benefit the company. When Tom Brokaw asked her whether her significant personal investments in natural gas represented a conflict of interest, Pelosi shrugged off the question by hiding behind the crony capitalist’s false credo: “That’s the marketplace.”

Title: 60 Minutes on congressional inside trading
Post by: G M on November 14, 2011, 07:45:01 AM

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7388130n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox

Congress: Trading stock on inside information?
November 13, 2011 4:02 PM

Steve Kroft reports that members of Congress can legally trade stock based on non-public information from Capitol Hill.



Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7388130n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 16, 2011, 08:14:53 AM

Regarding the last two posts:   :cry: :cry: :cry:

Title: Palin: How Congress occupied Wall Street
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 18, 2011, 07:35:33 AM

By SARAH PALIN

Mark Twain famously wrote, "There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress." Peter Schweizer's new book, "Throw Them All Out," reveals this permanent political class in all its arrogant glory. (Full disclosure: Mr. Schweizer is employed by my political action committee as a foreign-policy adviser.)

Mr. Schweizer answers the questions so many of us have asked. I addressed this in a speech in Iowa last Labor Day weekend. How do politicians who arrive in Washington, D.C. as men and women of modest means leave as millionaires? How do they miraculously accumulate wealth at a rate faster than the rest of us? How do politicians' stock portfolios outperform even the best hedge-fund managers'? I answered the question in that speech: Politicians derive power from the authority of their office and their access to our tax dollars, and they use that power to enrich and shield themselves.

The money-making opportunities for politicians are myriad, and Mr. Schweizer details the most lucrative methods: accepting sweetheart gifts of IPO stock from companies seeking to influence legislation, practicing insider trading with nonpublic government information, earmarking projects that benefit personal real estate holdings, and even subtly extorting campaign donations through the threat of legislation unfavorable to an industry. The list goes on and on, and it's sickening.

Astonishingly, none of this is technically illegal, at least not for Congress. Members of Congress exempt themselves from the laws they apply to the rest of us. That includes laws that protect whistleblowers (nothing prevents members of Congress from retaliating against staffers who shine light on corruption) and Freedom of Information Act requests (it's easier to get classified documents from the CIA than from a congressional office).

The corruption isn't confined to one political party or just a few bad apples. It's an endemic problem encompassing leadership on both sides of the aisle. It's an entire system of public servants feathering their own nests.

None of this surprises me. I've been fighting this type of corruption and cronyism my entire political career. For years Alaskans suspected that our lawmakers and state administrators were in the pockets of the big oil companies to the detriment of ordinary Alaskans. We knew we were being taken for a ride, but it took FBI wiretaps to finally capture lawmakers in the act of selling their votes. In the wake of politicos being carted off to prison, my administration enacted reforms based on transparency and accountability to prevent this from happening again.

We were successful because we had the righteous indignation of Alaskan citizens on our side. Our good ol' boy political class in Juneau was definitely not with us. Business was good for them, so why would they want to end "business as usual"?

The moment you threaten to strip politicians of their legal graft, they'll moan that they can't govern effectively without it. Perhaps they'll gravitate toward reform, but often their idea of reform is to limit the right of "We the people" to exercise our freedom of speech in the political process.

I've learned from local, state and national political experience that the only solution to entrenched corruption is sudden and relentless reform. Sudden because our permanent political class is adept at changing the subject to divert the public's attention—and we can no longer afford to be indifferent to this system of graft when our country is going bankrupt. Reform must be relentless because fighting corruption is like a game of whack-a-mole. You knock it down in one area only to see it pop up in another.

What are the solutions? We need reform that provides real transparency. Congress should be subject to the Freedom of Information Act like everyone else. We need more detailed financial disclosure reports, and members should submit reports much more often than once a year. All stock transactions above $5,000 should be disclosed within five days.

We need equality under the law. From now on, laws that apply to the private sector must apply to Congress, including whistleblower, conflict-of-interest and insider-trading laws. Trading on nonpublic government information should be illegal both for those who pass on the information and those who trade on it. (This should close the loophole of the blind trusts that aren't really blind because they're managed by family members or friends.)

No more sweetheart land deals with campaign contributors. No gifts of IPO shares. No trading of stocks related to committee assignments. No earmarks where the congressman receives a direct benefit. No accepting campaign contributions while Congress is in session. No lobbyists as family members, and no transitioning into a lobbying career after leaving office. No more revolving door, ever.

This call for real reform must transcend political parties. The grass-roots movements of the right and the left should embrace this. The tea party's mission has always been opposition to waste and crony capitalism, and the Occupy protesters must realize that Washington politicians have been "Occupying Wall Street" long before anyone pitched a tent in Zuccotti Park.

Ms. Palin, a former governor of Alaska, was the Republican nominee for vice president in 2008.

Title: And he's worried about where to park his yacht.....
Post by: G M on November 19, 2011, 12:24:49 PM

http://biggovernment.com/whall/2011/11/18/exclusive-documents-the-kerrys-curious-stock-trades/

EXCLUSIVE DOCUMENTS: The Kerrys’ Curious Stock Trades
by Wynton Hall

BigGovernment.com has obtained records of Massachusetts Democrat Senator John Kerry and his wife Teresa Heinz’s stock portfolios that show almost perfectly timed pharmaceutical stock trades during the Obamacare debate, which fattened their already enormous personal fortune.

Title: Demwalk Empire
Post by: G M on November 24, 2011, 08:27:16 PM

(http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/112011.jpg)
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/112011.jpg

President Barucky Obampson

Title: Illinois: State Of Embarrassment
Post by: G M on December 07, 2011, 05:04:09 AM

http://www.newgeography.com/content/002557-illinois-state-of-embarrassment

Illinois: State Of Embarrassment




by Joel Kotkin 12/06/2011






Most critics of Barack Obama’s desultory performance the past three years trace it to his supposedly leftist ideology, lack of experience and even his personality quirks. But it would perhaps be more useful to look at the geography — of Chicago and the state of Illinois — that nurtured his career and shaped his approach to politics. Like with George W. Bush and Texas, this is a case where you can’t separate the man from the place.
 
The Chicago imprint on Obama is unmistakable. His closest advisors are almost all products of the Windy City’s machine politic: ConsigliereValerie Jarrett; his first chief of staff, now Chicago Mayor, Rahm Emanuel; and his current chief of staff, longtime Chicago hackster William Daley, scion of the Windy City’s longtime ruling family.
 
All these figures arose from a Chicago where corruption is so commonplace that it elicits winks, nods and even a kind of admiration. Since 1973, for example, 27 Chicago Aldermen have been convicted by U.S. Attorney of the Northern District of Illinois.
 
That culture of corruption affects the rest of the state as well. Both Gov. George Ryan (who served from 1999 to 2003 and  and his successor Ron Blagojevich have been convicted a major crimes. So have four of the state’s last eight governors. Blagojevich’s felonies are part and parcel of a political climate that also includes the also newly convicted  Antonin “Tony” Rezko, a real estate speculator and early key Obama backer, sentenced late last month to a ten-year prison sentence.
 
Crony capitalism constitutes the essential element of what the legendary columnist John Kass of the Chicago Tribune has labeled both the “Chicago way” and the “Illinois Combine”, not primarily an ideology-driven movement. The political system, he notes, “knows no party, only appetites.”
 
Just look at the special favors granted to vested interests while the state has imposed a 65% boost in income taxes for middle class citizens. Companies like Boeing and United, which have head offices in Chicago, get tax breaks and incentives, while everyone else pays the full fare. This game is still afoot.  Even as the state deficit persists, other big players such as the CME group, which operates the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the Chicago Board of Options and Sears are threatening to leave unless their taxes are also lowered.
 
Thus it’s not surprising then that cronyism has become a hallmark of the Obama administration. Wall Street grandees, a key source of Obama campaign funders in 2008 and again now, have been treated to bailouts as well as monetary policies that have assured massive profits to the “too big to fail” crowed while devastating consumers and smaller banks.
 
The evolving scandal over “green jobs” — with huge loans handed out to faithful campaign contributors — epitomizes the special dealing that has become an art form in the system of Chicago and Illinois politics.  Beneficiaries include longtime Obama backers such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Google. Another scandal is building up around the telecom company LightSquared. This company, financed largely by key Obama donors, appears to have gained a leg up for a huge Pentagon contract due to White House pressure.
 
If the Chicago system had proven an economic success, perhaps we could excuse Obama for bringing it to the rest of us. Most of us would put up with a bit of corruption and special dealing if the results were strong economic and employment growth.
 
But the bare demographic and economic facts for both Chicago and Illinois reveal a stunning legacy of failure. Over the past decade, Illinois suffered the third highest loss of STEM (science, technology, engineering and math-related) jobs in the nation, barely beating out Delaware and Michigan. The rest of the job picture is also dismal: Over the past ten years, Illinois suffered the third largest loss of jobs of any state, losing over six percent of its employment.
 
The state’s demographic picture also is dismal. In the last decade, Illinois lost population not only to sunbelt states such as Texas and Florida but actually managed to have negative migration even with places like California and New York, net losers to virtually everywhere else. In fact, Illinois had a positive net migration with only one major state, Michigan.
 
Chicago and its Daley dictatorship has been much celebrated in the media – particularly after Obama’s election in everything from the liberal New Yorker to Fast Company, which named Chicago “city of the year” in 2008. The following year, the Windy City was deemed the best city for men by Askmen.com, for offering what it claimed was “the perfect balance between cosmopolitan and comfortable, combining all of the culture, entertainment and sophistication of an internationally renowned destination with an affordable lifestyle and down-to-earth work hard/play hard character.”
 
Well, you can make that case, unless you happen to be searching for a job. Over the past decade, “the Chicago way” has proven more adept at getting good coverage than creating employment for its residents. In NewGeography's last cities rankings greater Chicago ranked 41st out of the 51 largest metropolitan areas. Between 2001 and 2011 it actually lost jobs. Since 2007 the region has lost more jobs than Detroit, and more than twice as many as New York. It has lost about as many jobs – 250,000 – as up and comer Houston has gained.  In NewGeography's recent survey of high-tech growth, the Chicago region stood at a dismal 47th among the nation’s 51 largest metropolitan areas.
 
Overall, Chicago Loop Alliance reports that private sector employment in the Loop, the core of the Chicago downtown area, fell from 338,000 to 275,000 between 2000 and 2010. Chicago’s core has fallen further behind, in capturing high end employment than its traditional rival, New York.
 
This weak hand is also evident in the region’s strongly negative migration. According to the last Census, Chicago lost more than 200,000 people during the last decade. People are leaving the Chicago area not only for Sun Belt havens but to rising Midwest competitors like Indianapolis and Minneapolis, which offer better business climates, lower housing prices and cleaner governments, says local urban analyst Aaron Renn. Even perennial losers like Los Angeles and New York are net gainers with Chicago.
 
Given this economic and demographic track record, it’s no big surprise that the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois face enormous fiscal pressures. The city is facing a deficit of about $650 million and the state’s unfunded future liabilities are upwards of $160 billion. The  new taxes are on tap for state residents, according to Illinois Public Policy Institute, will cost the average Illinoisan a whole week’s earnings.
 
One might hope this disastrous record might make President Obama consider taking a different path to governing our country.  Yet sadly it appears that acknowledgement of failure is not part of the “Chicago way” — a denial that may cost us dearly in the years ahead.
 
This piece first appeared at Forbes.com.
 
Joel Kotkin is executive editor of NewGeography.com and is a distinguished presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University, and an adjunct fellow of the Legatum Institute in London. He is author of The City: A Global History. His newest book is The Next Hundred Million: America in 2050, released in February, 2010.

Title: Programmer under oath admits computers rig elections
Post by: bigdog on December 15, 2011, 01:49:18 PM

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1thcO_olHas&sns=fb[/youtube]

Very interesting.  Paper trail!!!???

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud: Clinton Curtis
Post by: DougMacG on December 16, 2011, 08:53:14 AM

Bigdog,  Very interesting story.  I never heard that story at the time.  I heard more about what Maxine Waters was trying to get at regarding Diebold.  He is very believable - up to a point.  He does go rather seamlessly from what he knows to other conclusions such as the communist China story at the end.  Asked: was this [the flip the result program] used, he said: 'I have no idea'.  He talks of writing code to rig one machine I think, pressing a secret button, and goes to flipping the result of a larger election.  I did not follow that.  Although no one went to jail over finding a stack of Al Franken ballots in the trunk of a car.  Normally one precinct irregularity doesn't flip an election result.  In both Florida 2000 and with the 60th Senator, the errors were perhaps greater than the margin.

Here is a youtube that expands on Curtis' story. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7tjnuG-l6g

One reaction I have is that this supports the argument in favor of further education.  Why is it that so few people can read source code?  I realize it is hard to build with hardware capacity so small and simple that it is only capable of holding one basic program that can only add one vote from each ballot to the count, not switch or timer based iterations, but it needs to be done.

Our polling places have election judges present from both sides (and where I vote there is a paper ballot to count against the machine reading it).  Where would these machines go for re-programming?  One corrupt employee would stay after everyone leaves?  Like any question of tainted evidence, isn't there a chain of custody with a voting machine?  The machines aren't just free for tinkering?  And isn't the penalty for rigging or triggering the switch program a felony for each incident, for each person involved?

More than 30 years ago I was selling some of the first fully automated teller machines, a labor saving technology that perhaps caused the Jimmy Carter's and Reagan's unemployment problems. :wink:  On every install I would joke with the technicians about rigging my card to trigger the dispensing of ALL the cash.  I would get a laugh out of that, but amazingly you never hear of it happening on any brand machine at any bank over more that 3 decades.  The ability to write and verify security into programming has been available for a very long time.

This story may explain some elections in Venezuela, where exit polls had a 40 point flip and where control of the machines and polling places was with all with the regime, more than it explains Florida 2000 or other irregularities here.

Title: Holder's use of his office in race and politics
Post by: prentice crawford on December 20, 2011, 02:58:33 AM

Woof,
 Holder has no problem using his office to further his political agenda.

EDITORIAL: Justice Department to blacks: We know better

ROD LAMKEY JR./THE WASHINGTON TIMES REVERSED: Former North Carolina lawmaker Stephen LaRoque, a Republican who led the drive for nonpartisan local elections, calls the decision “racial as well as partisan.”From left: Faroya Basden, Elton Williams and Tyshun Wilson work to open the True Deliverance Fellowship Center in a closed storefront shop in Kinston. The center will be a place for Christian youths to congregate in the town of nearly 23,000 people, two-thirds of whom are black.

 By THE WASHINGTON TIMES

-

The Washington Times

 Tuesday, October 27, 2009


 Black voters across the land should be offended by the Obama Justice Department. In a decision last month, the department effectively told black voters in the town of Kinston, N.C., that they are too stupid to choose their own elected officials unless the candidates are identified by party label. In doing so, the department overruled Kinston’s black voters themselves, who helped vote overwhelmingly to join most other North Carolina towns in holding nonpartisan local elections.
 
The arrogance of the Justice Department is staggering. Its violation of constitutional norms is astonishing. And its paternalism toward Kinston’s blacks is almost antebellum.
 
The issue at hand was a proposal last November to switch Kinston to a nonpartisan voting system for local elections. About 65 percent of Kinston’s 15,000 registered voters are black, meaning that blacks are registered at a higher proportion than their voting-age population of 59 percent. In last November’s elections, more than 11,000 of those 15,000 voted, with blacks voting in greater numbers than whites. By a nearly 2 to 1 margin, Kinston voted to eliminate party affiliations from local candidates’ names on election ballots. The switch to nonpartisanship won a majority in seven of the city’s nine black-majority voting precincts. In sum, nothing could be clearer than that Kinston’s black voters themselves want nonpartisan elections.
 
Yet the Justice Department ruled that nonpartisan elections somehow violate black voting rights because apparently black voters don’t know their own minds. The department ruled that unless black and white voters specifically know who the Democrat in any particular race is, the would-be Democrat might not win - and unless the would-be Democrat wins, blacks will be disenfranchised.
 
“Removing the partisan cue in municipal elections will, in all likelihood, eliminate the single factor that allows black candidates to be elected to office,” wrote Loretta King, who at the time was acting head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.
 
More blatantly, department spokesman Alejandro Miyar said only a Justice Department analysis could make “the determination of who is a ‘candidate of choice’ for any group of voters.” That’s odd. We thought voters chose their candidates by, yes, voting. They vote, and then they count. Since when did a Washington bureaucrat get to tell the voters that they voted wrong? Since when did that bureaucrat get to tell a majority of black voters in a majority black city with a disproportionately high black voting registration that those selfsame black voters can’t make their own choice unless the choice has a D by his name?
 
The Justice Department is pushing beyond all reasonable limits a constitutionally suspect provision known as Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That section requires any jurisdiction in parts of 16 states to attain the department’s permission before making any change in voting procedures, even changes as small as moving voting machines from a school cafeteria to the school’s auditorium. Last spring, the Supreme Court stopped just short of ruling that Section 5 is unconstitutional. The high court wrote that “the Act’s preclearance requirements and its coverage formula raise serious constitutional questions,” but then decided that the case at hand did not require the justices to decide those questions.
 
In other recent cases, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. has written that “it is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race” and that “the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
 
Back in the still-valid 1970 case of Oregon v. Mitchell, Justice Hugo Black wisely wrote that “no function is more essential to the separate and independent existence of the States and their governments than the power to determine … the nature of their own machinery for filling local public offices.”
 
Here the Justice Department is clearly in the sordid business of discriminating by both race and political party to overturn a black-majority town’s right to determine how it fills local offices. This decision should not stand. The city of Kinston should challenge it in court, and legal foundations ought to be eagerly offering to guide that challenge at no cost to the city.



                               Holder’s Hidden Agenda, cont’d . . .

November 13, 2009 10:57 A.M.

By Andrew C. McCarthy

  This summer, I theorized that Attorney General Eric Holder — and his boss — had a hidden agenda in ordering a re-investigation of the CIA for six-year-old alleged interrogation excesses that had already been scrutinized by non-partisan DOJ prosecutors who had found no basis for prosecution. The continuing investigations of Bush-era counterterrorism policies (i.e., the policies that kept us safe from more domestic terror attacks), coupled with the Holder Justice Department’s obsession to disclose classified national-defense information from that period, enable Holder to give the hard Left the “reckoning” that he and Obama promised during the 2008 campaign. It would be too politically explosive for Obama/Holder to do the dirty work of charging Bush administration officials; but as new revelations from investigations and declassifications are churned out, Leftist lawyers use them to urge European and international tribunals to bring “torture” and “war crimes” indictments. Thus, administration cooperation gives Obama’s base the reckoning it demands but Obama gets to deny responsibility for any actual prosecutions.

Today’s announcement that KSM and other top al-Qaeda terrorists will be transferred to Manhattan federal court for civilian trials neatly fits this hidden agenda. Nothing results in more disclosures of government intelligence than civilian trials. They are a banquet of information, not just at the discovery stage but in the trial process itself, where witnesses — intelligence sources — must expose themselves and their secrets.

Let’s take stock of where we are at this point. KSM and his confederates wanted to plead guilty and have their martyrs’ execution last December, when they were being handled by military commission. As I said at the time, we could and should have accommodated them. The Obama administration could still accommodate them. After all, the president has not pulled the plug on all military commissions: Holder is going to announce at least one commission trial (for Nashiri, the Cole bomber) today.

Moreover, KSM has no defense. He was under American indictment for terrorism for years before there ever was a 9/11, and he can’t help himself but brag about the atrocities he and his fellow barbarians have carried out.

So: We are now going to have a trial that never had to happen for defendants who have no defense. And when defendants have no defense for their own actions, there is only one thing for their lawyers to do: put the government on trial in hopes of getting the jury (and the media) spun up over government errors, abuses and incompetence. That is what is going to happen in the trial of KSM et al. It will be a soapbox for al-Qaeda’s case against America. Since that will be their “defense,” the defendants will demand every bit of information they can get about interrogations, renditions, secret prisons, undercover operations targeting Muslims and mosques, etc., and — depending on what judge catches the case – they are likely to be given a lot of it. The administration will be able to claim that the judge, not the administration, is responsible for the exposure of our defense secrets. And the circus will be played out for all to see — in the middle of the war. It will provide endless fodder for the transnational Left to press its case that actions taken in America’s defense are violations of international law that must be addressed by foreign courts. And the intelligence bounty will make our enemies more efficient at killing us

 
                            Black Panthers Endorse Obama
Obama also has the endorsement of the New Black Panther Party.

"Barack Obama represents 'Positive Change' for all of America.  Obama will stir the 'Melting Pot' into a better "Molten America.'"
Read The New Black Panther Party 10 Point Platform from the anti-white and virulently anti-Semitic black supremacist party that has endorsed Obama on the presidential candidate's own website.


Following criticism earlier this month of an online endorsement from the New Black Panther Party (NBPP), Obama's campaign removed the controversial organization from the presidential candidate's official website.  The NBPP had been a registered team member and blogger on Obama's "MyObama" campaign site.

But the NBPP endorsement was reposted on Obama's official website today.

"Obama is capable of stirring the 'melting pot' into a better 'molten America,'" states the NBPP endorsement posted on Obama's site.

The NBPP is a controversial black extremist party whose leaders are notorious for their racist statements and for leading anti-white activism.  Malik Zulu Shabazz, NBPP national chairman, who has given scores of speeches condemning "white men" and Jews, confirmed his organization's endorsement of Obama in a recent interview with WND.

"I think the way Obama responded to the attack on him and the attempt to sabotage his campaign shows true leadership and character.  He had a chance to denounce his pastor and he didn't fall for the bait.  He stood up and addressed real issues of racial discord," stated Shabazz.

Shabazz boasted he met Obama last March when the politician attended the 42nd anniversary of the voting rights marches in Selma, Ala.

"I have nothing but respect for Obama and for his pastor," said Shabazz, referring to Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor of nearly 20 years.

It is Wright's racially charged and anti-Israel remarks that were widely circulated this month, landing the presidential candidate in hot water and prompting Obama to deliver a major race speech in which he condemned Wright's comments but not the pastor himself.

Speaking to WND, Shabazz referred to Obama as a man with a "Muslim background, a man of color."

Shabazz's NBPP's official platform states "white man has kept us deaf, dumb and blind," refers to the "white racist government of America," demands black people be exempt from military service and uses the word "Jew" repeatedly in quotation marks.

Shabazz has led racially divisive protests and conferences, such as the 1998 Million Youth March in which a few thousand Harlem youths reportedly were called upon to scuffle with police officers and speakers demanded the extermination of whites in South Africa.

The NBPP chairman was quoted at a May 2007 protest against the 400-year celebration of the settlement of Jamestown, Va., stating, "When the white man came here, you should have left him to die."

He claimed Jews engaged in an "African holocaust," and he has promoted the anti-Semitic urban legend that 4,000 Israelis fled the World Trade Center just prior to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

When Shabazz was denied entry to Canada last May while trying to speak at a black action event, he blamed Jewish groups and claimed Canada "is run from Israel."

Canadian officials justified the action stating he has an "anti-Semitic" and "anti-police" record, but some reports blamed what was termed a minor criminal history for the decision to deny him entry.

He similarly blamed Jews for then-New York Mayor Rudi Giuliani's initial decision, later rescinded, against granting a permit for the Million Youth March.

The NBPP's deceased chairman, Khallid Abdul Muhammad, a former Nation of Islam leader who was once considered Louis Farrakhan's most trusted adviser, gave speeches referring to the "white man" as the "devil" and claiming that "there is a little bit of Hitler in all white people."

In a 1993 speech condemned by the U.S. Congress and Senate, Muhammad, lionized on the NBPP site, referred to Jews as "bloodsuckers," labeled the pope a "no-good cracker" and advocated the murder of white South Africans who would not leave the nation subsequent to a 24-hour warning.

All NBPP members must memorize the group's rules, such as that no party member "can have a weapon in his possession while drunk or loaded off narcotics or weed," and no member "will commit any crimes against other party members or black people at all."

The NBPP endorses Obama on its own page of the presidential candidate's official site that allows registered users to post their own blogs.

The group labels itself on Obama's site as representing "Freedom, Justice, and Peace for all of Mankind."  It links to the official NBPP website, which contains what can be arguably regarded as hate material.

The NBPP previously endorsed Obama on the presidential candidate's site, but following publicity of that endorsement, the Obama campaign removed the NBPP posting.

"It's our policy [to remove] any content generated by a group that advocates violence," explained Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor to FoxNews.com.

Before the campaign removed the party's page, Obama spokeswoman Tiffany Edwards told FoxNews.com the NBPP endorsement on Obama's website "has nothing to do with us."

"People can form their own groups," she said. "It's not something that the campaign -- it's not something that we've done."

While it appears anyone can initially sign up as a registered supporter on Obama's site, it isn't clear whether the campaign monitors the site or approves users.  There is a link on each blog page for users to report any abusers, such as those who post controversial entries, to the administrator.

Shabbazz chalked up the Obama campaign's initial removal of his NBPP endorsement from the website to "the game of politics."

"The Obama camp's move to remove our blog doesn't mean much because I understand politics.  We still completely support Obama as the best candidate."

Obama 'less biased' on Israel

Shabazz said that aside from promoting black rights, he also supports Obama because he may take what he called a "less biased" policy on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"I have hopes he will change the U.S. government's position toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because our position has been unwarranted bias.  Time and time again the U.S. vetoed resolutions in the U.N. Security Council condemning [Israeli] human rights violations. ... I hope he shifts policy," Shabazz said.

           .............................................................................................

        Explosive Accusations: Justice Department Lawyer Accuses Holder of Dropping Black Panther Case For Racial Reasons –
 
June 30th, 2010 (21) Posted By Pat Dollard.
 
  A former Justice Department attorney who quit his job to protest the Obama administration’s handling of the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case is accusing Attorney General Eric Holder of dropping the charges for racially motivated reasons.
 
J. Christian Adams, now an attorney in Virginia, says he and the other Justice Department lawyers working on the case were ordered to dismiss it.
 


“I mean we were told, ‘Drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party,’” Adams told Fox News, adding that political appointees Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division since 2003, ordered the dismissal.
 
Asked about the Justice Department’s claim that they are career attorneys, not political appointees, Adams said “obviously, that’s false.”
 
“Under the vacancy reform act, they were serving in a political capacity,” he said. “This is one of the examples of Congress not being told the truth, the American people not being told the truth about this case. It’s one of the other examples in this case where the truth simply is becoming another victim of the process.”
 
Adams claimed an unnamed political appointee said if somebody wants to bring these kinds of cases, “that’ not going to de done out of the civil rights division.”
 
Adams also accused Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez of lying under oath to Congress about the circumstances surrounding the decision to drop the probe.
 
The Justice Department has defended its move to drop the case, saying it obtained an injunction against one member to keep him away from polling stations while dismissing charges against the others “based on a careful assessment of the facts and the law.”
 
But Adams told Fox News that politics and race was at play in the dismissal.
 
“There is a pervasive hostility within the civil rights division at the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases,” Adams told Fox News’ Megyn Kelly.
 
Adams says the dismissal is a symptom of the Obama administration’s reverse racism and that the Justice Department will not pursue voting rights cases against white victims.

“In voting, that will be the case over the next few years, there’s no doubt about it,” he said.
 
In an opinion article published in the Washington Times last week, Adams said the dismissal “raises serious questions about the department’s enforcement neutrality in upcoming midterm elections and the subsequent 2012 presidential election.”
 
Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler dismissed Adams’ accusations as a “good faith disagreement” with ulterior motives.
 
“It is not uncommon for attorneys within the department to have good faith disagreements about the appropriate course of action in a particular case, although it is regrettable when a former department attorney distorts the facts and makes baseless allegations to promote his or her agenda,” she said in a written statement.
 
In the final days of the Bush administration, three Black Panthers — Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson — were charged in a civil complaint with violating the Voter Rights Act in November 2008 by using coercion, threats and intimidation at a Philadelphia polling station — with Shabazz brandishing what prosecutors called a deadly weapon.
 
The Obama administration won a default judgment in federal court in April 2009 when the Black Panthers didn’t appear in court to fight the charges. But the administration moved to dismiss the charges in May 2009. Justice attorneys said a criminal complaint, which resulted in the injunction, proceeded successfully.
 
The department “is committed to comprehensive and vigorous enforcement of both the civil and criminal provisions of federal law that prohibit voter intimidation. We continue to work with voters, communities, and local law enforcement to ensure that every American can vote free from intimidation, coercion or threats,” Schmaler said Wednesday.
 
But the Justice Department’s explanation has failed to appease the United States Commission on Civil Rights, which is probing the department’s decision, or Republican lawmakers who say the dismissal could lead to an escalation of voter intimidation.
 
The commission held a hearing in April in which Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., who has led the charge for answers from the Justice Department, was among those testifying. The Justice Department did not provide witnesses at that hearing. Instead, Perez testified before the commission in May.
 
“At a minimum, without sufficient proof that New Black Panther Party or Malik Zulu Shabazz directed or controlled unlawful activities at the polls, or made speeches directed to immediately inciting or producing lawless action on Election Day, any attempt to bring suit against those parties based merely upon their alleged ‘approval’ or ‘endorsement’ of Minister King Samir Shabazz and Jackson’s activities would have likely failed,” he told the commission.
 
The commission has repeatedly sought information from the Justice Department, going as far as filing subpoenas. Schmaler said the department has provided 2,000 pages of information in response.
 
But Adams said in the Times article that the department ordered the attorneys “to ignore the subpoena, lawlessly placing us in an unacceptably legal limbo.”
 
Adams also says that after the dismissal, Justice Department attorneys were instructed not to bring any more cases against racial minorities under the Voting Section.

Adams told Fox News that the New Black Panther case was the “easiest I ever had at the Justice Department.
 
“It doesn’t get any easier than this,” he said. “If this doesn’t constitute voter intimidation, nothing will.”


                                                  P.C.

Title: WSJ: Race baiting campaign against vote integrity
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 23, 2011, 07:57:24 AM

The Obama Administration's re-election mobilization continues: Witness Eric Holder's attempt to play the race card and perhaps twist the law in a campaign against voter identification laws.

In the Attorney General's telling, the movement in the states to require voters to show some ID is a revival of minority disenfranchisement a la Jim Crow. A growing number of minorities, he said in a speech last week, are now worried about "the same disparities, divisions and problems" that beset the country in 1965 and "many Americans, for the first time in their lives . . . now have reason to believe that we are failing to live up" to the promise of democracy for all.

If you haven't heard about this national crisis, perhaps that's because you don't travel in Mr. Holder's political circles. He is merely repeating the howls of groups like the NAACP and the George Soros-funded Brennan Center, which claim without evidence that voter ID laws hurt minorities.

The NAACP even petitioned the United Nations this month for a human-rights ruling on what President Benjamin Jealous called a "tidal wave of assaults on the right to vote." He meant in America, not Cuba or North Korea. The American Civil Liberties Union has sued to challenge a voter ID law in Wisconsin.

Mr. Holder's remarks are especially notable because they come as the Justice Department is reviewing voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina for "preclearance" under the Voting Rights Act. The states' plans require voters to present photo ID like a driver's license or passport to vote, a measure endorsed by the Commission on Federal Election Reform headed by President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker in 2005 to protect the integrity of the ballot.

Mr. Holder says the Civil Rights Division led by Thomas Perez will review the policies and impartially "apply the law." If that's true, Mr. Perez's job should be easy: In 2005, Justice approved a nearly identical law in Georgia. In 2008's Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the Supreme Court likewise ruled 6-3 that an Indiana law requiring photo ID at the ballot box was constitutional.

The court's liberal lion, then-Justice John Paul Stevens, wrote for the majority that Indiana's law "is unquestionably relevant to the State's interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process." Indiana offered free voter ID cards to all citizens, so the inconvenience of picking up an ID at the Department of Motor Vehicles wasn't an undue burden and was reasonably balanced by the state's interest in reducing fraud, Justice Stevens wrote.

That isn't good enough for Mr. Holder, who says his department's priority is to "expand the franchise." But expand it for whom, exactly? The vast majority of voters already have the necessary photo ID, which they need to get through airport security or register for a grocery-store savings card.

Plaintiffs put up by liberal lawsuit shops routinely claim that ID laws endanger the rights of hundreds of thousands, but lawsuits in Indiana and Georgia were dismissed because they couldn't produce a single eligible voter who'd been turned away due to the ID requirement. Turnout has risen in states that have passed the voter ID laws, with no adverse impact on minorities.

In his speech, Mr. Holder highlighted historical attempts to keep voters away from the polls to "gain partisan advantage." But in a case of more recent history, in 2009, Mr. Holder's department dropped a voter intimidation case against the Black Panther Party, in which members stood outside a polling place brandishing nightsticks and threatening voters. Civil-rights lawyer Bartle Bull saw the Panthers in action and called it "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen."

Thirty states now require some form of ID at the polls, and one goal of Mr. Holder's attack is to intimidate other states that want to toughen their laws. He's probably also signaling that Justice will strike down the Texas and South Carolina statutes. This would please the Democratic Party's left while not-so-subtly inventing a threat of Republican racism to drive minority turnout in 2012. Mr. Holder's voter ID alarums are one more reason he's earning a reputation for politicized, partial justice.

Title: From the birthplace of "Hope and change"
Post by: G M on December 23, 2011, 01:11:11 PM

http://www.chicagomag.com/core/pagetools.php?url=%2FChicago-Magazine%2FJanuary-2012%2FGangs-and-Politicians-An-Unholy-Alliance%2F&mode=print

Gangs and Politicians in Chicago: An Unholy Alliance

David Bernstein and Noah Isackson

 
A few months before last February’s citywide elections, Hal Baskin’s phone started ringing. And ringing. Most of the callers were candidates for Chicago City Council, seeking the kind of help Baskin was uniquely qualified to provide.
 
Baskin isn’t a slick campaign strategist. He’s a former gang leader and, for several decades, a community activist who now operates a neighborhood center that aims to keep kids off the streets. Baskin has deep contacts inside the South Side’s complex network of politicians, community organizations, and street gangs. as he recalls, the inquiring candidates wanted to know: “Who do I need to be talking to so I can get the gangs on board?”
 
Baskin—who was himself a candidate in the 16th Ward aldermanic race, which he would lose—was happy to oblige. In all, he says, he helped broker meetings between roughly 30 politicians (ten sitting aldermen and 20 candidates for City Council) and at least six gang representatives. That claim is backed up by two other community activists, Harold Davis Jr. and Kublai K. M. Toure, who worked with Baskin to arrange the meetings, and a third participant, also a community activist, who requested anonymity. The gang representatives were former chiefs who had walked away from day-to-day thug life, but they were still respected on the streets and wielded enough influence to mobilize active gang members.
 
The first meeting, according to Baskin, occurred in early November 2010, right before the statewide general election; more gatherings followed in the run-up to the February 2011 municipal elections. The venues included office buildings, restaurants, and law offices. (By all accounts, similar meetings took place across the city before last year’s elections and in elections past, including after hours at the Garfield Center, a taxpayer-financed facility on the West Side that is used by the city’s Department of Family and Support Services.)
 
At some of the meetings, the politicians arrived with campaign materials and occasionally with aides. The sessions were organized much like corporate-style job fairs. The gang representatives conducted hourlong interviews, one after the other, talking to as many as five candidates in a single evening. Like supplicants, the politicians came into the room alone and sat before the gang representatives, who sat behind a long table. “One candidate said, ‘I feel like I’m in the hot seat,’” recalls Baskin. “And they were.”
 
The former chieftains, several of them ex-convicts, represented some of the most notorious gangs on the South and West Sides, including the Vice Lords, Gangster Disciples, Black Disciples, Cobras, Black P Stones, and Black Gangsters. Before the election, the gangs agreed to set aside decades-old rivalries and bloody vendettas to operate as a unified political force, which they called Black United Voters of Chicago. “They realized that if they came together, they could get the politicians to come to them,” explains Baskin.
 
The gang representatives were interested in electing aldermen sympathetic to their interests and those of their impoverished wards. As for the politicians, says Baskin, their interests essentially boiled down to getting elected or reelected. “All of [the political hopefuls] were aware of who they were meeting with,” he says. “They didn’t care. All they wanted to do was get the support.”
 
Baskin declined to name names, but Chicago has learned, through other sources at the meetings, the identities of some of the participants. They include: Aldermen Howard Brookins Jr. (21st Ward), Walter Burnett Jr. (27th), Willie Cochran (20th), and Freddrenna Lyle (6th). Alderman Pat Dowell (3rd) attended a meeting; upon realizing that the participants had close gang ties, she objected but stayed. Also attending were candidates who would go on to win their races, including Michael Chandler (24th) and Roderick Sawyer (6th). Darcel Beavers, the former 7th Ward alderman who would wind up losing her race, and Patricia Horton, a commissioner with the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District who lost her bid for city clerk, also met with the group.
 
Chandler, Brookins, and Burnett told Chicago they did not attend such a meeting. Sawyer and Horton did not return several calls seeking comment. A spokesman for Dowell confirmed that she attended the meeting after she objected. Beavers, Cochran, and Lyle, who was recently appointed as a Cook County judge, said they attended but were not told beforehand that former gang chiefs would be there, nor that the purpose involved gang-backed political support. “It, basically, was no different than sitting in front of any other panel that asks you questions relative to constituent issues,” said Cochran.
 
During the meetings, the politicians were allotted a few minutes to make their pitches. The former gang chiefs then peppered them with questions: What would they do about jobs? School safety? Police harassment? Help for ex-cons? But in the end, as with most things political in Chicago, it all came down to one question, says Davis, the community activist who helped Baskin with some of the meetings. He recalls that the gang representatives asked, “What can you give me?” The politicians, most eager to please, replied, “What do you want?”
 
Street gangs have been a part of Chicago politics at least since the days of the notorious First Ward bosses “Bathhouse John” Coughlin and Michael “Hinky Dink” Kenna, who a century ago ran their vice-ridden Levee district using gangs of toughs armed with bats and pistols to bully voters and stuff ballot boxes. “Gangs and politics have always gone together in this city,” says John Hagedorn, a gang expert and professor of criminal justice at the University of Illinois at Chicago. It’s a shadowy alliance, he adds, that is deeply ingrained in Chicago’s political culture: “You take care of them; they’ll take care of us.”
 
To what extent do street gangs influence—and corrupt—Chicago politics today? And what are the consequences for ordinary citizens? To find out, Chicago conducted more than 100 interviews with current and former elected officials and candidates, gang leaders, senior police officials, rank-and-file cops, investigators, and prosecutors. We also talked to community activists, campaign operatives, and criminologists. We limited our scope to the city (though alliances certainly exist in some gang-infested suburbs) and focused exclusively on Democrats, since they are the dominant governing party in Chicago and in the statehouse. Moreover, we looked at the political influence of street gangs only, not of traditional organized crime—a worthy subject for another day.
 
Our findings:
 
• While they typically deny it, many public officials—mostly, but not limited to, aldermen, state legislators, and elected judges—routinely seek political support from influential street gangs. Meetings like the ones Baskin organized, for instance, are hardly an anomaly. Gangs can provide a decisive advantage at election time by performing the kinds of chores patronage armies once did.
 
• In some cases, the partnerships extend beyond the elections in troubling—and possibly criminal—ways, greased by the steady and largely secret flow of money from gang leaders to certain politicians and vice versa. The gangs funnel their largess through opaque businesses, or front companies, and through under-the-table payments. In turn, grateful politicians use their payrolls or campaign funds to hire gang members, pull strings for them to get jobs or contracts, or offer other favors (see “Gangs and Politicians: Prisoner Shuffle”).
 
• Most alarming, both law enforcement and gang sources say, is that some politicians ignore the gangs’ criminal activities. Some go so far as to protect gangs from the police, tipping them off to impending raids or to surveillance activities—in effect, creating safe havens in their political districts. And often they chafe at backing tough measures to stem gang activities, advocating instead for superficial solutions that may garner good press but have little impact.
 
The paradox is that Chicago’s struggle to combat street gangs is being undermined by its own elected officials. And the alliances between lawmakers and lawbreakers raise a troubling question: Who actually rules the neighborhoods—our public servants or the gangs?

**Read it all.

Title: WSJ: DOJ vs SC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 26, 2011, 12:26:28 PM

By EVAN PEREZ
WASHINGTON—The Justice Department blocked South Carolina's new voter identification law, citing concerns about the law's effect on African-American voters and setting up a new conflict between the Obama administration and Republican-led state governments.
 
'We plan to look at every possible option to get this terrible, clearly political decision overturned,' said South Carolina Gov. Haley.

The South Carolina proposal would require voters to provide state-issued or military photo identification in order to cast a ballot. Current law allows voters to use a printed voter registration card as identification.

Under the federal Voting Rights Act, South Carolina must prove that any changes in voting law don't have the effect of discriminating against minorities. The state can either change the law or, more likely, challenge the Justice Department's objection in court. South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley called the federal action "outrageous," adding that "we plan to look at every possible option to get this terrible, clearly political decision overturned so we can protect the integrity of our electoral process."

The Republican-led legislature passed the law earlier this year, and proponents said the identification requirement is needed to ensure balloting is free from fraud. Civil rights groups say the law threatens to infringe on the rights of voters who don't have driver's licenses and may not have the means to pay for documentation to get state-issued IDs.

"Although the state has a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud and safeguarding voter confidence," it didn't provide "any evidence or instance of either in-person voter impersonation or any other type of fraud that is not already addressed by the state's existing voter identification requirement," said Thomas Perez, assistant attorney for civil rights, in a letter to state officials.

Mr. Perez said the law could have a discriminatory effect on nearly 82,000 minority voters. Minorities account for about 30% of South Carolina's 2.7 million registered voters.

South Carolina is one of dozens of jurisdictions in all or parts of 16 states, mostly in the South, required to get permission from the attorney general or a panel of judges in the District of Columbia federal court before making changes to local voting laws.

The Justice Department's move is sure to stir partisan disputes as a presidential election draws near. The last such Justice Department challenge of a voter identification law occurred in 1994 against Louisiana, under President Bill Clinton, and led to changes that passed muster with the department.

Voter ID laws in Georgia and Indiana, passed during the administration of President George W. Bush, didn't draw objections from the Justice Department. The Supreme Court in 2008 upheld the Indiana law.

Lawyers from the Justice Department's civil rights division spent months reviewing data turned over by South Carolina and determined that nonwhite voters were 20% more likely not have a photo ID issued by the state motor vehicles department. The data showed 10% of nonwhite registered voters and 8.4% of white voters don't have a state DMV photo ID.

Chad Connelly, chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party, said Democrats were exaggerating the effects of the law because they have "depended on" fraudulent votes in elections. He cited federal law that requires showing identification to buy certain cold medicines at a pharmacy.

"They have to show an ID to get a Sudafed at CVS," he said. "There's no reason you shouldn't show an ID to show you're an American."

Mr. Perez, in his letter, acknowledged provisions in the state law that attempt to mitigate the effect on minority voters, including allowing voters to get free state-issued IDs. But he said the measures weren't enough.

"Until South Carolina succeeds in substantially addressing the racial disparities," the state cannot meet the burden of proving the law doesn't have a discriminatory effect, he wrote.

South Carolina is one of seven states with voter ID laws signed into law in 2011, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, a New York University think-tank that studies voting issues. Only two had such laws before this year, according to the Brennan Center.

The Obama administration has repeatedly tangled with right-leaning states, mostly over state immigration laws that the federal government argues infringe on its powers.

Partisan fights over vote fraud have become commonplace in election years. Republicans have accused Democrats of using fraud to win elections. Democrats accuse Republicans of using voter ID laws and election-day tricks, such as pamphlets and automated calls, to discourage likely Democratic voters from turning out.

There is scant evidence from years of studies that the isolated instances of vote fraud are significant enough to turn an election. In recent years, federal and state authorities have prosecuted voter-registration fraud complaints. Those mostly relate to people who commit fraud to get paid for registering voters, not actual ballots being cast in a fraudulent way.

Similarly, alleged voter suppression efforts are hard to document. In one recent case in Maryland, a jury convicted an aide to the Republican gubernatorial candidate for authorizing automated calls to voters in majority-black precincts that prosecutors alleged were aimed at suppressing black turnout.

The calls claimed that the Democratic candidate had already won and that voters could stay home. It is unknown how many voters heeded the calls. The Democratic candidate easily won.

In a speech this month, Attorney General Eric Holder focused his concern on state laws that he said threatened to make voting less accessible. He hinted at possible coming battles with other states, noting that the Justice Department was scrutinizing state laws in Florida, Texas and elsewhere that have curtailed early balloting or added hurdles to registration efforts.

Title: POTH editorial
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 27, 2011, 06:36:16 AM

Next fall, thousands of students on college campuses will attempt to register to vote and be turned away. Sorry, they will hear, you have an out-of-state driver’s license. Sorry, your college ID is not valid here. Sorry, we found out that you paid out-of-state tuition, so even though you do have a state driver’s license, you still can’t vote.

 The Loyal Opposition
Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor, offers commentary and quick takes on breaking news stories.

Visit the Blog »

Related in Opinion
More on United States Elections »Readers’ Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (36) »
Political leaders should be encouraging young adults to participate in civic life, but many Republican state lawmakers are doing everything they can instead to prevent students from voting in the 2012 presidential election. Some have openly acknowledged doing so because students tend to be liberal.

Seven states have already passed strict laws requiring a government-issued ID (like a driver’s license or a passport) to vote, which many students don’t have, and 27 others are considering such measures. Many of those laws have been interpreted as prohibiting out-of-state driver’s licenses from being used for voting.

It’s all part of a widespread Republican effort to restrict the voting rights of demographic groups that tend to vote Democratic. Blacks, Hispanics, the poor and the young, who are more likely to support President Obama, are disproportionately represented in the 21 million people without government IDs. On Friday, the Justice Department, finally taking action against these abuses, blocked the new voter ID law in South Carolina.

Republicans usually don’t want to acknowledge that their purpose is to turn away voters, especially when race is involved, so they invented an explanation, claiming that stricter ID laws are necessary to prevent voter fraud. In fact, there is almost no voter fraud in America to prevent.

William O’Brien, the speaker of the New Hampshire State House, told a Tea Party group earlier this year that students are “foolish” and tend to “vote their feelings” because they lack life experience. “Voting as a liberal,” he said, “that’s what kids do.” And that’s why, he said, he supported measures to prohibit students from voting from their college addresses and to end same-day registration. New Hampshire Republicans even tried to pass a bill that would have kept students who previously lived elsewhere from voting in the state; fortunately, the measure failed, as did the others Mr. O’Brien favored.

Many students have taken advantage of Election Day registration laws, which is one reason Maine Republicans passed a law eliminating the practice. Voters restored it last month, but Republican lawmakers there are already trying new ways to restrict voting. The secretary of state said he was investigating students who are registered to vote in the state but pay out-of-state tuition.

Wisconsin once made it easy for students to vote, making it one of the leading states in turnout of younger voters in 2004 and 2008. When Republicans swept into power there last year, they undid all of that, imposing requirements that invalidated the use of virtually all college ID cards in voter registration. Colleges are scrambling to change their cards to add signatures and expiration dates, but it’s not clear whether the state will let them.

Imposing these restrictions to win an election will embitter a generation of students in its first encounter with the machinery of democracy.

Title: Re: NYT it's so hard to vote
Post by: DougMacG on December 27, 2011, 07:37:14 AM

"Next fall, thousands of students on college campuses will attempt to register to vote and be turned away. Sorry, they will hear, you have an out-of-state driver’s license. Sorry, your college ID is not valid here. Sorry, we found out that you paid out-of-state tuition, so even though you do have a state driver’s license, you still can’t vote."

a) If they are away from home on election day, they can vote absentee back home - like adults do. 

b) If they like where they live and are all grown up ready to vote and this is home now, not their parents' house, they can change their driver's license to their new address within 30 days of moving as would be otherwise required by law.  School starts by Sept 1.  Election day is in Nov.  That ought to do it.

c) They could take notice that the campaign was in full swing 1.5 YEARS before election day and make a decision to vote, where to vote and how to comply with identification rules before the last day. 

Many of these kids have a year of AP-US History, AP Physics and 2 years of AP Calculus before they turn 18 or enter college.  How about we make rules for everyone that protects the integrity of the process and let them comply.   Perhaps they are too busy to deal with real world realities; that may explain why they come in and vote like their professors until they find the world is different than they were taught.  Somewhere in their studies perhaps they came across places on earth throughout history where it really was hard to vote.

Title: The electoral process: Newt first hurt in Va. by new voter registration rules
Post by: DougMacG on December 27, 2011, 09:05:04 PM

Listening to opposition radio today I learned that Newt (allegedly) did not make the ballot in Virginia because of the new, tighter rules on voter registration.  He submitted 12,500 signatures they said but 10,000 signatures of registered voters is required to make the ballot and he came up short.  Same list 4 years ago would have been fine, but the rules changed.  They were finding the irony quite enjoyable.  (Unverified, I am unable to find a link.)

Title: Re: The electoral process: Newt first hurt in Va. by new voter registration rules
Post by: G M on December 27, 2011, 09:31:18 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on December 27, 2011, 09:05:04 PM

Listening to opposition radio today I learned that Newt (allegedly) did not make the ballot in Virginia because of the new, tighter rules on voter registration.  He submitted 12,500 signatures they said but 10,000 signatures of registered voters is required to make the ballot and he came up short.  Same list 4 years ago would have been fine, but the rules changed.  They were finding the irony quite enjoyable.  (Unverified, I am unable to find a link.)

No sympathy for Newt. If Ron Paul's band of misfit toys could get him on the ballot, it's not that freakin' hard.

Title: WSJ: Holder's race baiting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 30, 2011, 07:59:31 AM

Eric Holder must be amazed that President Obama was elected and he could become Attorney General. That's a fair inference after the Attorney General last Friday blocked South Carolina's voter ID law on grounds that it would hurt minorities. What a political abuse of law.

In a letter to South Carolina's government, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez called the state law—which would require voters to present one of five forms of photo ID at the polls—a violation of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Overall, he noted, 8.4% of the state's registered white voters lack photo ID, compared to 10% of nonwhite voters.

This is the yawning chasm the Justice Department is now using to justify the unprecedented federal intrusion into state election law, and the first denial of a "pre-clearance" Voting Rights request since 1994.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act was created to combat the systematic disenfranchisement of minorities, especially in Southern states with a history of discrimination. But the Justice position is a lead zeppelin, contradicting both the Supreme Court and the Department's own precedent. In 2005, Justice approved a Georgia law with the same provisions and protections of the one Mr. Holder nixed for South Carolina. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board that an Indiana law requiring photo ID did not present an undue burden on voters.

A second case offers a further glimpse into the High Court's perspective on the modern use of Section 5. In 2009's Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Holder, the Court declined to decide the question of the constitutionality of Section 5, writing that while it imposes "substantial federalism costs," the "importance of the question does not justify our rushing to decide it." But the Justices didn't stop there.

They also cast real doubt on the long-term viability of the law, noting in an 8-1 decision by Chief Justice John Roberts that it "imposes current burdens and must be justified by current needs." That such strong criticism was signed by even the Court's liberals should concern Mr. Holder, who may eventually have to defend his South Carolina smackdown in court.

South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley tells us she "will absolutely sue" Justice over its denial of her state's law and that challenge will go directly to federal district court in Washington, D.C. From there it may be appealed directly to the Supreme Court, which would have to consider whether South Carolina can be blocked from implementing a law identical to the one the High Court approved for Indiana, simply because South Carolina is a "covered" jurisdiction under the Voting Rights Act.

In such a scenario, Mr. Holder's tactics could well doom Section 5 itself. That's a big gamble for the sake of trying to stir up election-year minority voter turnout.

Civil-rights groups claim this Justice offensive is needed to counteract a voting environment in which little has changed since Jim Crow. But South Carolina's law, like Indiana's and Georgia's, explicitly addresses potential disenfranchisement by offering state-issued IDs free of charge. When civil-rights groups fretted about the ability of minority voters to get to the local Department of Motor Vehicles to pick up a free state-issued ID card, Governor Haley created an 800 number to offer free rides to anyone who couldn't afford the transportation. About 30 people called.

In October, the South Carolina Department of Elections reported that some 240,000 state voters lacked ID cards. The DMV now says more than 200,000 of those had allowed their IDs to expire, lived in other states or were dead.

The Voting Rights Act was once needed to counteract the gap between black and white voter registration. By 2009 the gap had narrowed to a few percentage points in some covered states while blacks out-registered whites in others. Yet Justice retains a federal veto on election-law changes no matter how innocuous or racially neutral. Section 5 has become a vehicle not to pursue equal access to the polls but to play the grossest kind of racial politics.

As African-American men at the most exalted reaches of government, Messrs. Obama and Holder are a testament to how much racial progress the country has made. It's a shame to see them pretending little has changed so they can scare up some votes.

Title: WSJ: Super PAC boomerangs
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2012, 02:52:07 PM

Here come the Presidential primaries, and right on schedule here come the campaign-finance scolds. The latest target of the folks who deplore the role of money in politics are so-called super PACs, or political action committees that can raise and spend unlimited funds as long as they don't coordinate with a candidate. What we really have here is another progressive reform boomerang.

In the common media wisdom, super PACs are a result of the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United ruling. This is said to have created a "loophole" that the super PACs have exploited to evade campaign-finance restrictions on the money that candidates can raise on their own.

The real loophole is the U.S. Constitution. The High Court merely restored the right of corporations and unions to exercise their First Amendment right to political speech, which includes the right to assemble to support candidates with money. Congress had illegally restricted that right with McCain-Feingold, which was the latest attempt to do the impossible and banish money from politics.

This is the history of the campaign-finance movement going back to Watergate and before that to the progressive era. Congress passes some limit on campaign fund-raising or spending, but the candidates and their supporters find a way around the law, often after the courts strike down one provision or another. Then the reformers say we need new laws to plug the holes their old laws failed to plug. Some people have wasted their lives playing this unconstitutional game of whack-a-mole.

The super PACs were inevitable as long as the politicians reacted to Citizens United by maintaining strict limits on donations to individual candidates. Under current law, a donor can give $2,500 for a primary and another $2,500 for the general election per candidate.

Enlarge Image

CloseGetty Images
 .The effect has been to reduce political competition by helping the well-heeled who can fund themselves, or the well-connected who can call upon networks of money men to bundle $5,000 contributions. A candidate who touches a populist nerve today can also compensate by tapping tens of thousands of small donors over the Internet. But it's easier to set up a super PAC that allows unlimited donations and spending.

The charade is that these PACs must be formally independent of candidates, even if everyone knows the candidates they are backing. The Restore Our Future super PAC has spent well north of $1 million in Iowa pounding Newt Gingrich on behalf of Mitt Romney. Yet when Mr. Gingrich faulted the ads, Mr. Romney was obliged to do a Sergeant Schultz of "Hogan's Heroes" act and claim he knew nothing about it—though Restore Our Future is run by former Romney aides who don't need to be told how they can help Mr. Romney.

Thus have the campaign-finance scolds also reduced political accountability. The candidates can deny responsibility for any attack ads while their super PAC allies savage their opponents. When candidates have to take responsibility for their advertising, they are likely to be more careful about the rhetoric and facts.

To his credit, Mr. Romney got to the heart of the matter when he told MSNBC that "We really ought to let campaigns raise the money they need and just get rid of these super PACs." If candidates could raise unlimited funds the way they once could, super PACs wouldn't be needed.

We also might get more and better candidates who are currently put off by the burden of raising money in $2,500 increments or less. To raise $10 million at $2,500 a pop requires 4,000 donors, if everyone gives the maximum. Assuming an improbable success rate of one donation for every two calls, that's 8,000 phone calls. Then multiply that by three because it's assumed that a competitive primary run requires upwards of $30 million or more. That's a lot of phone calls.

President Obama's campaign has boasted that it will have as much as $1 billion to spend this campaign year, and you can bet his super PACs will come out swinging at the GOP nominee as soon as that choice is clear. The Republican nominee had better have more than one super PAC spending on his behalf as early as March if he doesn't want to suffer the fate of Bob Dole in 1996 when Bill Clinton bludgeoned him unfairly on Medicare.

In our raucous, media-saturated democracy, candidates need to raise such sums to inform voters and break through mainstream media distortions. The campaign-finance obsessives want the corporations that run the New York Times, the Washington Post and NBC to be able to spend whatever they want to influence campaigns via their reporting and commentary, but they want to deny that same right to others. The next time you hear someone denounce super PACs, remember they are denouncing what their own misguided reforms made necessary.

Title: voter fraud in Indiana
Post by: ccp on January 14, 2012, 11:56:22 AM

From the 2012 election thread:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/12/indiana-gop-get-schooled-on-election-fraud/

It looks obvious to me this list of "signatures" was written all by one hand.
I wonder how common this is.  It must be far more common than we think just because, in general, fraud, etc is always more common than is brought to public forbearance, so to speak.

I cannot for the life of me think of any reason on Earth why States should have the right to insist that photo ID be presented at the time people vote do you?

Surely this is only a cynical attempt from Republicans to intimidate and "disenfranchise" voters.   :roll: :wink:

Title: How far does this reach?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2012, 06:15:07 PM

Not Just A Democrat Dirty Trick, But A Crime


A few years ago, as part of its strategy of facilitating voter fraud as a means of winning close elections, the Democratic Party undertook a campaign to secure as many Secretary of State offices in swing states as possible. From those perches, the Democrats would be in a position to oversee elections and enforce (or decline to enforce) election laws. That strategy has been quite successful, but the Democrats suffered a setback in Iowa in 2010 when conservative Republican Matt Schultz won an upset victory in the Secretary of State race. Since then, Iowa Democrats have targeted Schultz.

That targeting has taken a sinister turn–a criminal one, in fact–as the Des Moines Register reports:

A Des Moines man has been arrested after police say he used, or tried to use, the identity of Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz in a scheme to falsely implicate Schultz in perceived unethical behavior in office.

Zachary Edwards was arrested Friday and charged with identity theft.

The Iowa Department of Public Safety issued a news release saying Schultz’s office discovered the scheme on June 24, 2011 and notified authorities.

Iowa blogger Shane Vander Hart has more here.

Edwards is a former Obama staffer who directed “new media operations” for Obama in five states during the 2008 primaries. Thereafter, he was Obama’s Director of New Media for the State of Iowa. In the Democratic Party’s lexicon, “new media” apparently includes identity theft.

Edwards now works for LINK Strategies, a Democratic consulting firm with extraordinarily close ties to Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin. Its principal, Jeff Link, has served as Harkin’s campaign manager and chief of staff. Link, too, is a former Obama staffer. The LINK Strategies web site says that Jeff Link “served as a media consultant to the Obama for President Campaign, coordinating branding, all paid media and polling in 25 states, including seven battleground states (VA, NC, FL, CO, NM, NV, MT)….”

That Edwards allegedly tried to steal the Secretary of State’s identity in order to frame Schultz for “unethical behavior in office” is no coincidence. Iowa Democrats, as Kevin Hall of the Iowa Republican points out, have mounted a campaign of false accusations against Schultz:

Since his surprise victory over incumbent Michael Mauro in November 2010, Secretary of State Schultz has been a target of the Iowa Democratic Party. Interestingly, on June 24, the same day as Zach Edwards alleged crime, Under the Golden Dome, a blog connected to Iowa Democrats, launched a three-part series of articles critical of Matt Schultz. They were based on documents obtained through an open records request from “a tipster.” The blog alleged that a batch of emails from Schultz’s office “raise some serious questions about his ability to remain independent and ensure election integrity”.

Just 15 days earlier, on June 9, the Iowa Democratic Party filed an ethics complaint against Schultz, claiming the Secretary of State of used public resources to campaign against presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman. The Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board dismissed the complaint on July 19.

So on its face, Edwards’s identity theft appears to be part of a coordinated effort by the Iowa Democratic Party to bring down the Republican Secretary of State so he can be replaced with a Democrat. We hope that Edwards will get the long jail term that he deserves, but the more important question is, from whom was he taking instructions? Circumstantially, one would guess from his boss, Jeff Link. But if so, who was instructing (and paying?) Link’s firm? The White House? Tom Harkin? Iowa’s Democratic Party?

Much like Watergate, which began with a seemingly simple (if puzzling) burglary and ultimately unraveled the Nixon administration, it is impossible to say how far the trail of criminality will go if the Edwards case is pursued aggressively. Will that happen? I don’t know; stay tuned.

Title: AG Holder and DOJ' Lanny Breuer linked to banks accused of foreclosure fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 23, 2012, 09:50:45 PM

U.S. AG Eric Holder, DoJ Head Lanny Breuer Linked To Banks Accused Of Foreclosure Fraud

First Posted: 1/20/12 07:00 AM ET Updated: 1/20/12 09:23 AM ET

By Scot J. Paltrow


Jan 19 (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department's criminal division, were partners for years at a Washington law firm that represented a Who's Who of big banks and other companies at the center of alleged foreclosure fraud, a Reuters inquiry shows.

The firm, Covington & Burling, is one of Washington's biggest white shoe law firms. Law professors and other federal ethics experts said that federal conflict of interest rules required Holder and Breuer to recuse themselves from any Justice Department decisions relating to law firm clients they personally had done work for.

Both the Justice Department and Covington declined to say if either official had personally worked on matters for the big mortgage industry clients. Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said Holder and Breuer had complied fully with conflict of interest regulations, but she declined to say if they had recused themselves from any matters related to the former clients.

Reuters reported in December that under Holder and Breuer, the Justice Department hasn't brought any criminal cases against big banks or other companies involved in mortgage servicing, even though copious evidence has surfaced of apparent criminal violations in foreclosure cases.

The evidence, including records from federal and state courts and local clerks' offices around the country, shows widespread forgery, perjury, obstruction of justice, and illegal foreclosures on the homes of thousands of active-duty military personnel.

In recent weeks the Justice Department has come under renewed pressure from members of Congress, state and local officials and homeowners' lawyers to open a wide-ranging criminal investigation of mortgage servicers, the biggest of which have been Covington clients. So far Justice officials haven't responded publicly to any of the requests.

While Holder and Breuer were partners at Covington, the firm's clients included the four largest U.S. banks - Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo & Co - as well as at least one other bank that is among the 10 largest mortgage servicers.

DEFENDER OF FREDDIE

Servicers perform routine mortgage maintenance tasks, including filing foreclosures, on behalf of mortgage owners, usually groups of investors who bought mortgage-backed securities.

Covington represented Freddie Mac, one of the nation's biggest issuers of mortgage backed securities, in enforcement investigations by federal financial regulators.

A particular concern by those pressing for an investigation is Covington's involvement with Virginia-based MERS Corp, which runs a vast computerized registry of mortgages. Little known before the mortgage crisis hit, MERS, which stands for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, has been at the center of complaints about false or erroneous mortgage documents.

Court records show that Covington, in the late 1990s, provided legal opinion letters needed to create MERS on behalf of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and several other large banks. It was meant to speed up registration and transfers of mortgages. By 2010, MERS claimed to own about half of all mortgages in the U.S. -- roughly 60 million loans.

But evidence in numerous state and federal court cases around the country has shown that MERS authorized thousands of bank employees to sign their names as MERS officials. The banks allegedly drew up fake mortgage assignments, making it appear falsely that they had standing to file foreclosures, and then had their own employees sign the documents as MERS "vice presidents" or "assistant secretaries."

Covington in 2004 also wrote a crucial opinion letter commissioned by MERS, providing legal justification for its electronic registry. MERS spokeswoman Karmela Lejarde declined to comment on Covington legal work done for MERS.

It isn't known to what extent if any Covington has continued to represent the banks and other mortgage firms since Holder and Breuer left. Covington declined to respond to questions from Reuters. A Covington spokeswoman said the firm had no comment.

Several lawyers for homeowners have said that even if Holder and Breuer haven't violated any ethics rules, their ties to Covington create an impression of bias toward the firms' clients, especially in the absence of any prosecutions by the Justice Department.

O. Max Gardner III, a lawyer who trains other attorneys to represent homeowners in bankruptcy court foreclosure actions, said he attributes the Justice Department's reluctance to prosecute the banks or their executives to the Obama White House's view that it might harm the economy.

But he said that the background of Holder and Breuer at Covington -- and their failure to act on foreclosure fraud or publicly recuse themselves -- "doesn't pass the smell test."

Federal ethics regulations generally require new government officials to recuse themselves for one year from involvement in matters involving clients they personally had represented at their former law firms.

President Obama imposed additional restrictions on appointees that essentially extended the ban to two years. For Holder, that ban would have expired in February 2011, and in April for Breuer. Rules also require officials to avoid creating the appearance of a conflict.

Schmaler, the Justice Department spokeswoman, said in an e-mail that "The Attorney General and Assistant Attorney General Breuer have conformed with all financial, legal and ethical obligations under law as well as additional ethical standards set by the Obama Administration."

She said they "routinely consult" the department's ethics officials for guidance. Without offering specifics, Schmaler said they "have recused themselves from matters as required by the law."

Senior government officials often move to big Washington law firms, and lawyers from those firms often move into government posts. But records show that in recent years the traffic between the Justice Department and Covington & Burling has been particularly heavy. In 2010, Holder's deputy chief of staff, John Garland, returned to Covington, as did Steven Fagell, who was Breuer's deputy chief of staff in the criminal division.

The firm has on its web site a page listing its attorneys who are former federal government officials. Covington lists 22 from the Justice Department, and 12 from U.S. Attorneys offices, the Justice Department's local federal prosecutors' offices around the country.

As Reuters reported in 2011, public records show large numbers of mortgage promissory notes with apparently forged endorsements that were submitted as evidence to courts.

There also is evidence of almost routine manufacturing of false mortgage assignments, documents that transfer ownership of mortgages between banks or to groups of investors. In foreclosure actions in courts mortgage assignments are required to show that a bank has the legal right to foreclose.

In an interview in late 2011, Raymond Brescia, a visiting professor at Yale Law School who has written about foreclosure practices said, "I think it's difficult to find a fraud of this size on the U.S. court system in U.S. history."

Holder has resisted calls for a criminal investigation since October 2010, when evidence of widespread "robo-signing" first surfaced. That involved mortgage servicer employees falsely signing and swearing to massive numbers of affidavits and other foreclosure documents that they had never read or checked for accuracy.

Recent calls for a wide-ranging criminal investigation of the mortgage servicing industry have come from members of Congress, including Senator Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., state officials, and county clerks. In recent months clerks from around the country have examined mortgage and foreclosure records filed with them and reported finding high percentages of apparently fraudulent documents.

On Wednesday, John O'Brien Jr., register of deeds in Salem, Mass., announced that he had sent 31,897 allegedly fraudulent foreclosure-related documents to Holder. O'Brien said he asked for a criminal investigation of servicers and their law firms that had filed the documents because they "show a pattern of fraud," forgery and false notarizations.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud: Easy registration. Project Veritas
Post by: DougMacG on February 12, 2012, 11:26:41 AM

Vikings fans are excited to see Tom Brady and Tim Tebow getting registered to vote in MN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=GqMVxeZhflI&feature=player_embedded

Support ID check.

Title: Obozo's cronyism/corruption
Post by: G M on February 13, 2012, 07:04:16 AM

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/02/cronyism-101.php

Cronyism 101

 
I wrote about my participation in the Koch brothers’ semi-annual seminar in Palm Springs two weekends ago here. Along with Peter Schweizer, I did a presentation on cronyism. My speech focused on corporate cronyism, while Peter’s centered on the sort of political cronyism that he detailed in his book Throw Them All Out. I included in that post a couple of the Power Point slides that accompanied my speech, and several readers wondered whether they could see the whole thing. So I fleshed out my outline into a complete text, and have interspersed the slides where I showed them in Palm Springs. Here it is, a pretty good introduction, I think, to the subject of corporatism in the Age of Obama:

Read it all.

Title: Maddow: RP Screwed in Maine?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 17, 2012, 07:11:26 AM

I have a rather low opinion of Rachel Maddow, but it sure seems like she is raising a fair point here.  Why is this getting so little coverage?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pngwcQQW5bA&feature=player_embedded

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on February 17, 2012, 08:01:56 AM

I saw this last night.

Yes.   One has to wonder are there the result of incompetence, honest mistakes, or outright bribes or just political operatives doing stuff for their guy?

We will never know.

Romney has money.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on February 17, 2012, 10:53:52 AM

Rachel Maddow has uncovered unreported results before they were reported or recorded?  Yes maybe a scandal of timing or incompetence with the volunteers.  She presents the question of whether or not it was rigged without even a suggestion of evidence of rigging.  The accusation is that someone may have tried to affect the timing of reporting in order in one area in Maine to influence a news story. OMG.

Slow news day, that is a lot of hoopla over a non-binding straw vote of caucus attendees.  In our caucus we were required by state law to announce to the caucus the exact results of the vote before it was called in.  Then it was called in cell phone to cell phone (to the volunteer daughters of one of the organizers) and accumulated with other results to try to get something preliminary reported onto the evening news.  The procedure was set long before anyone knew who the result would favor.  That is not exactly an election result certified by a Secretary of State.

Someone please post the video of Rahel Maddow's outrage over the 'uncounted' Al Franken votes found in the trunk of a Minneapolis car late on election night after Norm Coleman was originally called the winner and dozens of other irregularities in an ABC documentary .I have posted previously. I'm sure she was all over it.  Votes known to be wrong were certified by the move-on.org Sec State and provided the 60th vote in the Senate to deem health care passed, affecting everyone for generations, not an evening news non-binding straw poll preliminary result.  Just my two cents.

Title: DOJ vs. Texas's Voter ID law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 13, 2012, 06:25:01 AM

oth the Left and Right have expressed concern over potential abuse in America’s current voting process. But as the rhetoric flies, what are the facts? And is the Department of Justice heeding all concerns?
-------------------
From Townhall Magazine's EXCLUSIVE March feature, "Voter ID Laws: Racist or Reasonable?," by Brandon Darby:

There’s been much said lately about election integrity and voter identification laws. Both sides of the American political spectrum have raised concerns over polls and potential abuses in the American voting process. In fact, due to the serious voter registration irregularities identified by groups like True the Vote in Texas, along with the numerous voter fraud convictions across the nation involving workers from politically motivated groups like the failed organization ACORN, many states are pursuing photo identification as a means of addressing such assaults on election integrity. Texas, South Carolina and Florida have all taken steps to mandate photo identification as a requirement for voting. ...

 

Deep in the Heart of Texas

Take, for example, Harris County, the county encompassing Houston, Texas. The irregularities in voter registration in this jurisdiction have raised serious concerns over election integrity through the investigative efforts of nonprofits and Harris County agencies alike.


True the Vote, a nonpartisan, Houston-based nonprofit focusing on electoral integrity has revealed some startling information. Their effort, which started out of a small tea party group, focused on volunteering as poll workers in their local 2009 elections. According to the group’s founder, Catherine Engelbrecht, what started as a simple effort to exercise civic duty and get involved brought them face to face with what she referred to as frightening and gross incompetence on the part of some election and county workers at the polls. Engelbrecht pointed out in her interview with Townhall that even though Texas law allowed 11 different forms of identification to be used at that time to verify identity, which was required to vote, she and her 70 election volunteers noticed that many voters were being allowed to vote without any identification at all. Texas has since passed voter identification laws which require the use of a photo identification card.


Engelbrecht’s volunteers ultimately submitted 800 signed affidavits outlining problems they encountered, including having overheard some election judges telling people who they should and should not vote for. After these experiences, the group decided to form True the Vote and to investigate how citizens could help ensure voter integrity and what processes existed to report abuses or irregularities. Engelbrecht says these efforts revealed even more frightening examples of degradation to the election process.

...
 


Engelbrecht’s True the Vote organization then decided to look at the actual registry and not just the new registrations. The group obtained the nearly 2,000,000-person Harris County Voter Registry Role. The group subdivided the registry by congressional district due to the size of the data.


After the registry was divided into the seven congressional districts which Harris County encompasses, True the Vote needed a starting point to isolate red flags for possible irregularities. They decided to start looking at registrations that had addresses six or more people were registered to.


The group found the seven congressional districts had four that were predominantly Republican and three that were predominantly Democratic. The four predominantly Republican districts had a range from 1,973 to 3,300 addresses with six or more people registered to them. The three predominantly Democratic districts had much higher numbers. Though this could possibly be attributed to variations in socioeconomic factors between the predominantly Republican and predominantly Democratic districts, what the group found next was alarming. The predominantly Democratic districts themselves had large variations between them in the number of addresses with six or more registered voters. The first had 7,560, the second 8,981, and the third—the district of Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, the prominent, outspoken Democratic congresswoman—had 19,596 instances with six or more voters registered at one address.


True the Vote then compared the socio-economic demographics of the three predominantly Democratic congressional districts in an effort to explain why Jackson Lee’s district could have such a high number in comparison. Engelbrecht told Townhall the group had found no significant difference to explain such a drastic variation in the numbers.
 

The group began doing research into the abnormalities in Jackson Lee’s district. They took the first 3,800 registrations of the flagged 19,596 homes with six or more registrants and began to investigate further. The group visited addresses and scoured property tax records. The group found many of the addresses were vacant lots or business addresses. Thirty-nine were registered at businesses and 97 of the addresses were nonexistent. One hundred six of the registrations revealed the same registrant registered more than once, and 207 of the addresses turned out to be vacant lots. Meanwhile, 595 registrations had registrants with driver’s license addresses not matching the registration, and many were voting in a district they did not live in. Of the random 3,800 registrations from Jackson Lee’s predominantly Democratic district, 25 percent had critical errors which Engelbrecht believes could result in an erosion of election integrity.


The media began to focus on the findings from the Harris County tax assessor’s office and True the Vote. Shortly after the August 24 press conference announcing the results of the office’s investigation, a fire of unknown origins burned down the warehouse containing all of Harris County’s voting equipment. In total, the fire claimed 10,000 voting machines, which was approximately $30,000,000 worth of equipment.  ...
Read more of Brandon Darby's piece in the March isssue of Townhall Magazine.

Title: POTH editorial takes the other side
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 13, 2012, 07:14:09 AM

Pravda on the Hudson takes a contrarian POV.  No surprise there, but its worth seeing how the other side makes its case:

When Texas lawmakers were writing one of the nation’s most restrictive voter-identification laws last spring, they rejected a proposal to allow voters to use other forms of ID beyond a narrow list. They rejected another suggestion to help voters without an ID card apply for one. And when a lawmaker offered an amendment to offer free access to birth certificates in order to get a card, instead of charging $22, they rejected that, too.

Related News
Justice Dept. Blocks Texas on Photo ID for Voting (March 13, 2012)
Justice Department Seeks Trial on Florida Elections (March 4, 2012) So it was no surprise on Monday when the Justice Department did the right thing and forcefully rejected the state’s voter-ID law entirely. The department said the law clearly disadvantages Hispanic voters, who lack photo ID’s at a much higher rate than the state’s overall population. The Voting Rights Act requires that states and counties with a history of racial discrimination prove that new voting laws don’t discriminate in purpose or effect, and Texas was unable to meet that test.

The department’s action comes after it also blocked a similar law in South Carolina in December, a demonstration that it is serious about overturning a growing body of politically inspired legislation that could make it harder for people in more than a dozen states to vote. (It has also blocked Florida’s decision to curtail early voting and third-party registration drives.) These laws, pushed by Republicans, would erect barriers to minorities, students and the poor, all of whom tend to vote for Democrats.

In a letter to Texas elections officials, the Justice Department said the state submitted no evidence that it is suffering from a voter-impersonation problem that would be solved with an ID requirement. But, at the department’s request, Texas did submit data showing how the requirement would affect Hispanic voters, and the numbers were disturbing. Nearly 11 percent of Hispanic registered voters lack a driver’s license or government-issued card, compared with nearly 5 percent of non-Hispanic voters. (Hispanics were the only minority group analyzed because it was easier to identify their last names.)

That means that as many as 800,000 Hispanic voters in the state could be disenfranchised if they cannot get a government ID. And the department notes that the state did nothing to make that task easier, refusing to open more driver’s license offices (lacking in 81 out of 254 counties) or even to extend the hours of the existing ones.

Another blow against discrimination on Monday came from a Wisconsin judge who ruled that the state’s voter-ID law violated the State Constitution. The judge, Richard Niess, wrote that the people most affected by the law “would consist of those struggling souls” who are qualified to vote but the lack the financial or physical resources to get an ID card. What right does the government have, he wrote, to “simply cast aside the inherent suffrage rights of any qualified elector” in the hopes of preventing some unqualified people from voting?

The challenges to these two state laws will now move through the courts, which will have an opportunity to restore a basic constitutional right to those who have lost it.

Title: Morris: Obama promotes voter fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 19, 2012, 08:33:43 AM

http://www.dickmorris.com/obama-promotes-voter-fraud-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/

Title: Guess who requires I.D.?
Post by: G M on April 05, 2012, 04:58:21 PM

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZf25pmgR4c&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZf25pmgR4c&feature=player_embedded

Funny how the left never lives up to their own standards.

Title: WikiLeaks/STRATFOR (!!!) Obama stole election, bribed JJ, and took Russian$
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 24, 2012, 03:47:55 AM

 :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o

If this is born out, the implications are profound , , ,

===================

http://www.westernjournalism.com/wikileaks-obama-team-stole-election-bribed-jesse-jackson-and-took-russian-money-in-2008/

Revealed By WikiLeaks: Obama Team Stole Election, Bribed Jesse Jackson And Took Russian Money In 2008
April 23, 2012 By Kevin "Coach" Collins 37 Comments
inShare.60

According to internal Emails circulated among the staff at Stratfor, an Austin Texas based private intelligence gathering firm, John McCain was presented with proof that Democrats in Pennsylvania and Ohio used voter fraud to win those states and committed other disturbing crimes. The communiqués were stolen and made public by WikiLeaks.

An Email dated November 7, 2008 under the subject line “ Insight – The Dems & Dirty Tricks ** Internal Use Only – Pls Do Not Forward **,” was sent by Fred Burton, Stratfor’s V.P. of Intelligence. It said in part, The black Dems were caught stuffing the ballot boxes in Philly and Ohio as reported the night of the election and Sen. McCain chose not to fight. The matter is not dead inside the party. It now becomes a matter of sequence now as to how and when to “out”.

Burton also mentioned a “six-figure” Democrat donation/bribe to Jesse Jackson to buy his silence about Israel. On October 14, 2008 Jackson told fellow attendees in at the World Policy Forum in Evian France a ‘President Obama’ would “remove the clout of Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades.”

Burton continued with an explosive charge he apparently considered quite believable, The hunt is on for the sleezy Russian money into O-mans coffers. A smoking gun has already been found. Will get more on this when the time is right. My source was too giddy to continue. Can you say Clinton and ChiCom funny money? This also becomes a matter of how and when to out.

This allegation makes some sense of Obama’s reassurances to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev caught by an open mic. Obama said “….but it’s important for him [Putin] to give me space.”

Medvedev responded: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you …”

Obama: “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.”

Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir [Putin]…”

Fred Burton is a known quantity in the highest Intelligence circles. He has been Deputy Chief of the Department of State’s counterterrorism division for the Diplomatic Security Service (DSS).

Stratfor has acknowledged that last December its internal communications system was hacked and the group “Anonymous” has taken credit for the sabotage .  WikiLeaks started to publish Stratfor’s stolen Emails last month. Startfor will neither confirm nor deny whether the communiqués attributed to its staff are real or fabrications.

Congressman Darrell Issa are you listening?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on April 24, 2012, 07:33:37 AM

This story if true is amazingly scary.  That Obama won by 7 points and the cheating if true was unnecessary is irrelevant to the crimes.  That John McCain said nothing is also irrelevant.   Nixon won 49 states in 1972 and did not need any of the wrongdoing either.

Each fraudulent vote is a felony (?) and if the corruption reaches the top, or wherever it reaches, it is treason IMO to systematically undermine our electoral system.

OTOH, hard to believe they are sitting on "proof" and don't come forward.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 24, 2012, 08:10:18 AM

Very interesting that Stratfor is cited as a source.  IF TRUE, this carries real weight.  If I have energy after teaching tonight (1600 right now and I'm getting ready) then I will see if I can figure out how to access my Stratfor account from here.

Title: McCain, the 2008 Election, and Civil Unrest
Post by: G M on April 26, 2012, 11:43:15 AM

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/04/21/john-mccain-the-2008-election-and-civil-unrest/?singlepage=true

By J. Christian Adams

McCain, the 2008 Election, and Civil Unrest

April 21, 2012 - 6:48 am - by J. Christian Adams      There is an interesting story about the 2008 election coming out of Wikileaks. Memos from Stratfor released by Wikileaks say that widespread voter fraud occurred in Ohio and that “black Dems were caught stuffing the ballot boxes in Philly.”  The McCain campaign knew about the fraud but feared taking action because of the “possibility of domestic violence” if they challenged the results in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

The memos say campaign staff urged candidate John McCain to act in court:

“Staff felt they could get a federal injunction to stop the process.”

AdvertisementOne of the Wikileaked memos says: “Sen. McCain chose not to  fight.”  The reason?

The memo states:

“McCain felt the crowds assembled in support of Obama and such would be detrimental to our country and it would do our nation no good for this to drag out like last go around, coupled with the possibility of domestic violence.”

With the blessings of hindsight, we see that fear of mob violence in our country is no longer a hypothetical in the mind of a presidential candidate.  The call by the New Black Panther Party in Sanford, Florida, to seize (or kill) a private citizen is no longer the stuff of a senator’s imagination.

Recall Philadelphia was where the entire New Black Panther Party controversy started on election night. Poll watcher Bartle Bull has opined that one purpose of the presence of the New Black Panthers was to intimidate poll watchers, the exact people trained to detect and memorialize polling place misbehavior. That’s another reason why the dismissal of the lawsuit by the Holder Justice Department, even before discovery took place to investigate the events in Philadelphia, was such a blow to the rule of law.

Whether or not ballot boxes were stuffed by “black Dems” in Philadelphia is probably something we will never know. What we do know is this: First, that people in the McCain campaign thought they had evidence of election tampering that cost McCain the election.  Second, that McCain thought it best for the country to do nothing about it, in part because of fears of mob violence.

America is coasting along a slippery surface, and small concessions to the mob can resonate in ways we can’t predict. In seven months, we have a chance to reverse the mistakes of 2008, even if only to stand up to the mob this time.

Which raises the problem of Philadelphia. Obviously something is going very wrong in the City of Brotherly Love.  Elections there are a big giant spigot for the Left to keep the state blue.  GOP poll watchers are thrown out of precincts, New Black Panthers stalk the polls, and, worst of all, not enough poll watchers are available to cover all the precincts. It’s time that changed.  That’s why True the Vote is holding a summit April 27-28 in Houston, to mobilize and train a poll-watching army to deploy across the nation in November.

If you are sitting on the couch on Election Day watching it on TV, if you are at work instead of not using available leave, if you aren’t inside the polls on Election Day to prevent the mess of 2008 from repeating, you aren’t doing enough.  If not 2012, when?

Title: Corruption etc: Detroit Looted by its Elected Officials
Post by: DougMacG on May 07, 2012, 08:13:47 AM

Walter Russell Mead makes a great point that this man-made disaster is right in one of America's once great cities and no one seems to care.
http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/05/05/rogue-democrats-loot-detroit-as-nation-sleeps/

May 5, 2012
Rogue Democrats Loot Detroit As Nation Sleeps
Walter Russell Mead

Few readers will be surprised to learn that decades of incompetence and entrenched corruption in Detroit’s government have not only helped wreck the city; firms linked to former Democratic mayor Kwame Kilpatrick also looted the pension fund.

The latest scandal, which leaves even hardened observers of the abysmal Democratic machine that has run the city into the ground bemused, involves a real estate firm which gave the felonious mayor massages, golf outings, trips in chartered jets and other perks as this enemy of the people went about his hypocritical business of pretending to care about the poor while robbing them blind. The firm, apparently run by a sleazy low class crook named by the reprehensible Kilpatrick to be the Treasurer of what was left of Detroit’s finances, used Detroit pension funds to buy a couple of California strip malls. Title to the properties was never transferred to the pension funds, and they seem to be out $3.1 million.

Kilpatrick’s partner in slime is his ex-college frat brother Jeffrey Beasley, who is accused of taking bribes and kickbacks as he made bad investments that cost pension funds $84 million.  Overall, a Detroit Free Press investigation estimates that corrupt and incompetent trustees appointed by Democratic officials over many years in Detroit are responsible for almost half a billion dollars in investments gone wrong.

I honestly don’t know why there is so little national outrage about this despicable crew and the terrible damage they have done. The ultimate victims of the crime are Detroit’s poor and the middle class and lower middle class, mostly African-American municipal workers who may face serious financial losses in old age.

The 41 year old Kwame Kilpatrick may well be the worst and most destructive American of his generation; his two terms as Mayor of Detroit are among the most sordid and stomach churning episodes in the storied history of American municipal corruption. Now under federal indictment for, essentially, running Detroit City Hall as a criminal enterprise, Kilpatrick reportedly turned down a plea bargain that included a 15 year prison term. Insiders say that since the maximum time for the charges he faces was 18 years, the offer from the prosecutors indicates strong confidence in their case. Indicted with him was his father; it’s nice to think that father and son will have some quality time in the can.

We must all hope for mercy in this world and the next and VM doesn’t exactly wish the worst on these people, but if between the civil penalties, fines and lawsuits from those they have wronged Kilpatrick and company are picked so clean that they have to depend on their prison earnings for snack money in jail, helping them out won’t be at the top of our charitable giving list. And one thing Michigan legislators should check is whether the state has a nice harsh pension forfeiture law.

These judgments are always subjective, but it seems to me that there is not nearly enough national publicity about and outrage over the crimes of Kwame Kilpatrick. If a white or Asian Republican pol had looted fire and police pension funds, blighted the lives of a generation of minority kids and helped do more damage to a great American city than Hurricane Katrina, I don’t think this would be primarily a local news story. I would expect that the scandal would grip the nation, and there would be wall to wall national media coverage.

As there should be.

As it is, an eerie silence envelopes the subject. Outside the Michigan area, only the most dedicated news hounds and political junkies follow this story.

Three factors seem to be at work. One is quite simply financial; falling newsroom budgets in the MSM mean that it is harder for national papers and legacy networks to cover the country.

The second factor is more disturbing: there is a pervasive national sense of ennui and despair about urban areas in which African Americans are the majority. ‘We’ expect decline, decay and corruption in these places, so the Kilpatrick story strikes many editors and journalists as just another ‘dog bites man’ story: not news. Cory Booker is news; Kwame Kilpatrick isn’t.

That ennui and despair intensify when the subject is Detroit. Frankly, while the genteel world hates the thought of being racist, in reality there is a widespread belief in even the most liberal and well educated portions of the white upper middle class that nothing much better can happen in Detroit. I don’t believe that, and this is one of the reasons the city’s decline makes me angry as well as sad. Lax law enforcement and oversight from federal and state authorities allowed a climate of unrestrained corruption to grow up in Detroit over many years.

Putting a lot more people in jail much earlier in their careers, and instilling a healthy fear of the law in Detroit’s political class would have slowed the decline at least, and might well have created openings for better politicians to emerge. The failure of Detroit’s political class must also be seen as a dramatic failure of national and state law enforcement. The horses had been out of this stable for a long time before the authorities showed up with padlocks in hand. One hopes that the Department of Justice will move aggressively to target big city machines for investigation before more Detroits pop up. Similarly, state governors might want to suggest to their attorneys general that corruption bears watching. Michigan taxpayers are going to be stuck with huge bills as the state struggles to cope with the consequences of misrule in Detroit; smart governors might not want to wait until their cities collapse.

Finally, there is a disconnect between important local news and our national news culture today. The New York Times does a lousy job covering New York city and New York State; in the rarefied world of Times readers, local news is dull. Many of our national news editors and writers see themselves as cosmopolitan citizens of the world, interested in much more exciting and important things than the grubby realities of local and municipal life.

In this, the journalists faithfully reflect the thinking of many members of the genteel upper middle class; it is a kind of weird Platonic vision of reality in which the ‘lower’, grubby levels of politics and national life count for less than the ‘higher’, ‘nobler’ levels. Call it the gentrification of news; before Ivy Leaguers filled the newsrooms, American papers focused on the nuts and bolts of life. Now, they are much too highfalutin and hoity-toity for crime and city hall reporters to be the cocks of the walk.

Thus, even as interest in and reporting on the economic and social meltdown of so many once prosperous American cities and states ebbs, the ‘aristocracy’ of the press corps intensifies its endless and endlessly overdone coverage of the national election cycle. Very little that is said or done in either the Romney or Obama campaigns right now has much to do with what voters will be thinking about and voting on six months from now. But that doesn’t stop the legacy press from obsessing about it while ignoring far more consequential developments taking place on every side.

Detroit doesn’t matter all that much to the New York Times and many of its readers for the same reasons that Albany, Queens, Buffalo and Schenectady don’t matter. The new American elite wants to live and think as if it has transcended all that dreary provincial mess and lives on high in a world of Big Ideas and Global Issues. Mrs. Jellyby is much more interested in visionary programs to uplift the inhabitants of Borrio-Boola-Gha than on making sure her own children are well dressed and well cared for.

(At the American Interest we are trying to change this pattern. Go here to read a review of some recent books on Detroit by John G. Rodwan that appears in our May/June print issue.)

There is something profoundly wrong with an American political culture that accepts chronic misgovernment in major cities as OK. It is not OK; the people who do these things may call themselves liberal Democrats and wear the mantle of defenders of the poor, but over and over their actions place them among the most cold blooded enemies and oppressors of the weak.

American cities have been festering pits of graft and bad governance since at least the early 19th century, but there is a difference between the “honest graft” of Tammany Hall and the nihilistic destruction practiced by some of today’s urban machines. Today’s situation, in which some city machines are so dysfunctional that the parasite is literally killing the host (and not just in Detroit), is new and, again, the most vulnerable in our society suffer the worst consequences. Minority children are the greatest ultimate victims of this loathsome corruption: they attend horrible schools and grow up in decaying, unsafe urban landscapes where there is no growth, no jobs and no opportunity for the young.

How is it anything but racist not to care about that — and not to burn with the desire to put the scabrous thugs who misgovern our cities and waste our social funds in prison where they belong?

(Mead is a Democrat who voted for Obama.)

Title: POTH:
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 12, 2012, 05:58:07 AM

Pravda on the Hudson saying what one would expect:
==========
It was nearly 10 p.m. on Wednesday when Paul Broun, a Republican congressman from Georgia, rose on the House floor to propose that no more money be spent enforcing a section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

The act is one of the most momentous laws ever passed by Congress, removing the discriminatory barriers that had blocked generations of African-Americans from the polls. Yet a Southern representative tried to slip in an amendment to an appropriations bill that would prevent the Justice Department from supervising election-law changes in his state and in 15 others where there has been a history of discrimination.

Moments later, Representative John Lewis, a Democrat of Georgia, strode to the microphone with a furious denunciation. Mr. Lewis, whose skull was fractured by a police baton in Selma, Ala., during a 1965 voting rights march, said it was “unbelievable” that a fellow Georgia lawmaker could offer such an amendment.

“It is shameful that you would come here tonight and say to the Department of Justice that you must not use one penny, one cent, one dime, one dollar to carry out the mandate of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act,” he said, his voice loud and trembling. “People died for the right to vote! Friends of mine, colleagues of mine! Speak out against this amendment — it doesn’t have a place.”

On the floor, Mr. Broun’s explanation for getting rid of Justice Department supervision was that it had become “antiquated” and unfair. But he also said he wanted the Justice Department to back off because it has raised objections to a voter identification law in his state and several others. Those laws are the Republican Party’s modern attempt to disenfranchise minorities, the poor and older Americans for political gain.

After being confronted by Mr. Lewis, he withdrew his amendment, condemned discrimination and apologized “for any hurt feelings anyone has.” The issue, however, is far bigger than hurt feelings. Mr. Broun owes an apology to history.
==========

Thoughts?   Why didn't Broun insist on his POV?  What on earth is wrong with Voter ID?  Why not frontally face down the progressive assertion of disenfranchisment?  To start and not finish is worse than to never have started.

Title: FL investigating voter rolls
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 13, 2012, 12:21:54 PM

This in from GB:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/florida-investigating-thousands-of-potentially-non-citizen-voters/

In a surprising development , , ,

"Florida officials have requested access to Department of Homeland Security databases to further help determine who is a citizen — a request the Obama administration has denied."

 :roll:

Title: review of electoral college
Post by: ccp on May 26, 2012, 10:05:10 AM

Kali-fornicate (itself) with 55 of the 538 votes.   Without it, Brock would have no chance.  Thank God for Texas:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States)

Title: WSJ: Holder's racial incitements
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 01, 2012, 10:28:12 AM

The United States of America has a black President whose chief law enforcement officer, Attorney General Eric Holder, is also black. They have a lot of political power. So how are they using it? Well, one way is to assert to black audiences that voter ID laws are really attempts to disenfranchise black Americans. And liberals think Donald Trump's birther fantasies are offensive?

"In my travels across this country, I've heard a consistent drumbeat of concern from citizens, who—often for the first time in their lives—now have reason to believe that we are failing to live up to one of our nation's most noble ideals," Mr. Holder said Wednesday in a speech to the Council of Black Churches. Voter ID laws and white discrimination, he added, mean that "some of the achievements that defined the civil rights movement now hang in the balance."

That's right. The two most powerful men in America are black, two of the last three Secretaries of State were black, numerous corporate CEOs and other executives are black, and minorities of many races now win state-wide elections in states that belonged to the Confederacy, but the AG implies that Jim Crow is on the cusp of a comeback.

It's demeaning to have to dignify this argument with facts, but here goes. Voter ID laws have been found by the courts not to be an undue burden under the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution. The landmark Supreme Court opinion, upholding an Indiana law in 2008, was written for a six-member majority by that noted right-winger, John Paul Stevens.

Enlarge Image

CloseAssociated Press
 
Attorney General Eric Holder
.Black voter turnout increased in Georgia and Indiana after voter ID laws passed. Georgia began implementing its law requiring one of six forms of voter ID in 2007. According to data from Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp, the black vote increased by 42%, or 366,000 votes, in 2008 over 2004. The Latino vote grew by 140% or 25,000 votes in 2008, while the white vote increased by only 8% from four years earlier.

No doubt Mr. Obama's presence on the ballot helped drive that turnout surge in 2008, but then the black vote in Georgia also increased by 44.2% during the midterm Congressional races of 2010 from 2006. The Hispanic vote grew by 66.5% in 2010 from four years earlier. Those vote totals certainly don't suggest that requiring an ID is a barrier to the ballot box.

As for public opinion, an April 2012 Fox News survey found that a majority of Democrats (52%), Republicans (87%) and independents (72%) support voter ID laws. This is no doubt because Americans understand intuitively that ballot integrity is as important as ballot access to democratic credibility. Everyone's franchise is devalued if an election turns on the votes of the quick and the dead.

All of this honors Mr. Holder too much because the real key to understanding his speech is to think lower. A May 4 story in the Washington Post got to the heart of the matter: "The number of black and Hispanic registered voters has fallen sharply since 2008, posing a serious challenge to the Obama campaign in an election that could turn on the participation of minority voters."

In the 2008 heyday of hope and change, strong minority turnout helped push Mr. Obama to victory, especially in such swing states as Virginia and New Mexico. But as another election approaches, the minority thrill is gone. According to the Census Bureau, Hispanic voter registration has fallen 5% across the U.S., to about 11 million. The decline is 28% in New Mexico and about 10% in Florida, another swing state. Black registration is down 7% across the country.

The likeliest explanation is economic, as job losses and mortgage foreclosures lead to dislocation and migration to new areas. But it's also possible that many minorities are as disappointed as everyone else with the lackluster recovery. For all of Mr. Obama's attempts to portray Mitt Romney as out of touch, no one has suffered more in the Obama economy than minorities.

Which explains Mr. Holder's racial incitement strategy. If Mr. Obama is going to win those swing states again, he needs another burst of minority turnout. If hope won't get them to vote for Mr. Obama again, then how about fear?

Mr. Holder's Council of Black Churches address is merely the latest of his election-year moves that charge racial discrimination of one kind or another. These include voting-rights lawsuits to block voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina, intervention in immigration cases in Arizona, and various housing and lending discrimination suits. Whatever the legal merits of these cases, their sudden proliferation in an election year suggests a political motivation.

The courts will eventually expose much of this as meritless, but it's a shame the media won't call Mr. Holder on this strategy before the election. Imagine the uproar if a Republican AG pursued a similar strategy. It's worse than a shame that America's first black Attorney General is using his considerable power to inflame racial antagonism

Title: MA Dem convention requiring voter ID
Post by: DougMacG on June 05, 2012, 06:41:55 AM

Many states have Voter ID on the ballot this year.  Democrats vehemently oppose it; it will block people's right to vote.

Meanwhile quite humerous is that at the Mass. Dem convention this weekend endorsing Elizabeth Warren, the convention required voter id.  It seems that they wanted to be certain who each person was because the vote is important and they don't want any fraud.  Hmmm.  What about the disenfranchised.  Who looks out for them?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/06/01/voter-id-ma-democrats-disenfranchise-their-delegates

Voter ID is good for me, but not for thee.

Title: DOJ fights to keep foreigners voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 13, 2012, 10:24:44 AM

 :-o :-o :-o :cry:

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/06/12/meet-the-radical-doj-lawyer-keeping-foreigners-on-florida-voter-rolls/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on June 13, 2012, 12:26:15 PM

I keep hearing Democrats saying that there is no proof of "rampant" voter fraud.   That it is an aboration, rare, the exception to the rule.

But this begets the question how can we know if we don't even ID anyone how much fraud there really is?

How can one know without following people around if they are who they say they are or are elligible to vote or are not voting for other people without some ID (at least)?

If only 1% of vote are fraudulent that could have still meant 20 thousand votes in Wisoconsin were illiegitimate.   While 1% is not a lot 20,000 is.   Try sorting out one of a hundred.

Title: AG Holder defends foreigners voting in FL
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 15, 2012, 10:55:01 AM

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/06/14/holder-defends-foreigners-voting-in-florida-elections/

=======================

Patriot Post

Florida v DOJ Over Voter Purge
On Tuesday the state of Florida filed suit against the Department of Homeland Security in order to continue with Republican Gov. Rick Scott's plan to purge ineligible voters from the rolls. "I have a job to do to defend the right of legitimate voters," said Scott. "We've been asking for the Department of Homeland Security's database, SAVE, for months, and they haven't given it to us. So this afternoon, we will be filing a lawsuit, the secretary of state of Florida, against the Department of Homeland Security to give us that database. We want to have fair, honest elections in our state, and we have been put in a position that we have to sue the federal government to get this information."
Almost immediately after the Florida suit was filed, the Justice Department filed their own suit against Florida, claiming that the Sunshine State is violating Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act. Notably, DOJ dropped its allegations that Florida is violating the Voting Rights Act. Scott claims that the state has identified 100 non-U.S. citizens who were registered to vote, 50 of whom already cast illegal ballots in Florida elections. Apparently, the DOJ thinks that's just fine. After all, Florida will once again be a crucial swing state in the upcoming presidential election, and Barack Obama will need every vote he can muster, illegal or otherwise.

Title: FL beats DOJ in round one
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2012, 12:22:36 PM

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/06/27/doj-vs-florida-round-one-florida/

Title: PJMedia: Solway: A Modest Suggestion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 02, 2012, 03:24:30 PM

A Modest Suggestion for the American Election
The present administration and the Democratic Party have much to answer for.
http://pjmedia.com/blog/a-modest-suggestion-for-the-american-election/
by
David Solway

The corruption of electoral practice is now so deeply entrenched in American political usage, riveted in place by massive spending, systemic lying, media compliance, and the exercise of arbitrary power, that one despairs for the future of the country. This is especially the case with the Obama administration, which represents not the United States of America so much as the Democratic Party, its many dissident factions, radical groups, disaffected constituents, and its well-heeled backers. It is diligently engaged in subverting the electoral process to solidify its hold on national office, sparing no effort to bring about this problematic end. The following examples are only scattershot in what amounts to a veritable fusillade.
Florida is — or was — attempting to purge ineligible voters from the electoral rolls. The process has been halted for the present, but Secretary of State Ken Detzner claims the Department of Homeland Security has denied the state access to the federal immigration data base, thus impeding its efforts to identify instances of vote falsification. Florida governor Rick Scott has initiated a lawsuit against the DHS, and the Justice Department responded in kind. Indiana passed legislation in 2005 to counter voting irregularities, provoking the Democrats to file suit. Texas is determined to pass a new voter ID law, to which the DOJ has formally objected. Attorney General Eric Holder is also blocking implementation of voter ID laws in South Carolina. And so it goes.
Indeed, research conducted by the Pew Center shows that there are approximately two million dead voters listed on the registries, and that one in every eight voter records contains inaccuracies. It is also a well-known fact that up to three million voters can cast their ballots in several different states, facilitated by the Motor Voter bill introduced by the Clinton administration.

As Peter Ferrara, general counsel of the American Civil Rights Union (ACRU), urges in an article called “Stealing Our Elections” for The American Spectator, “Let’s be fully frank.” The obvious reason that Obama, Holder, and the Democratic Party oppose proof of citizenship and voter ID, he writes, is that “vote fraud is a central Democrat strategy for ‘winning’ elections.” The Democrats appear to be the party of the dead and the morally contaminated. Identification is anathema to them. And yet ID is required in almost every facet of official civic life — driver’s licenses, club memberships, medicare consultations, and a host of other such categories, without which recognition is not forthcoming and access is denied. Even Eric Holder’s own Washington, D.C., office requires photo ID, and a sign posted by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law reads: “ALL VISTORS MUST SHOW ID.”

Why should the voting process be any different — unless there are ulterior motives at work? What other conclusion can any reasonable person arrive at? As the Washington Times editorializes, “The Obama administration’s refusal to recognize the fundamental importance of an honest count only strengthens the growing notion that it seeks advantage, not justice.” It is plain that something must be done to avoid the scandal of a potentially rigged or manipulated election and to ensure, so far as possible, that dead voters be re-interred, multiple voters fractioned back to single balloting, mail-in fraudsters outed, forgers detected, noncitizens removed from the rolls, and illegal voter registration schemes investigated.

Here, then, is my modest suggestion. Determined to avoid a looming travesty, the Republican Party should insist that an international committee of legal experts and electoral watchdogs be invited to monitor the upcoming federal election.

Reputable observers might be recruited from that rapidly diminishing assortment of countries that still retain a degree of respectability in the international arena: Canada (cf. Canada’s International Election Observation project), Australia, New Zealand, the Czech Republic, Andorra perhaps. (Israel would make an ideal contributor to the procedure were it not the innocent victim of a worldwide campaign of slander and disinformation.) The United Nations, of course, should be avoided like the proverbial plague lest it assemble a squad of observers from Zimbabwe (recently appointed to head the UN World Tourism Organization), Iran (recently chosen as rapporteur for the UN Committee on Information), and other degenerate and autocratic stalwarts like Cuba, Syria, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and, naturally, the Palestinians.

The same goes for the Carter Center, which is sullied by a left wing and pro-Islamic agenda, and for the OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe), which is, by any account, pretty well useless. But a cohort of impartial sentries hailing from countries generally acknowledged as more or less decent in their international relations might lead to “sober second thought” — a phrase applied to the Canadian Senate — in the minds of some politicians.

Title: How Do You Get in to Hear Eric Holder Say That Voter ID Laws are racist?
Post by: DougMacG on July 11, 2012, 07:31:28 AM

How Do You Get Into the NAACP Convention to Hear Eric Holder Say That Voter ID Laws Are Racist?

Of course: you have to present a “government-issued photo I.D. (such as a driver’s license).” You can’t make this stuff up...
July 10, 2012 — John Hinderaker, Powerlineblog.com

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/07/how-do-you-get-into-the-naacp-convention-to-hear-eric-holder-say-that-voter-id-laws-are-racist.php

Title: TX voter ID vs. DOJ looking not good
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 11, 2012, 05:17:39 PM

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/07/10/texas-voter-id-on-life-support/?singlepage=true

Title: Corrupt Harry Reid outsources jobs with taxpayer money
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2012, 07:22:08 AM

Dear Patriot,

OK, the uniforms the US Olympic Team will be wearing in the London Games were made in China. They were not paid for with tax dollars but instead by Ralph Lauren who designed them and had them produced in one of his factories. It would have been nice to have them made here but thanks to overreaching unions, America really does not have much of a garment industry left.

In an obvious pandering play to the union powers, Harry Reid was "outraged" by such a travesty. “The USOC should be embarrassed, they should be humiliated. ... Our athletes should not wear clothes manufactured in China.” He went on to say, "they should be placed in a pile and burned".

Forget for a moment how you feel about the uniform issue itself and consider Reid's record on foreign manufacturing.

Fact 1. The government gave now bankrupt solar panel manufacturer, Solyndra, nearly half a billion dollars for nothing. 

Fact 2. When Harry Reid pushed through funding and sweetheart land deals for a huge solar power generating facility near his home town in Nevada, the solar panels were purchased from his good friend, and Chinese manufacturing billionaire, Wang Yusuo. You guessed it, the panels installed in Nevada were made in China! I am sure it is a mere coincidence that Harry Reid's son, Rory Reid, is employed as a lobbyist for the solar venture!

Folks, this is the sort of corruption and deceit we are fighting. We know that most in the mainstream media will not touch a story like this. Our fight is to educate enough voters about what elected politicians are really doing behind the fake anger.

Help us place Harry Reid into the MINORITY PARTY in November with a generous contribution --here--
 
 
Sincerely,
 
Todd Cefaratti
Freedom Organizer


P.S. Our strength is in numbers. Please help our efforts by forwarding this message to a friend.


 
TheTeaParty.net | 1701 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Suite 300, PMB #433 | Washington, DC 20006

Title: OBAMA GUTS WELFARE REFORM LAW WORK REQUIREMENTS.
Post by: objectivist1 on July 16, 2012, 08:43:22 AM

What is even more shocking than what Obama did here, which was totally lawless, is the the fact that no mainstream media is covering the story!

People can now literally sit on thier butts and collect welfare - all in the interest of more votes for Obama.

The Welfare Work Requirement: Obama Obliterates Clinton’s Best Achievement

By Herman Cain
July 16, 2012

President Obama likes to blame everything on George W. Bush, but apparently he does not discriminate. This week, Obama obliterated one of the best things Bill Clinton ever did.
Conservatives don’t look back fondly at the Clinton years, and for good reason, although he looks decent compared to what we have today. But you have to give credit where it’s due: Clinton did some good things, and one of the best – at the prodding of Newt Gingrich and the Republican Congress to be sure – was the signing of the 1996 welfare reform act.
The bill “ended warfare as we know it” as Clinton liked to say, and introduced stringent requirements that able-bodied welfare recipients either work or spend time preparing for work. It was a good idea and it reversed the expansion of the welfare rolls for the first time in decades. The key was that states were not allowed to waive the work requirements. Congress wrote this section of the law very carefully because they knew that some state bureaucrats would try to do just that.
Now the work requirement is gone, not because new legislation was passed to remove it, but because Obama once again decided the law does not apply to him.
On Thursday, the Obama Administration issued a directive allowing states to waive the work requirement – and only the work requirement. The directive explains: “The Secretary (Kathleen Sebelius) is interested in using her authority to approve waiver demonstrations to challenge states to engage in a new round of innovation that seeks to find more effective mechanisms for helping families succeed in employment.”
In fact, Sebelius has no authority to grant such waivers. The bill makes that very clear by limiting the allowance of waivers to one section only, and it very explicitly excludes the work requirement from that section. This was not an accident. The power of the bill, and of the whole idea, was that it would only succeed if the work requirement was mandatory for all states and for all recipients.
And there’s no need for the Obama Administration to “find more effective mechanisms.” Welfare reform has been a roaring success.
Of course, that depends how you define success. It only took four years after the bill had eliminated the old Aid for Families with Dependent Children program, and replaced it with the new Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, for poverty to plummet while welfare caseloads were cut in half, according to a report from the Heritage Foundation.
So why would Obama get rid of the work requirements? I can think of two reasons – one ideological and the other political.
The ideological reason is that liberals hated welfare reform from day one. They predicted it would push millions more children into poverty. When it did exactly the opposite, their hatred was not abated in the slightest. They are convinced that the only way for people to get by is the reliability of a check from the government, and to them, the notion that you would replace this security blanket with this strange thing called a job is simply absurd.
The political reason is cynical but simple. People who depend on the government to be their primary benefactor vote Democratic, and if their dependence is permanent, then they vote Democratic for life. Even if these folks don’t vote, expanding the welfare rolls will allow for the expansion of the programs all across the country – and the newly hired welfare bureaucrats will vote Democratic, because their subsistence is dependent on the government as well.
Ronald Reagan liked to say that he defined compassion not by how many people we help, but by how many people no longer need our help. Obviously, and not surprisingly, Barack Obama’s view is exactly the opposite. The more people who depend on government largesse, and the easier it is for them to get it and keep getting it, the more job security he creates – for himself.
And he’s even willing to grant waivers that the law expressly forbids in order to make it happen.
I wonder what Bill Clinton thinks about what Obama did to one of his most positive achievements. After all, Clinton (who was re-elected the same year he signed welfare reform) worked with a Republican Congress to pass this bill, to cut the capital gains tax and to balance the budget for several years running.
Now the first Democratic president to follow him is undoing all of the above, or trying to. It’s almost enough to make you wonder, when Clinton walks into that voting booth in November and closes the curtain behind him . . . what he will really do.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2012, 08:59:14 AM

In further proof that you and I have similar sources, I already posted this on the Government Programs thread now nearby.  :-)

Title: Conspiracy Theory, or real possibility?
Post by: objectivist1 on July 17, 2012, 10:54:43 AM

OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO STAGE ‘REICHSTAG’ EVENT AS TRIGGER FOR MARTIAL LAW, DHS SOURCE WARNS

‘Reichstag’ event could involve false assassination attempt blamed on “white supremacists”
Incited racial riots would lead to calls for government “crackdown”
Civil unrest would lead to martial law, DHS travel checkpoints, indefinite delay of elections

Washington, DC – The Obama agents, through the DHS and other assorted colluders, are plotting a major ‘Reichstag’ event to generate racial riots and produce the justification for martial law, delaying the November 2012 elections, possibly indefinitely, a DHS whistleblower informed the Canada Free Press on Tuesday.
The ‘Reichstag Event’ would take the form of a staged assassination attempt against Barack Obama, “carefully choreographed” and manufactured by Obama operatives. It would subsequently be blamed on “white supremacists” and used to enrage the black community to rioting and looting, the DHS source warned.
The Obama administration would then use the violence and chaos they created as justification for the imposition of martial law in major urban cities in America, the creation of DHS checkpoints, restriction of travel, and the indefinite delay of the November 2012 elections.
The Reichstag event refers to a fire started during Hitler’s rise to power. The fire allowed him to grab emergency powers and murder his opposition. Historians have long believed that Hitler started the fire himself, while he blamed it on the Communists.
The anonymous whistleblower elaborated on how the Obama administration is using the Occupy movement, labor unions, and other assorted subversive groups to create massive chaos within the nation.
“Using untracked campaign funds, they are paying people to infiltrate the various movements to cause physical destruction of property and disrupt commerce. That began last year, but has increased ten-fold already this year,” the DHS source shared.
“Obama is using some high profile people as pawns to foment the revolution. I heard several times through very credible sources that [Louis] Farrakhan is on the CIA payroll. Other have been named as well, but I’m not prepared to identify them yet. Farrakhan is to coordinate the Blacks and the Muslims to prepare for riots this summer, using any means necessary.”
The recent revelations appeared to complement warnings given by other government insiders, who alleged that Jeremiah Wright, Van Jones, Al Sharpton, and Jesse Jackson were all agent provocateurs whose mission was to inflame racial tensions and spark open conflict in the streets of America.
According to the DHS source, a global economic collapse is coming, which the Obama administration is well aware of. They wish to build a system of global governance from the ashes of the previous financial system. In order for this mission to be completed, the Obama administration needs more time at the helm of power. Their reasons for concern are justified; as recently as May 8, influential political prognosticator Dick Morris predicted a Romney landslide if the election were held today.

The shocking news also seemed to confirm recent actions taken by the DHS, such as their purchase of 450 million rounds of ammunition and their recent BlackHawk helicopters operation in Chicago, which looked frighteningly similar to a civil unrest exercise, but was described as “routine training”.
The concept of a staged assassination attempt against Barack Obama is not new as well and was first voiced by a knowledgeable White House insider known only as “WHI”.
Ulsterman:  So what is it?  Pull what off?
Insider:  A manufactured threat against the President of the United States.  Something easily digested by the media and the American public.  Not a real threat – something totally of their own making. They will use it if they need to – got no doubt whatsoever about that.  Jarrett has approved the idea…and did so a long time ago.  There were whispers of it during the 2008 campaign.  McCain was so god-awful it never reached a serious consideration…but the plan was discussed.  If needed – they were willing to go that route.  It would be the ultimate use of the race card in the history of American politics.  And…it would likely work if they got away with it.
Ulsterman:  They would go that far? Risk something like that?
Insider:  You don’t need to ask that question.  Not after what we’ve discussed this past year.  Not after what I’ve told you has proven out over and over again.  So stop asking the fu—ing question.  You need to accept the fact…if you haven’t done so yet – you need to accept the fact these people are playing for keeps.  I told you – how many times?  How many times have I said it?  These are not Democrats.  These folks are something else entirely.  And they are willing to push the country – all of us, right against the fu—ing wall.  Hard.  I’m pushing back.  Others are too.  All of this is part of that effort.  A small part, but an important one.
As with the Occupy movement, it appears as if the Obama administration executed a test-run of the plot, with a “shot being fired” at the White House. This would lend credibility when they choreographed the attempt for the masses.
As early as August 2011, WHI also predicted race riots coming in the summer of 2012. The use of the Trayvon Martin death and the subsequent incitements to violence by the media, Obama operatives, and useful idiots, followed by the subsequent threats by the NBPP of a coming “race war” appear to have been merely a sign of what’s to come.
Middle-class American citizens were shocked and appalled at the allegations, with many hoping they were not true. Some said they had harbored similar suspicions for quite some time, due to the many anomalies and inaccuracies emanating from the current operatives inhabiting the White House.
The DHS source claimed that campaign funds were being directly used to fund the incitements to violence and rioting that the Obama administration was seeking to spark.
“Using untracked campaign funds, they are paying people to infiltrate the various movements to cause physical destruction of property and disrupt commerce. That began last year, but has increased ten-fold already this year,” stated this source.
“He added that they are using some lower level DHS agents to make the payments under the context of tracking subversives, but they are the unwitting subversives.”

The use of campaign funds, funneled through DHS agents to street-level agitators for the purpose of fomenting violence, would be extremely legally questionable, if not outright illegal, certain legal experts shared.
Intelligence officials said that if the allegations were true, the degree to which extremists had penetrated the upper echelons of the American government, finance, and security structure was unparalleled.
“Let’s just say that we are not taking these accusations lightly,” one official remarked on condition of anonymity. “Certain figures will be placed under a microscope, along with their associates.”
Valerie Jarrett, the shadowy figure always at Obama’s side, has been accused by some of “manipulating” or “controlling’ the President. Just who does she work for? Who does she take orders from?
The possibility that Barack Obama’s operatives, under the direction of Valerie Jarrett, was actively involved in the facilitation of street violence and mob chaos disturbed citizens, with many deeming it unpatriotic, subversive, and possibly seditious.

“Isn’t this why HUAC was created?”, one middle-class citizen angrily questioned. “Congress must re-instate HUAC, hold hearings, and find out if there is any truth to this.”
The intensely close co-ordination of seemingly separate entities confirmed the suspicions of many that communist agents had infiltrated major institutions, organizations, and trade unions, and were working together to sabotage America.
Who is Valerie Jarrett?
“Their apparatus can be seen as a type of octupus, having many tentacles,” one intelligence source confided on condition of anonymity. “Occupy is one tentacle, the unions are another, the Black Panthers are another, the radical black/islamic supremacists(Wright, Farrakhan, Van Jones, Sharpton) are another, DHS and its’ umbrella agencies are another, the mainstream press is another,” the source explained. “These tentacles are all working together, seemingly separate, but eventually they are controlled by the same small group of people. They receive their directives and marching orders and mindlessly execute them.”
The intelligence official predicted that in the very near future, all of the seemingly separate entities would be clearly exposed as working together, co-ordinating their activities together, and driving for the same goal – the destruction of America as a constitutional republic, the destruction of its capitalist system, and the dethroning of the U.S. as a superpower.

Title: Not just a Dem dirty trick, but a crime
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2012, 07:54:27 PM

Not Just A Democrat Dirty Trick, But A Crime


A few years ago, as part of its strategy of facilitating voter fraud as a means of winning close elections, the Democratic Party undertook a campaign to secure as many Secretary of State offices in swing states as possible. From those perches, the Democrats would be in a position to oversee elections and enforce (or decline to enforce) election laws. That strategy has been quite successful, but the Democrats suffered a setback in Iowa in 2010 when conservative Republican Matt Schultz won an upset victory in the Secretary of State race. Since then, Iowa Democrats have targeted Schultz.

That targeting has taken a sinister turn–a criminal one, in fact–as the Des Moines Register reports:

A Des Moines man has been arrested after police say he used, or tried to use, the identity of Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz in a scheme to falsely implicate Schultz in perceived unethical behavior in office.

Zachary Edwards was arrested Friday and charged with identity theft.

The Iowa Department of Public Safety issued a news release saying Schultz’s office discovered the scheme on June 24, 2011 and notified authorities.

Iowa blogger Shane Vander Hart has more here.

Edwards is a former Obama staffer who directed “new media operations” for Obama in five states during the 2008 primaries. Thereafter, he was Obama’s Director of New Media for the State of Iowa. In the Democratic Party’s lexicon, “new media” apparently includes identity theft.

Edwards now works for LINK Strategies, a Democratic consulting firm with extraordinarily close ties to Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin. Its principal, Jeff Link, has served as Harkin’s campaign manager and chief of staff. Link, too, is a former Obama staffer. The LINK Strategies web site says that Jeff Link “served as a media consultant to the Obama for President Campaign, coordinating branding, all paid media and polling in 25 states, including seven battleground states (VA, NC, FL, CO, NM, NV, MT)….”

That Edwards allegedly tried to steal the Secretary of State’s identity in order to frame Schultz for “unethical behavior in office” is no coincidence. Iowa Democrats, as Kevin Hall of the Iowa Republican points out, have mounted a campaign of false accusations against Schultz:

Since his surprise victory over incumbent Michael Mauro in November 2010, Secretary of State Schultz has been a target of the Iowa Democratic Party. Interestingly, on June 24, the same day as Zach Edwards alleged crime, Under the Golden Dome, a blog connected to Iowa Democrats, launched a three-part series of articles critical of Matt Schultz. They were based on documents obtained through an open records request from “a tipster.” The blog alleged that a batch of emails from Schultz’s office “raise some serious questions about his ability to remain independent and ensure election integrity”.

Just 15 days earlier, on June 9, the Iowa Democratic Party filed an ethics complaint against Schultz, claiming the Secretary of State of used public resources to campaign against presidential hopeful Jon Huntsman. The Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board dismissed the complaint on July 19.

So on its face, Edwards’s identity theft appears to be part of a coordinated effort by the Iowa Democratic Party to bring down the Republican Secretary of State so he can be replaced with a Democrat. We hope that Edwards will get the long jail term that he deserves, but the more important question is, from whom was he taking instructions? Circumstantially, one would guess from his boss, Jeff Link. But if so, who was instructing (and paying?) Link’s firm? The White House? Tom Harkin? Iowa’s Democratic Party?

Much like Watergate, which began with a seemingly simple (if puzzling) burglary and ultimately unraveled the Nixon administration, it is impossible to say how far the trail of criminality will go if the Edwards case is pursued aggressively. Will that happen? I don’t know; stay tuned.

Title: AG Holder linked to banks accused of foreclosure fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2012, 07:56:24 PM

Second post of the evening.  Note that it is from January:

U.S. AG Eric Holder, DoJ Head Lanny Breuer Linked To Banks Accused Of Foreclosure Fraud

First Posted: 1/20/12 07:00 AM ET Updated: 1/20/12 09:23 AM ET

By Scot J. Paltrow


Jan 19 (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department's criminal division, were partners for years at a Washington law firm that represented a Who's Who of big banks and other companies at the center of alleged foreclosure fraud, a Reuters inquiry shows.

The firm, Covington & Burling, is one of Washington's biggest white shoe law firms. Law professors and other federal ethics experts said that federal conflict of interest rules required Holder and Breuer to recuse themselves from any Justice Department decisions relating to law firm clients they personally had done work for.

Both the Justice Department and Covington declined to say if either official had personally worked on matters for the big mortgage industry clients. Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said Holder and Breuer had complied fully with conflict of interest regulations, but she declined to say if they had recused themselves from any matters related to the former clients.

Reuters reported in December that under Holder and Breuer, the Justice Department hasn't brought any criminal cases against big banks or other companies involved in mortgage servicing, even though copious evidence has surfaced of apparent criminal violations in foreclosure cases.

The evidence, including records from federal and state courts and local clerks' offices around the country, shows widespread forgery, perjury, obstruction of justice, and illegal foreclosures on the homes of thousands of active-duty military personnel.

In recent weeks the Justice Department has come under renewed pressure from members of Congress, state and local officials and homeowners' lawyers to open a wide-ranging criminal investigation of mortgage servicers, the biggest of which have been Covington clients. So far Justice officials haven't responded publicly to any of the requests.

While Holder and Breuer were partners at Covington, the firm's clients included the four largest U.S. banks - Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo & Co - as well as at least one other bank that is among the 10 largest mortgage servicers.

DEFENDER OF FREDDIE

Servicers perform routine mortgage maintenance tasks, including filing foreclosures, on behalf of mortgage owners, usually groups of investors who bought mortgage-backed securities.

Covington represented Freddie Mac, one of the nation's biggest issuers of mortgage backed securities, in enforcement investigations by federal financial regulators.

A particular concern by those pressing for an investigation is Covington's involvement with Virginia-based MERS Corp, which runs a vast computerized registry of mortgages. Little known before the mortgage crisis hit, MERS, which stands for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, has been at the center of complaints about false or erroneous mortgage documents.

Court records show that Covington, in the late 1990s, provided legal opinion letters needed to create MERS on behalf of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and several other large banks. It was meant to speed up registration and transfers of mortgages. By 2010, MERS claimed to own about half of all mortgages in the U.S. -- roughly 60 million loans.

But evidence in numerous state and federal court cases around the country has shown that MERS authorized thousands of bank employees to sign their names as MERS officials. The banks allegedly drew up fake mortgage assignments, making it appear falsely that they had standing to file foreclosures, and then had their own employees sign the documents as MERS "vice presidents" or "assistant secretaries."

Covington in 2004 also wrote a crucial opinion letter commissioned by MERS, providing legal justification for its electronic registry. MERS spokeswoman Karmela Lejarde declined to comment on Covington legal work done for MERS.

It isn't known to what extent if any Covington has continued to represent the banks and other mortgage firms since Holder and Breuer left. Covington declined to respond to questions from Reuters. A Covington spokeswoman said the firm had no comment.

Several lawyers for homeowners have said that even if Holder and Breuer haven't violated any ethics rules, their ties to Covington create an impression of bias toward the firms' clients, especially in the absence of any prosecutions by the Justice Department.

O. Max Gardner III, a lawyer who trains other attorneys to represent homeowners in bankruptcy court foreclosure actions, said he attributes the Justice Department's reluctance to prosecute the banks or their executives to the Obama White House's view that it might harm the economy.

But he said that the background of Holder and Breuer at Covington -- and their failure to act on foreclosure fraud or publicly recuse themselves -- "doesn't pass the smell test."

Federal ethics regulations generally require new government officials to recuse themselves for one year from involvement in matters involving clients they personally had represented at their former law firms.

President Obama imposed additional restrictions on appointees that essentially extended the ban to two years. For Holder, that ban would have expired in February 2011, and in April for Breuer. Rules also require officials to avoid creating the appearance of a conflict.

Schmaler, the Justice Department spokeswoman, said in an e-mail that "The Attorney General and Assistant Attorney General Breuer have conformed with all financial, legal and ethical obligations under law as well as additional ethical standards set by the Obama Administration."

She said they "routinely consult" the department's ethics officials for guidance. Without offering specifics, Schmaler said they "have recused themselves from matters as required by the law."

Senior government officials often move to big Washington law firms, and lawyers from those firms often move into government posts. But records show that in recent years the traffic between the Justice Department and Covington & Burling has been particularly heavy. In 2010, Holder's deputy chief of staff, John Garland, returned to Covington, as did Steven Fagell, who was Breuer's deputy chief of staff in the criminal division.

The firm has on its web site a page listing its attorneys who are former federal government officials. Covington lists 22 from the Justice Department, and 12 from U.S. Attorneys offices, the Justice Department's local federal prosecutors' offices around the country.

As Reuters reported in 2011, public records show large numbers of mortgage promissory notes with apparently forged endorsements that were submitted as evidence to courts.

There also is evidence of almost routine manufacturing of false mortgage assignments, documents that transfer ownership of mortgages between banks or to groups of investors. In foreclosure actions in courts mortgage assignments are required to show that a bank has the legal right to foreclose.

In an interview in late 2011, Raymond Brescia, a visiting professor at Yale Law School who has written about foreclosure practices said, "I think it's difficult to find a fraud of this size on the U.S. court system in U.S. history."

Holder has resisted calls for a criminal investigation since October 2010, when evidence of widespread "robo-signing" first surfaced. That involved mortgage servicer employees falsely signing and swearing to massive numbers of affidavits and other foreclosure documents that they had never read or checked for accuracy.

Recent calls for a wide-ranging criminal investigation of the mortgage servicing industry have come from members of Congress, including Senator Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., state officials, and county clerks. In recent months clerks from around the country have examined mortgage and foreclosure records filed with them and reported finding high percentages of apparently fraudulent documents.

On Wednesday, John O'Brien Jr., register of deeds in Salem, Mass., announced that he had sent 31,897 allegedly fraudulent foreclosure-related documents to Holder. O'Brien said he asked for a criminal investigation of servicers and their law firms that had filed the documents because they "show a pattern of fraud," forgery and false notarizations.

Title: Bribery compromised officials of DOJ let financial crime suspects free
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2012, 07:59:07 PM

Third post of the evening

Bribery, compromised officials leave indicted financial-crime suspects free from prosecution under Holder’s DOJ

By Matthew Boyle
Published: 10:16 PM 02/01/2012 | Updated: 10:29 PM 02/01/2012


A U.S. Justice Department source has told The Daily Caller that at least two DOJ prosecutors accepted cash bribes from allegedly corrupt finance executives who were indicted under court seal within the past 13 months, but never arrested or prosecuted.

The sitting governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands, his attorney general and an unspecified number of Virgin Islands legislators also accepted bribes, the source said, adding that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is aware prosecutors and elected officials were bribed and otherwise compromised, but has not held anyone accountable.

The bribed officials, an attorney with knowledge of the investigation told TheDC, remain on the taxpayers’ payroll at the Justice Department without any accountability. The DOJ source said Holder does not want to admit public officials accepted bribes while under his leadership.

That source said that until the summer of 2011, the two compromised prosecutors were part of a team of more than 25 federal prosecutors pursuing a financial crime ring, and at least five other prosecutors tasked to the case were also compromised by the criminal suspects they were investigating, without being bribed.

TheDC is withholding the name of the source, a knowledgeable government official who served on the Justice Department’s arrest team and was involved in the investigation, in order to prevent career retaliation from political figures in the Obama administration.

A former high-level elected official vouches for the government source’s veracity. “[The source] was trustworthy … and you could tell [the source] information or [the source] could hear information and [the source] would keep things close to [the source’s] chest,” that former official told TheDC. “You could trust [the source] with your life.”

The identities of the prosecutors who accepted bribes and others who were compromised have not yet been made public, and TheDC has not yet independently confirmed their identities. The prosecutors themselves are now cooperating with Justice Department investigators.

Eric Holder, the source said, personally approved the makeup of the investigation and arrest teams.

“The team which was put in place, of course, in tracking all the information that we had — Holder had to sign off on the teams. He signed off on them a year and a half ago,” the source said during an interview. “He wasn’t fully in control of it, but of course the knowledge and approval of it came from him.”

“There are internal documents, of course. He was briefed. He got a full scope of what transpired, and he got a full scope of what is going on with this case in particular. There is nothing going on in this case that Holder doesn’t know about right now.”

DOJ leadership has been fretting internally, the source said, about how to handle the story when the news breaks because it represents a new level of corruption in the Obama administration. The Holder Justice Department is concerned about the appearance that it lacks the competence to enforce the laws in which Obama has shown political interest, including those related to corruption and other financial crimes.

Title: Fed Ct: DOJ official may have lied about New Black Panther Case
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2012, 08:33:41 PM

4th entry of the evening:

(this case was discussed here rather thoroughly at the time btw)


Federal Court: DOJ Official May Have Lied About the New Black Panther Case


In a little noted decision on July 23, a federal district court judge concluded that internal DOJ documents about the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case “contradict Assistant Attorney General [Thomas] Perez’s testimony that political leadership was not involved in” the decision to dismiss the case.

In other words, the sworn testimony of Perez, the Obama political appointee who heads the Civil Rights Division, before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights was apparently false.

The decision in Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice by Judge Reggie Walton was in a case filed by Judicial Watch after the Civil Rights Division refused to turn over documents about the NBPP case requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Walton is the same federal judge who presided over the prosecution of Scooter Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff.

As Judge Walton outlined, Judicial Watch’s FOIA request “sought documents relating to the DOJ’s decision to dismiss civil claims in the New Black Panther Party case.” Walton awarded Judicial Watch a small amount of attorneys’ fees and costs, having concluded that the Judicial Watch lawsuit “was the catalyst for the DOJ’s release of records.”

According to the court, the DOJ documents, including emails from former Associate Attorney General Thomas Perrelli (who was the number-two official at DOJ) and former Democratic election lawyer and Deputy Associate Attorney General Sam Hirsch, “revealed that political appointees within DOJ were conferring about the status and resolution of the New Black Panther Party case in the days preceding the DOJ’s dismissal of claims.”

This included emails from Perrelli to lower-level DOJ attorneys on May 14 and 15, 2009, the day before and the very day the case was dismissed against three of the defendants on May 15. As Judge Walton concluded in discussing the importance of the Judicial Watch lawsuit, “urely the public has an interest in documents that cast doubt on the accuracy of government officials’ representations regarding the possible politicization of agency decisionmaking.”

Neither Perrelli nor Hirsch has ever answered any questions about why top officials in the Justice Department were so interested in one of the many cases handled by the Civil Rights Division or what actions or instructions they communicated. And they have never said who else they discussed the case with above them, either in the Office of the Attorney General or in the White House. We don’t know the actual content of many of these emails because the court upheld the exemption from disclosure claimed by DOJ for many of these documents under a FOIA rule that protects certain legally privileged documents.

But the court also said that DOJ had failed “to show that its withholding of some documents from Judicial Watch prior to the filing of this lawsuit was legally correct or had a reasonable basis in law.” That is no surprise. Far too many of the actions of this Justice Department, particularly the Civil Rights Division, have not been legally correct or had a reasonable basis in law. And in this case, DOJ tried to avoid releasing documents as mandated by FOIA that it found politically embarrassing since there was no justifiable legal reason for dismissing an open-and-shut case of voter intimidation that had already been won by default.

But what is most disturbing about this court order is that it strongly suggests that Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez essentially lied in sworn testimony. At a hearing before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights on May 14, 2010, Perez was asked by Commissioner Peter Kirsanow whether “any political leadership [was] involved in the decision not to pursue this particular case.” Perez’s answer, on page 79 of the transcript of that hearing, is an uncategorical “No.” When the statements of Perez are compared to the documents that Judicial Watch forced DOJ to release in the FOIA lawsuit, it is clear Judge Walton was polite when he said they are contradictory and “cast doubt on the accuracy” of Perez’s account.

A less diplomatic judge might have said that Perez testified falsely in his hearing testimony before the Commission on Civil Rights. In other words, he may have committed perjury if he knew his statements were false when uttered.

The Commission on Civil Rights repeatedly asked Attorney General Holder to appoint a special counsel to investigate the handling of the NPBB case by the Department and the refusal of Perez to comply with lawful documents requests and subpoenas served on DOJ by the Commission. When will the attorney general do so, and when will he ask for an investigation of this possible perjury by Perez?

Where is the investigation by the Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) of whether Perez violated his ethical and professional obligations as a DOJ attorney? Will the DOJ inspector general open an investigation of the possible violation by Perez of 18 U.S.C. §1621, which outlaws presenting false statements under oath in official federal proceedings? Or will they all respectively yawn and ignore this?

Imagine if a conservative political appointee at DOJ had just been cited in a federal court decision as having apparently testified falsely under oath. Not only would it be a top headline at The New York Times and The Washington Post, but the IG and OPR would be rushing to investigate. All of which is a sad commentary on the liberal bias not just of the media, but of too many of the offices and officials within the Justice Department who are supposed to administer justice in an objective, non-political, and impartial manner.

Title: WSJ: PA pushes back against DOJ.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 24, 2012, 06:31:28 AM

By COLLIN LEVY
Pennsylvania's Republican governor, Tom Corbett, is pushing back on U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder this week, calling a Justice Department inquiry into the state's voter ID law "unprecedented" and the department's interest in the matter politically driven.

In a letter to the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, Pennsylvania General Counsel James Schultz wrote that while the state had provided the Justice Department with tens of thousands of documents, the fishing expedition by Justice was going too far. "In light of the absence of authority for your request for information, I question whether your inquiry is truly motivated by a desire to assess compliance with federal voting rights laws, or rather is fueled by political motivation," he wrote.

The Justice Department's sniffing around Pennsylvania's voter ID law, which requires people to present photo identification at the voting booth, raised eyebrows because the state is not one of the handful that is required to get the Justice Department's permission for changes to its voting procedures under the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Mr. Holder's interest in the matter instead seemed geared to drum up racial tensions in the swing state in an election year, adding the prospect of a federal civil rights lawsuit to cast further doubt on the legitimacy of the new voting requirements.

The tide has been going against the law's opponents in the Keystone State. Earlier this month, a state judge ruled against an American Civil Liberties Union attempt to prevent the law from going into effect. The defeat was a setback for the group, which had specifically avoided arguing the case in federal court in an effort to end-run a Supreme Court precedent that had already rejected similar theories in an Indiana case. Witold Walczak of the Pennsylvania ACLU said that "going into federal court is like going to the plate with two strikes already against you." Somebody should share that insight with the Justice Department.

Title: Morris: One million less Dems in battleground states
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 24, 2012, 08:50:39 AM

http://www.dickmorris.com/dem-registration-craters-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: Pentagon failing to support soldier vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 07, 2012, 11:22:18 AM

As Michelle Aids Military Families, Pentagon Tries To Hold Down Turnout
Published on DickMorris.com on September 7, 2012

Dear Friend,

Click Here To Sign The Petition To Increase Military Voter Turnout!

Even as First Lady Michelle Obama eloquently addresses the needs of military families, her husband's Defense Department is cutting back on programs mandated by Congress to increase military voter turnout.

In 2009, Congress passed the Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment Act (MOVE) to stimulate turnout among active duty military, in part, by establishing Installation Voter Assistance Offices (IVAO) on each base to help military personnel vote.  But, in a report just issued by the Pentagon's Inspector General, only about half of the installations have voter assistance offices even though the MOVE Act required them all to have them.

Why is the Obama Pentagon dragging its feet in catalyzing a turnout of military voters?  It is probably because they would overwhelmingly back Romney if they were able to vote.

Among military veterans, Romney leads Obama by 58-34.  One would assume that active duty military have a similar inclination.  In the 2000 cliff-hanger Gore/Bush election, Democrats moved to exclude military absentee ballots from the Florida vote tally because they skewed so heavily against them.

How outrageous is it that the Pentagon is failing to implement a bi-partisan act of Congress designed to help those who defend our freedom participate in it by voting on Election Day?

This Pentagon report comes on the heels of lawsuits filed by the Democratic Party in Ohio to cut back the number of days during which military personnel can cast absentee ballots.  The Ohio legislature had extended the period until the day before Election Day.  But the Democratic lawsuit is trying to cut it back to four days before Election Day.  Their suit is based on their contention that treating military absentee ballots differently from other kinds of absentee voting is discriminatory.  But how easy is it to vote when you are in the wilds of Afghanistan, out on patrol during the day, constantly on the alert for snipers?  These are obstacles most absentee voters don't face and the military are entitled to special efforts to make their voting easier.

Please sign this petition to Michelle Obama, her husband, and the Pentagon to insist that the Defense Department move immediately to implement fully the requirements of the MOVE Act and establish voter assistance centers on all military bases and installations.

Put your actions where your words are!

Click Here To Sign The Petition To Increase Military Voter Turnout!
Thanks,

Dick

Title: God, Jerusalem, and honest vote count.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2012, 01:28:17 AM

An observation: 

Even with God himself watching from Jerusalem, the capitol of his Chosen People and tens of millions of Americans watching on TV, the Dems could not stop themselves from committing vote count fraud.

Title: DOJ political appointees overruled career attorneys at DOJ over SC voter ID law.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 12, 2012, 10:19:39 AM

PJ Media has learned that a team of career lawyers, expert analysts, and supervisors in the Justice Department Voting Section recommended that South Carolina’s photo voter identification law be precleared under the Voting Rights Act as non-discriminatory.  Presidential appointees in the Justice Department then disregarded the career recommendation and an objection followed, blocking South Carolina’s voter ID law.
 
South Carolina filed suit in federal court, and a trial concluded a few weeks ago.  The parties are briefing the case and a decision is expected shortly. (See “DOJ Lawyers Waste Your Money Over Fonts” at PJ Media.)
 
This information directly contradicts a central theme of Attorney General Eric Holder’s civil rights enforcement — that career civil servants have been placed back in charge of Voting Rights Act enforcement.  It also raises questions about political interference during an election year that has resulted in hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs from a federal court lawsuit to defend the decision by political appointees to overrule the career recommendation.  Had voter ID been precleared, South Carolina would not have needed to sue Eric Holder for approval in court.


Democrats have pushed the narrative that Bush political appointees overruled the recommendation of career lawyers inside the Voting Section and precleared Georgia voter ID in 2005.  This story is false because the career civil servant in charge of the Voting Section recommended that Georgia voter ID should be precleared, and the political appointees followed his recommendation.
 
That didn’t stop Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) from saying “the Washington Post ran two front page articles detailing how President Bush’s political appointees within the Division were overriding career litigators’ recommendations on crucial voting rights cases. . . .There are disturbing reports that career lawyers have been shut out of the Division’s decision-making process.”
 
Even then-Senator Barack Obama joined in, attacking now-PJ Media contributor Hans von Spakovsky’s role in approving Georgia voter ID: “Reports indicate that Mr. von Spakovsky joined other senior officials in overruling the recommendations of several career staff lawyers who had reviewed the Georgia voter ID law and determined that it would unduly hinder the ability of black voters to cast their ballots.”  The actions of the Bush-era Voting Section became a central campaign theme of candidate Obama, as I document in my book Injustice.
 
Once upon a time, the opinion of career staff at the Voting Section about a voter ID submission was the lodestar to Leahy and Obama.
 
The South Carolina voter ID law was reviewed by civil rights analysts, a veteran attorney reviewer, the deputy chief in charge of Section 5 enforcement, and ultimately the section chief.  Extensive and detailed memos were prepared by career staff recommending that South Carolina voter ID be precleared.  There was a very small difference in voter ID possession between blacks and whites – only a 1.6% difference.  South Carolina made photo ID free and allowed anyone with a reasonable impediment in obtaining one to vote anyhow after completing an affidavit. Based on these facts, career staff recommended preclearance.
 
But according to DOJ staff familiar with subsequent events, Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Matthew Colangelo then overruled the career staff and ordered that the Department of Justice object to South Carolina’s voter ID – precisely repeating the same behavior that Leahy and Obama had falsely accused the Bush Justice Department of conducting.
 

Tom Perez
 
This revelation is also damning because it means there is extensive DOJ documentation supporting South Carolina’s lawsuit.  DOJ lawyers did not reveal to the three-judge federal panel the internal preclearance recommendation stating that the law did not discriminate.  Nor did the Justice Department provide these documents to South Carolina in discovery.
 
Moreover, the career civil servants who recommended preclearance have significantly more experience in enforcing the Voting Rights Act than does Colangelo, a lawyer that one DOJ employee characterized to me as “seriously lacking” in any Voting Rights Act experience.  Assistant Attorney General Perez also lacks firsthand experience litigating Voting Rights Act cases, particularly compared with the DOJ staff that recommended preclearance of South Carolina’s voter ID.
 
In personal meetings with career Voting Section staff, Perez told them to ask outlandish and inappropriate questions of state officials in Section 5 reviews to discern if state officials enacted voter ID with a racially discriminatory intent.  Voting Section staff characterized Perez’s suggestions to me as wholly inappropriate.
 
Nevertheless, in the voter ID court litigation, other Justice Department lawyers have asked similarly outlandish questions of Texas and South Carolina officials in depositions – such as whether they belong to a country club, what cable news channels they watch, whether they spoke with the Heritage Foundation, and what their views toward “sanctuary cities” are.
 
This political interference comes on the heels of the Obama re-elect campaign making opposition to voter ID a cornerstone of a base-mobilization strategy.  Political appointees at the DOJ ensured that official government action would comport with campaign rhetoric.
 
Whether news outlets that once expressed outrage at the idea of career Voting Section employees being overruled by political appointees in a voter ID case will be outraged when it actually happens remains to be seen.  I somehow don’t expect the Washington Post,  USA Today, and the ridiculously biased Greg Gordon at the drain-swirling McClatchy to be consistent. Perhaps they should at least ask DOJ public affairs for their own copy of the documents the career civil servants produced recommending that South Carolina’s voter ID law be approved.  That way the federal court can learn the entire story.
 

Title: How to commit voter fraud in OH
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 18, 2012, 11:50:08 AM

http://pjmedia.com/blog/how-to-commit-voter-fraud-in-ohio/?singlepage=true


Disclaimer: Nothing in this article should be considered an encouragement to commit voter fraud. The intention of this satirical how-to guide is to expose the flaws in Ohio’s election laws and to call for reform of a system that makes it incredibly easy to vote fraudulently in this important swing state. Voter fraud is a felony in Ohio.
 


As a precinct election official, I have seen exceptionally professional behavior by my fellow poll workers and county board of election officials. However, they are at the mercy of loose state election laws. Though Ohio has a Republican governor and legislature, they backed down on their efforts to pass a voter ID law and refused to reform the state’s no-fault absentee voting rules, making the commission of voter fraud a relatively simple matter.

 
Advertisement
 



“Providing voters with free, fair, open, and honest elections ensures voter trust in the process of choosing our political leadership and the direction of our community’s future. Voters who have confidence in the elections process are more likely to continue to vote.” (Ohio Precinct Election Official Manual)
 
As a tribute to my state’s open invitation to voter fraud, I present:
 
The Idiot’s Guide to Committing Voter Fraud in Ohio
 
While all of these methods are illegal, some are more complicated than others. I’ve arranged them into three levels, depending on their complexity and outside resource requirements.
 
Novice Level:
 
•Vote for a friend or family member you know won’t show up at the polls on election day.
 
If you decide that one vote just isn’t enough to show your love for your favorite candidate on Election Day, why not “help” a sick (or lazy) friend or family member you know won’t be voting? This could be your roommate, your brother who hates politics and never bothers to vote, or your grandfather, who is bedridden with Alzheimer’s disease. Fortunately, Ohio makes it easy and you won’t even need anything as complicated as a fake ID.
 
Here are some acceptable forms of ID permitted in Ohio:
 
* A cable or cell phone bill (electronically transmitted or paper copy)
 
* A bank statement
 
* A government check (even an out-of-state government check will do) or a paycheck
 
* Other government document. This can be a school report card, college transcript from a state university (in or out of Ohio), or divorce papers.
 
As long as you can come up with a document that matches the current name and address on file at the board of elections, you can vote for someone else in Ohio.
 
When you arrive at the precinct, you will be required to sign the signature poll book on Election Day. In theory, it should match the signature on file in the book. According to the 2012 Precinct Election Official Training Manual:
 

If the voter’s signature, in the opinion of the majority of all four precinct election officials, does not substantially conform to the signature in the Signature Poll Book, the voter MUST vote a provisional ballot.
 
Not a problem. There are two simple ways to get around this. The first way is probably the least complicated. The signature pollbook with the “real” signature will be right there in front of you. You have to really botch the signature to convince three poll workers (from a slate of two Republicans and two Democrats) that it does not “substantially conform” to the original. This is especially true if you arrive at a busy time, when poll workers are looking at a line out the door. Just feign an injury to your writing hand and apologize for your scribbles. Another option would be to simply sign with an “X” and then proceed to vote a regular ballot. (This may invite additional scrutiny, so the first method is preferred.)
 •A variation to this method is to show up with no ID and present the last four numbers of your friend’s Social Security number in lieu of ID.
 
This is a bit more complicated because you will be required to sit at a separate booth, fill out a provisional ballot envelope, and vote a paper ballot. It’s slower than voting at the touch-screen voting machines, but avoids ALL ID requirements. When the board of elections receives your provisional ballot, they are only required to check to see that the name, address, and last four digits of the Social Security Number all match a registration on file at the BOE; the vote will then be counted.
 •An even easier way to accomplish your goal of voting early and voting often is to do so in the privacy of your home through the convenience of the absentee ballot.
 
Ohio has no-fault absentee voting. “Any qualified Ohio voter…may request and vote an absentee ballot without stating a reason.” To make it even easier, the secretary of State, in an attempt to calm Democrats who cried foul over Ohio’s ban on counties sending out unsolicited absentee applications, is sending preemptive applications to every registered voter in the state. Simply apply for an absentee ballot for a friend who doesn’t plan to vote and follow the instructions on the ballot. All you’ll need are the last four digits of the friend’s Social Security number, OR their Ohio driver’s license number, OR a cable TV bill (see above for acceptable forms of ID). Have the absentee ballot sent to your address and mail it in before Election Day. Repeat as necessary for all your sick and tired friends.
 
[Note: In prior elections, we have recommended voting for deceased voters who are still on the registered voters lists. But we recently spoke to Matt McClellan, press secretary for SOS Jon Husted, who told us that Ohio has removed 150,000 dead voters from the rolls since Husted took office. He said that Ohio's voter registration lists "are in the best shape they've been in in years." Husted confirmed that (officially?) via his personal Twitter account on Sept. 10th. We now suggest sticking with the names of "live" voters.]
 
Intermediate Level:
 •Commit campus voter fraud. Register non-resident college students who are attending school in Ohio.
 
This is an excellent group project, especially for community organizers. Though the Ohio Revised Code defines “residence” for voting purposes as the place of permanent, fixed habitation which would exclude a temporary college residence, no one is going to check and SOS Husted will likely not issue a directive advising boards of election not to accept registrations from such students.
 
Here is an Ohio college student from Texas in 2008 explaining why registering and voting in the swing state of Ohio gave her vote more “weight” than it would have had in her home state of Texas (see 3:49-4:08):
 


College students who have the misfortune of being legal residents of very liberal or very conservative states that won’t matter much in November are, sadly, disenfranchised. We should make every effort to help them by organizing voter registration drives for these kids who have every intention of returning to their home states during the summer and after graduation. Though technically illegal, registering them to vote in Ohio would help their votes to “count more.” Since young voters tend to be unreliable on Election Day, it might be worth taking the extra step of requesting absentee ballots for them, so they don’t have to crawl out of their dorm rooms on a frigid November day in Ohio.
 •Overwhelm boards of election with provisional ballots by voting in the wrong precinct.
 
Last month, a U.S. District Court ruled in favor of the S.E.I.U., saying that, contrary to Ohio law, provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct in Ohio must be counted, unless the board of elections can “verify” that poll workers directed the voter to the correct precinct and the voter refused to go. Either way, if you (or your group) can flood the precincts with voters who don’t belong there, poll workers will be forced to offer you provisional ballots. Provisional ballots must be hand-processed and checked against the voter registration list at the county board of elections. Imagine the mayhem that will ensue on election night when boards, in addition to their regular duties, are flooded with thousands of unexpected provisional ballots. The risk that some of these fraudulent “overvotes” or votes in the wrong location will slip through the system will be multiplied if we can flood the system with provisional ballots. [Note: Attorney General Mike DeWine filed a motion to intervene in the case recently since SOS Husted declined to appeal, so this recommendation is subject to change.]
 
Advanced Level:
 •Commit widespread voter fraud on a massive scale.
 
A special interest group determined to commit widespread voter fraud should consider Ohio, since it’s a relatively easy target. Most of the techniques listed above can be adapted to large groups, provided you have a competent computer hacker or insider to provide you with Social Security numbers or bulk utility bills. While this may seem like a tall order, keep in mind that in 2010, the computers at The Ohio State University were hacked, compromising the Social Security numbers of 760,000 people. And in 2006, the Ohio Secretary of State’s office sent CD’s to 20 political operatives, exposing the Social Security numbers of 7.7 million registered voters. It’s probably less a matter of “rocket science” than it is a matter of having the right person in the right place at the right time.
 
Once you know you have that required information available to you, it’s simply a matter of going through lists of registered voters (available at the county boards of elections) and finding people who have not voted in recent elections. If you can assemble a team that is willing to work hard on Election Day, you can potentially vote for thousands of registered voters who won’t show up at the polls. After all, you know they love your candidate and would vote for him if they weren’t too busy, tired, apathetic, or lazy, so you’re doing the right thing.
 
This is by no means an exhaustive list of voter fraud techniques. The list will continue to expand as the Obama campaign continues to bombard the courts with lawsuits alleging all manner of voter suppression. Members of the mainstream media, including Senator Sherrod Brown’s wife, Connie Schultz (until recently, on staff at the Plain Dealer, Ohio’s largest newspaper), will continue to plead our case to the public, insisting that voter ID amounts to racism and that no voter fraud exists, mainly because they haven’t caught any of us yet. Of course, it would be nearly impossible to detect most of the voter fraud we are suggesting here. We salute you, Connie (and others in your noble profession). See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil is one of our best weapons. We also salute Governor Kasich, the Ohio legislature, and Sec. of State Husted for not enacting voter ID laws in this important election year. We were a little worried after Republicans took over the legislature and all statewide offices in 2010. As it turned out, our fears were unfounded.
 
Though it’s too late for a voter ID law for this election, we know our days are numbered as the American people overwhelmingly favor such measures. Our biggest fear in November is not only vigilant poll workers and county election workers scrupulously carrying out their duties, but also volunteer poll watchers, who keep them accountable and make sure procedures are followed on Election Day. Beyond that, there’s not much they can do to stop us this year.
 
Our goal in November is not only to scrape out a few more votes for our chosen candidates, but to undermine confidence in the elections process — and if it’s a close election, to send the outcome to the courts, where we are confident we can win.
 


Paula's first battle with the MSM was in 2004, when the Akron Beacon Journal ran a week-long series associating homeschoolers with murderers and child molesters. She has since expanded her interests beyond homeschooling to blogging and online activism. An unapologetic Christian and a Constitutional conservative, Paula lives in a N.E. Ohio 'Water Tower Town' with her husband, youngest son, three dogs, two parrots, and a ferret. Her eldest son is a junior at Hillsdale College.

Title: DNC in hock to SEIU
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 21, 2012, 05:24:15 PM

http://freebeacon.com/dnc-literally-in-hock-to-seiu/

Title: Odd drop in military absentee ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2012, 12:24:23 AM

http://watchdog.org/55187/va-military-absentee-ballots-going-awol-in-2012/

Title: The electoral process - Early Voting
Post by: DougMacG on October 01, 2012, 11:19:15 AM

When these jerks in the campaigns and in the activism organizations keep pushing states and voters to vote earlier and earlier, such as the Obama campaign, do they ever ask if the voter is ready - do they have all the information they need for the other contests, like judges, soil and water conservation board, the amentments, the city council, etc??  On October 1 have they viewed all the debates that haven't happened yet or the economic data that hasn't come in yet?  Of course not.  So why do they do it?  To advance their own candidate, not to empower the voter.

Nothing is more reliable than having each person come in, in person, to a place with election judges on site, on the same day, verify who they are, and then cast one secret ballot.

Don't let them tell you otherwise.  MHO.

Title: POTH: Problems with vote by mail
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 07, 2012, 08:21:30 AM

Longish piece from Pravda on the Hudson on how absentee voting tends to have more fraudulent votes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/us/politics/as-more-vote-by-mail-faulty-ballots-could-impact-elections.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121007

Title: Dems only can register
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 08, 2012, 05:19:29 PM

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/school-lets-dems-register-students-to-vote-but-not-gop.html

Title: John Adams
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 09, 2012, 08:30:54 AM

"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections." --John Adams, Inaugural Address, 1797

Title: Just as was predicted
Post by: G M on October 10, 2012, 06:10:39 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/10/new-project-veritas-vids-say-obama-staffer-is-it-okay-if-i-vote-twice/

New Project Veritas vids: Say, Obama staffer, is it okay if I vote twice?

Title: Re: Just as was predicted
Post by: G M on October 10, 2012, 06:20:33 PM

Quote from: G M on October 10, 2012, 06:10:39 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/10/new-project-veritas-vids-say-obama-staffer-is-it-okay-if-i-vote-twice/

New Project Veritas vids: Say, Obama staffer, is it okay if I vote twice?

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/10/10/latest-okeefe-video-shows-obama-campaign-voter-fraud/?singlepage=true

Latest O’Keefe Video Shows Obama Campaign Voter Fraud
October 10, 2012 - 8:06 am - by J. Christian Adams     
 
James O’Keefe has done it again — this time capturing video of a paid Obama Organizing for America director in Houston, Texas, assisting a double-voting scheme directed toward Florida. In the video, an undercover Obama “volunteer”  tells Organizing for America’s Stephanie Caballero that she wanted to vote twice to help reelect President Obama.

The undercover “volunteer” tells Caballero, “I’m going to vote by ballot and then I have mine here too.”

After the volunteer tells Caballero her plan, Caballero volunteers to help the double voter get the forms to request an absentee ballot in Florida. “I’ll print that out and you just have to mail it back,” Caballero says.

The undercover “volunteer” says, “I don’t want to get in any trouble, but like I said, if no one’s gonna know.”

The paid Obama Organizing for America director’s response: [Laughter] “Oh my God this is so funny! It’s cool though!”



The response from the campaign staffer should have been: “That’s illegal. I’ll have no part in it.” But alas, the video reveals otherwise.

Later, when the plan to vote twice is put into effect, Caballero coyly and laughingly asks: “Are you going to do what I think you are going to do?” — namely vote twice. When the volunteer says, “Well, if no one is going to know.” Caballero then prints out and gives the forms to the volunteer to vote twice.


Stephanie Caballero
Obama campaign attorney Robert Bauer should be emailing memos to every paid staffer detailing 42 USC 1973i(e) and 42 USC § 1973gg–10(2). The former federal law makes it illegal to vote twice. The latter law prohibits fraudulent voting in a federal election. 18 USC 2 makes it illegal to aid and abet election fraud.

The new O’Keefe video raises the question — how many other undercover videographers have penetrated the Obama campaign? O’Keefe obviously reached the heart of one operation. Who knows how many more Obama campaign offices are full of “volunteers” on the lookout for criminal behavior by other Obama campaign staffers?

O’Keefe provides a clue and taunts journalists, daring them to call this an “isolated incident.”



Encouraging voter participation of marginal legality is nothing new for the Obama campaign. In 2008, they had an elaborate web portal for college students, encouraging some to register to vote where they went to school, discouraging others. The overall goal was to get students attending college in battleground states registered to vote in those states regardless of their actual domicile. If students from a battleground state went to college in a safe red or blue state, they were encouraged to keep their registration in their home battleground state.

The Obama campaign website in 2008 never told the students to cancel their original voter registration. Nor did it provide guidelines for what constituted bona fide domicile.

Currently, voter watchdog groups like True the Vote are conducting data crunching to determine who may have violated federal election law in 2008 by voting in two states for president. If someone does it again in 2012, it will eventually be caught thanks to the efforts of private parties combing voter rolls.

A final note about Stephanie Caballero. This paid Obama staffer is a radical’s radical. She was active in the Students for a Democratic Society in Houston. The most shocking thing about that is that the SDS still exists. The second most shocking thing is that someone from this leftover Marxist organization would be a paid staffer with the DNC. I’ll bet that didn’t happen on Bill Clinton and Don Fowler’s watch. Caballero also does photography work for the openly socialist Workers World magazine. This is the propaganda arm of the Workers World Party.

Now we have yet another reason to explain why some Democrats so aggressively oppose election integrity efforts and accuse election integrity watchdogs of phony “voter suppression.” They don’t want anyone, it seems, to know what they are really up to.

And the next time someone accuses the Obama camp of socialist tendencies and actively supporting voter fraud, a new video by James O’Keefe provides some evidence.

Title: NRO: Voter Fraud is real; Voter Fraud in Ohio
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 27, 2012, 06:17:32 AM

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331798/ithe-new-yorker-si-voting-myths-hans-von-spakovsky

also,

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/26/is-voter-fraud-being-committed-in-ohio/#.UIv7AD1ZtMI.facebook

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2012, 05:04:17 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/more-electronic-voting-machines-changing-romney-votes-to-obama-we-looked-into-it-and-heres-what-a-vendor-told-us/

Title: Some states moving from electronic back to paper voting.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 01, 2012, 02:28:48 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/why-are-some-states-dumping-their-electronic-voting-machines-and-going-back-to-paper/

Title: NAACP shenanigans at polling place
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2012, 08:02:54 PM

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/11/03/breaking_naacp_takes_over_polling_station_advocates_for_president_obama_at_houston_polling_location

Title: Re: NAACP shenanigans at polling place
Post by: DDF on November 03, 2012, 08:53:37 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2012, 08:02:54 PM

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/11/03/breaking_naacp_takes_over_polling_station_advocates_for_president_obama_at_houston_polling_location

Not surprising... some people will do anything to stay on the public tit.

Title: Virginia voter fraud case expands to focus on GOP firm
Post by: bigdog on November 05, 2012, 03:56:14 AM

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/virginia-voter-fraud-case-expands-to-focus-on-gop-firm/2012/11/02/76285252-24eb-11e2-ac85-e669876c6a24_story.html

Title: POTH: legal battles begin
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2012, 05:57:22 AM

BD:  If guilty, nail them and jail them.  

=====================

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/05/us/politics/candidates-make-final-dash-as-race-winds-down.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121105

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2012, 06:49:59 AM

"Let each citizen remember at the moment he is offering his vote that he is not making a present or a compliment to please an individual -- or at least that he ought not so to do; but that he is executing one of the most solemn trusts in human society for which he is accountable to God and his country." --Samuel Adams (1781)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 13, 2012, 05:40:16 PM

In a strange set of coincidences, Pres. Obama lost in all states that require Voter ID.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on November 13, 2012, 05:55:03 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on November 13, 2012, 05:40:16 PM

In a strange set of coincidences, Pres. Obama lost in all states that require Voter ID.

Strange indeed. I'm sure Eric Holder will look into it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 13, 2012, 11:00:17 PM

Good point Doug.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 14, 2012, 06:33:39 AM

Previously I've posted on the Allen West voter fraud/recount story on the Congress thread, I now start posting on it here with a simple fundraiser letter which also contains some numbers.  Again, I have given some money to this effort.
==============

Urgent: Allen West Wins If We Force a Full Recount
 
Dear Fellow American:
 
I am outside of the St. Lucie County elections office where Allen West is getting ‘railroaded’ again this morning.
 
Inside of the elections office sits Democrat Gertrude Walker, the ‘non-partisan’ Democrat elections boss who admits, “mistakes were made” on election night.
 
It’s not entirely clear if these “mistakes were made” before or after Allen West’s 2,000-vote lead magically swung to a 2,500-vote defeat at 2 a.m.   
 
But if one gives Walker the benefit of the doubt (and I don’t), she clearly runs the most incompetent ‘Banana Republic’ elections board in the country.
 
Otherwise, this just might be nothing short of a Chicago-style fraud operation.
 
The bottom line is that Walker refuses to give Allen West a full recount.
 
This is an outrage, if not a criminal fraud of the highest order.
 
Just what is Walker hiding?
 
The fact is we need to ramp-up the pressure on Walker – big time.
 
Nothing ever happens in politics until you start pushing – hard.
 
This is why the conservative President Downgrade PAC has planned an all-out radio ad blitz to demand Gertrude Walker give Allen West the full recount he deserves.
 
The conservative President Downgrade PAC still has an urgent need for donations to pay for these radio ads.
 
Please click here now to show your support, whether it’s a donation of $5, $25, $100, $250, $500 or more.
 
In our radio ad, we ask listeners to call Gertrude Walker at (772) 462-1500 and to demand a full recount.
 
And please call Walker yourself, and email me back to tell me what she says!
 
But if you want to do even more --- if you want this feckless ‘non-partisan’ Democrat to buckle under the pressure, please consider donating.  Go Here Now
 
I must tell you, I am absolutely convinced Allen West wins if we force a full recount of ‘early vote’ ballots.
 
Allen West picked-up 535 votes in the “sham” partial recount of ballots from 3 out of 8 early voting days.
 
He now only trails Murphy by 1,907 votes, or 0.57%.
 
Let’s recount the remaining 5 days!
 
Before the end of today, I’ll need to begin placing the ad buys on local radio for our campaign.
 
Please consider supporting our efforts with a donation of $5, $25, $100, $500 or more.
 
Unlike political campaigns, there is no limit on how much you can give.
 
Thank you for your generous support.
 
Yours for America,
 
Bob Adams
Founder & Chief Strategist
 
P.S. – The President Downgrade PAC has planned a radio ad blitz to demand a full recount for Allen West. In our radio ad, we ask listeners to call Gertrude Walker at (772) 462-1500 and to demand a full recount. Please click here now to help us run these radio ads, whether it’s a donation of $5, $25, $100, $500 or more. 

Title: Allen West's ad calling for a recount
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 16, 2012, 08:29:59 AM

https://secure.donationreport.com/donate.html?key=UZBCVO17DBYZ

Title: Nuclear option for Allen West
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 19, 2012, 08:03:38 AM

Allen West’s ‘Nuclear Option’
 
Dear Fellow American:
 
On Sunday afternoon, the Palm Beach Post and several other media outlets reported that St. Lucie County failed to submit its certified election results to the State before a 12-noon legal deadline.
 
In a brazen act of incompetence or fraud, the Democrat-run election board simply ran-out the clock.
 
This not only nullified the full recount underway since Saturday morning, but also certified by default the “sham” partial recount results from last week.
 
However, less than two hours after this bombshell (while the West campaign sought an emergency hearing), the Democrat-run election board announced “preliminary” results from the recount. 
 
These “preliminary” results showed Allen West losing even more votes!
 
One must seriously consider if it is even remotely possible for Colonel Allen West to ever receive a fair and accurate recount from this “banana republic” of an election board.
 
However, Allen West has another option outside of Florida. This is what I call “The Nuclear Option”.
 
Under the Federal Contested Elections Act, Congressman Allen West can take this election to the U.S. House of Representatives, who have the final word.   
 
A majority vote by John Boehner’s GOP-controlled House alone can force a recount, call for a new election, or even just seat Allen West as the victor outright - "game over".
 
There is not a single thing Obama-Reid-Pelosi, and especially the Democrat-run St. Lucie County election board, can do to stop it.
 
Revive America PAC is conducting an Urgent National Survey on this important question:
 
Allen West’s “Nuclear Option”: Should Congressman West Bypass the Democrat-Run St. Lucie County Election Board to Challenge the Election Before the Republican-led Congress?
 
Should Allen West Just “Press the Button”?
 
Please Go Here Now to Cast Your Vote on this Urgent National Survey
 
I also encourage you to forward this National Survey to family and friends. You can do so by clicking here now.
 
There are many other serious questions about this election still unanswered, such as the 900 voters who cast ballots in Precinct 93, where only 7 voters are registered. Can you say, “Acorn”?
 
Allen West is up against some of the most vile and corrupt liberal Democrats in the country.
 
Allen West needs to know that we’ve got his back.
 
Revive America PAC is one of the very few national conservative groups fighting for Allen West.
 
If Colonel West is forced to take it to the floor of Congress, we’ll stand with him every step of the way.
 
If you think this is the right thing to do, and you are able to help, please consider making a contribution of $25, $50, $100, $250, or $1,000 to support our work.
 
Thank you for everything you do.
 
Yours for America,
 
Bob Adams
Founder
 
P.S. – Revive America PAC is conducting a National Survey - “Allen West’s ‘Nuclear Option’: Should He Just 'Press the Button'”? Go Here Now to Cast Your Vote.
Help Support Our Work

Title: Electoral Fraud in Troy NY
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 27, 2012, 04:11:22 PM

http://www.westernjournalism.com/fox-news-reports-on-voter-fraud/?utm_source=Western+Journalism&utm_campaign=528614c1a0-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

Title: WSJ: Nostalgia and the Civili Right Act
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 29, 2012, 09:14:49 PM

Civil Rights Reactionaries Nostalgia and the Voting Rights Act.
By JAMES TARANTO

A left-liberal outfit called the Constitutional Accountability Center wants the U.S. Supreme Court to sustain a section of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, but its argument is based on little more than an appeal to emotion--specifically, on nostalgia for the heroism of the civil rights movement half a century ago.

The center's Doug Kendall and Emily Phelps find a news peg in the death of Lawrence Guyot, 73, after a series of illnesses. As a young man, the New York Times notes in its obituary, Guyot "was repeatedly challenged, jailed and beaten as he helped lead fellow members of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee and student volunteers from around the nation in organizing Mississippi blacks to vote."

In a particularly harrowing 1963 incident, Guyot went to a Mississippi jail to post bail for three activists who'd been arrested for entering a whites-only section of a bus station. "When he asked questions about their rough treatment, nine police officers beat him with the butts of guns, made him strip naked and threatened to burn his genitals. . . . Mr. Guyot was taken to a cell and beaten some more."

Kendall and Phelps write that Guyot's death "reminds us just how little time has passed since it took genuine, physical courage even to seek the right to vote in certain parts of the United States." That's very true, but it also reminds us just how dramatically things have changed in less than half a century. It is precisely because of the speed with which that change occurred that the court may strike down Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

For a pair who work for something called the Constitutional Accountability Center, Kendall and Phelps don't have a lot to say about the constitution. Their defense of Section 5 is purely sentimental, with lots of intensifying adjectives and adverbs. Shelby County v. Holder, they exclaim, is "a monumentally important challenge to a key part of the Voting Rights Act, the iconic law for which for which [sic] Mr. Guyot shed blood."

Section 5 prohibits certain states and localities--but not others--from making changes in "any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting" without advance permission from the U.S. Department of Justice or a federal trial court in Washington. Proposed changes may be implemented only after federal certification that they neither are intended to nor will in effect discriminate against minorities.

The constitutional issue, as the high court explains in its order granting review, is "whether Congress' decision in 2006 to reauthorize Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act under the pre-existing coverage formula of Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act exceeded its authority under the Fifteenth Amendment and thus violated the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the United States Constitution."

The 15th Amendment, ratified in 1870, guarantees that the right to vote "shall not be abridged or denied . . . on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude" and provides that "the Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." In a friend-of-the-court brief for the lower court that considered the Alabama county's case, the Constitutional Accountability Center observes repeatedly that that is a "broad" power.

Indisputably it is, but it is not an unlimited power. The question is whether Section 5 is appropriate legislation. If not, then it is clearly an infringement of state sovereignty under Article IV and the 10th Amendment, which define the basic structure of federal-state relations.

As Loyola Law School's Justin Levitt notes in a helpful Web-based fact sheet, Section 5 "applies where a 'test or device' was used to screen would-be voters, and where fewer than half of the eligible voters either registered or voted in 1964, 1968, or 1972." That is, the test is based on information that is at least 40 years old.

That is the heart of the challenge to Section 5, as Shelby County explains in its petition to the Supreme Court (citations omitted):

In 2006, Congress reauthorized the VRA for another 25 years without easing the preclearance burden or updating the coverage formula. Congress found "that the number of African-Americans who are registered and who turn out to cast ballots ha[d] increased significantly over the last 40 years, particularly since 1982 [the last time the Voting Rights Act was reauthorized]. In some circumstances, minorities register to vote and cast ballots at levels that surpass[ed] those of white voters." It also found that "the disparities between African-American and white citizens who are registered to vote ha[d] narrowed considerably in six southern States covered by the temporary provisions . . . and . . . North Carolina." Thus, "many of the first generation barriers to minority voter registration and voter turnout that were in place prior to the VRA ha[d] been eliminated."
The Supreme Court has upheld Section 5 in the past, after both its initial enactment in 1965 and its earlier re-enactment in 1982. The question is whether the facts that made it "appropriate legislation" then are sufficient to do so now (or were in 2006).

Enlarge Image


Close
Associated Press
 
Lawrence Guyot in 2004
.
Kendall and Phelps rest much of their argument on mere sentiment: "The presence among us of civil rights heroes such as John Lewis--and until this week Lawrence Guyot--ought to serve as a living conscience as the Court considers these issues. The Civil Rights era is not just a historical abstraction." Fair enough, but the Voting Rights Act, however "iconic" it may be, is no mere commemoration. If it were, there would be no dispute.

They go on to assert: "Conservatives argue that this iconic law"--ha, there they go again!--"is no longer necessary because the South is a different place today than it was when the law first passed. That argument gets things exactly backwards. The South is a different place today because of the Voting Rights Act." Although that last claim is no doubt true, to conclude therefore that Section 5 remains "appropriate legislation" is analogous to saying that a patient who's been saved from a deadly infection ought to take antibiotics for the rest of his life.

Here is their strongest argument in favor of Section 5:

In 2012, conservative legislators and election officials in states throughout the country tried to change election rules to make it more difficult for Americans to vote. These voting changes--imposing restrictive ID requirements, shortening early voting hours and making it more difficult to register to vote--had the greatest impact on young, minority, elderly and poor voters. . . .
Voter suppression laws that were held back by Section 5 rulings this year (summarized here) included a strict Texas ID law, which a three-judge panel found was tantamount to reviving the poll tax, and a shortened early voting calendar in Florida that a judge found would be akin to "closing polling places in disproportionately African-American precincts." Equally important, laws that ultimately did "clear," like South Carolina's ID law, which was approved for use beginning in 2013, did so because Section 5 made lawmakers more careful to avoid problematic outcomes, as one conservative judge observed.
There are two problems here. First, the 15th Amendment authorizes Congress to enact legislation dealing only with the abridgement of voting rights based on "race, color, or previous conditions of servitude." If, as Kendall and Phelps imply, the federal government is using Section 5 to protect the interests of "young, . . . elderly and poor voters," that would seem on its face to be an an overstepping of constitutional authority. (That said, the Voting Rights Act also protects "language minorities.")

More important, when the authors assert that what they call "voter suppression laws" have been enacted in "states all over the country," they elide that not all of those states are covered by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. As the New York Times reported last month:

Voter ID laws have been taken off the table in Texas and Wisconsin. The Justice Department has blocked such a law in South Carolina, which has appealed in federal court. In Florida and Ohio, early voting and voter-registration drives have been largely restored. New Hampshire is going ahead with its law, but voters who do not have the required document will be permitted to vote and have a month to verify their identity.
Strict voter ID laws remain in Kansas, Indiana, Georgia and Tennessee, but they are not seen as battleground states. And while Pennsylvania seems likely to institute a version of its law in the coming year, it will not affect this election.
Among these 11 states, Georgia, South Carolina, Texas and parts of Florida and New Hampshire are covered by Section 5. But Indiana, Kansas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Wisconsin are not. In Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008) the Supreme Court upheld Indiana's strict ID law against a challenge claiming it was unconstitutional on its face. In Ohio, a federal judge struck down a change in early voting rules on equal-protection grounds. In Pennsylvania a state judge enjoined enforcement of the voter ID law until next year, and a Wisconsin judge held that voter ID violated the state constitution.

The merits of these rulings are a subject for another day. The relevant point here is that even if the high court holds that Congress exceeded its authority by reauthorizing Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, there will be ample remedies for voters facing allegedly discriminatory practices. Among these is Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which, as the Justice Department's website notes, "prohibits voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in [certain] language minority groups." Section 2, unlike Section 5, applies everywhere in the United States.

"As we mark the passing of a civil rights warrior who wore his scars proudly, Lawrence Guyot's story should serve as a reminder of the truly heroic efforts that were necessary to win passage of iconic [!] laws such as the Voting Rights Act," Kendall and Phelps conclude. Paying tribute to the heroes of the past is entirely fitting, but clinging to the policies of the past is reactionary.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: bigdog on November 30, 2012, 03:52:28 AM

"Although that last claim is no doubt true, to conclude therefore that Section 5 remains "appropriate legislation" is analogous to saying that a patient who's been saved from a deadly infection ought to take antibiotics for the rest of his life."

So the South has built up immunity to the VRA? If so, perhaps a new, stronger law is order? I am not sure I understand the author's analogy here.

"Among these is Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which, as the Justice Department's website notes, 'prohibits voting practices or procedures that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in [certain] language minority groups.' Section 2, unlike Section 5, applies everywhere in the United States."

So, in conclusion, the VRA should remain law of the land, even though I just an entire article about how it doesn't apply. Amici can be important, but need not offer the strongest legal argument. Sometimes it is the voice that matters, not necessarily the precision of the legal argument. 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2012, 06:17:28 AM

The analogy seems logical enough to me.  That a medicine was needed in the past does not mean it is needed now.

As far as Sections 2 and 5 go, I understand the argument to say that the special standards and remedies of one, applied to a particular region of the country, are no longer necessary or appropriate, and that should any problems ever arise, there is sufficient remedy in the other, which applies to the country as a whole.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: bigdog on November 30, 2012, 06:29:30 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2012, 06:17:28 AM

The analogy seems logical enough to me.  That a medicine was needed in the past does not mean it is needed now.

As far as Sections 2 and 5 go, I understand the argument to say that the special standards and remedies of one, applied to a particular region of the country, are no longer necessary or appropriate, and that should any problems ever arise, there is sufficient remedy in the other, which applies to the country as a whole.

Then, perhaps a different medicine with different long term effects would make an even better anology. It seems like pain killers, which have addicitive qualities, for example, might make the point better.

So, if section 2 covers the entire country, what is the complaint about the smaller, more focused section 5?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2012, 06:38:05 AM

The analogy seemed reasonable and clear enough to me, but yours would have worked too  :-)

The problem with Section 5 is precisely that it imposes different standards and intrudes more on the sovereignty of particular states with the assertion being that they no longer deserve this heightened scrutiny.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: bigdog on November 30, 2012, 06:41:38 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2012, 06:38:05 AM

The problem with Section 5 is precisely that it imposes different standards and intrudes more on the sovereignty of particular states with the assertion being that they no longer deserve this heightened scrutiny.

Despite the history? Why extend the national government's scope to the entirity of the nation when there is little to no evidence that there has been a systematic effort to limit voting rights elsewhere? I thought you were a small government, states' rights type. I think I am missing your point, but it seems like like subjecting 50 states, rather than 11, makes government bigger and steps on the rights of more states, right?

Title: Dem officials face jail time for vote fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 29, 2012, 03:11:29 PM

http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles/2012/20121224003-dem-voter-fraud-face.html

Title: Blow: Rig the Vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 26, 2013, 12:02:30 PM

Charles Blow can be quite the blowhard; is there any merit in anything he says here?

Rig the Vote
By CHARLES M. BLOW
Published: January 25, 2013 271 Comments
If you can’t win by playing fair, cheat.



That seems to be the plan of Republican lawmakers in several battleground states that stubbornly keep going for Democrats during presidential elections. Thanks in part to gerrymandering, many states already have — and will continue to have in the near future — Republican-controlled legislatures.

Republican lawmakers in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin are considering whether to abandon the winner-take-all approach to awarding Electoral College votes and replace it with a proportional allocation.

That change would heavily favor Republican presidential candidates — tilting the voting power away from cities and toward rural areas — and make it more likely that the candidate with the fewest votes over all would win a larger share of electoral votes.

One day I will have to visit the evil lair where they come up with these schemes. They pump them out like a factory. Voter suppression didn’t work in November, and it may even have backfired in some states, so they just devised another devilish plan.

Pete Lund, a Republican state representative in Michigan, “plans to reintroduce legislation that would award all but two of Michigan’s 16 Electoral College votes according to congressional district results,” said an article Friday in The Detroit News.

The paper continued, “The remaining two would go to the candidate winning the statewide majority.”

Lund, who proposed a similar bill in 2012, made Republicans’ intentions completely clear, saying, according to the article: “It got no traction last year. There were people convinced Romney was going to win and this might take (electoral) votes from him.”

These bills are a brazen attempt to alter electoral outcomes and chip away at the very idea of democracy, to the benefit of Republican candidates.

The Detroit News also reported that, according to an analysis by Mark Brewer, the state Democratic Party chairman: “Romney would have gotten nine of Michigan’s electoral votes and Obama would have received seven in 2012 under Lund’s proposal. Instead, Obama garnered all 16 Michigan electoral votes en route to his national tally of 332.”

Meanwhile, Obama beat Romney in the state by a margin of nearly 450,000 votes.

Virginia’s bill is further along than Michigan’s. It’s already being debated.

For reference, although Obama won the state of Virginia and all of its electoral votes last year, as he did in 2008, according to The Roanoke Times on Friday, “If the system had been in effect for the 2012 election, Republican Mitt Romney would have won nine of Virginia’s 13 electoral votes, and President Barack Obama would have won four.” Keep in mind that in November, Obama won the state by almost 150,000 votes.

Republicans in Virginia are just as forthright about their intention to tilt the electoral playing field in their favor.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that the sponsor of Virginia bill’s, Charles W. Carrico Sr., a Republican, “said he wants to give smaller communities a bigger voice.” Carrico told The Post, “The last election, constituents were concerned that it didn’t matter what they did, that more densely populated areas were going to outvote them.”

Yes, you read that right: he wants to make the votes cast for the candidate receiving the fewest votes matter more than those cast for the candidate receiving the most. In Republican Bizarro World, where the “integrity of the vote” is a phrase used to diminish urban votes and in which democracy is only sacrosanct if Republicans are winning, this statement actually makes sense.

David Weigel of Slate explained the point of the Virginia plan this way: “Make the rural vote matter more and make the metro vote count less.”

Luckily, as the Roanoke paper noted Friday, Ralph Smith, the powerful Republican Virginia state senator, isn’t on board:

“Smith said this morning that he opposes the legislation, calling it ‘a bad idea.’ Smith sits on the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee, which will hear the bill next week. Without Smith’s support, it’s unlikely the bill could get to the Senate floor.”

Paul Bibeau, who writes “a blog of dark humor” from Virginia, points out a numerical oddity about the effects of the Virginia law that turns out, upon reflection, to be more stinging than funny: “This bill counts an Obama voter as 3/5 of a person.”

That is because, as Talking Points Memo says, “Obama voters would have received almost exactly 3/5 of the electoral vote compared to their actual population — 30.7 percent of the electoral vote over 51 percent of the popular vote.”

This is not where we should be in 2013, debating whether to pass bills to reduce urban voters to a fraction of the value of other voters and hoping that someone with the power to stop it thinks it’s a “bad idea.”

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 26, 2013, 12:57:33 PM

Rig the vote?  I heard the liberal uproar to Virginia doing that.  Romney would have had 9 votes instead of zero.  In a better year, the Republican would win all of Virginia and the Dem wishes for the split.  I don't recall the liberal uproar when Nebraska made that change in 1992 or Maine in 1972.  If both methods are acceptable, why is one cheating?

Title: A Jersey lesson in voter fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 06, 2013, 03:36:16 PM

A Jersey Lesson in Voter Fraud
My grandmother died there in 1940. She voted Democratic for the next 10 years..
smaller Larger 
By THOMAS FLEMING
WSJ

Some youthful memories were stirred by the news this week that the president plans to use his State of the Union speech next Tuesday to urge Congress to make voter registration and ballot-casting easier. Like Mr. Obama, I come from a city with a colorful history of political corruption and vote fraud.

The president's town is Chicago, mine is Jersey City. Both were solidly Democratic in the 1930s and '40s, and their mayors were close friends. At one point in the early '30s, Jersey City's Frank Hague called Chicago's Ed Kelly to say he needed $2 million as soon as possible to survive a coming election. According to my father—one of Boss Hague's right-hand men—a dapper fellow who had taken an overnight train arrived at Jersey City's City Hall the next morning, suitcase in hand, cash inside.

Those were the days when it was glorious to be a Democrat. As a historian, I give talks from time to time. In a recent one, called "Us Against Them," I said it was we Irish and our Italian, Polish and other ethnic allies against "the dirty rotten stinking WASP Protestant Republicans of New Jersey." By thus demeaning the opposition, we had clear consciences as we rolled up killer majorities using tactics that had little to do with the election laws.

My grandmother Mary Dolan died in 1940. But she voted Democratic for the next 10 years. An election bureau official came to our door one time and asked if Mrs. Dolan was still living in our house. "She's upstairs taking a nap," I replied. Satisfied, he left.

Thousands of other ghosts cast similar ballots every Election Day in Jersey City. Another technique was the use of "floaters," tough Irishmen imported from New York who voted five, six and even 10 times at various polling places.

Equally effective was cash-per-vote. On more than one Election Day, my father called the ward's chief bookmaker to tell him: "I need 10 grand by one o'clock." He always got it, and his ward had a formidable Democratic majority when the polls closed.

Other times, as the clock ticked into the wee hours, word would often arrive in the polling places that the dirty rotten stinking WASP Protestant Republicans had built up a commanding lead in South Jersey, where "Nucky" Johnson (currently being immortalized on TV in HBO's "Boardwalk Empire") had a small Republican machine in Atlantic City.

By dawn, tens of thousands of hitherto unknown Jersey City ballots would be counted and another Democratic governor or senator would be in office, and the Democratic presidential candidate would benefit as well. Things in Chicago were no different, Boss Hague would remark after returning from one of his frequent visits.

I have to laugh when I hear current-day Democrats not only lobbying against voter-identification laws but campaigning to make voting even easier than it already is. More laughable is the idea of dressing up the matter as a civil-rights issue.

My youthful outlook on life—that anything goes against the rotten stinking WASP Protestant Republicans—evaporated while I served in the U.S. Navy in World War II. In that conflict, millions of people like me acquired a new understanding of what it meant to be an American.

Later I became a historian of this nation's early years—and I can assure President Obama that no founding father would tolerate the idea of unidentified voters. These men understood the possibility and the reality of political corruption. They knew it might erupt at any time within a city or state.

The president's party—which is still my party—has inspired countless Americans by looking out for the less fortunate. No doubt that instinct motivated Mr. Obama in his years as a community organizer in Chicago. Such caring can still be a force, but that force, and the Democratic Party, will be constantly soiled and corrupted if the right and the privilege to vote becomes an easily manipulated joke.

Mr. Fleming is a former president of the Society of American Historians.

Title: The coming battle over the ballot box
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 09, 2013, 07:47:09 AM

The Coming Battle Over the Ballot Box A voting-rights veteran talks about the liberal campaign to expand the electoral rolls—and why Obama is on board
By JAMES TARANTO
WSJ

When President Obama declared victory last November, you might have missed the way he spun his voter-turnout triumph into a grievance: "I want to thank every American who participated in this election, whether you voted for the very first time or waited in line for a very long time," he said on election night, adding: "By the way, we need to fix that."

He returned to the subject at his inauguration: "Our journey is not complete until no citizen is forced to wait for hours to exercise the right to vote." And in his State of the Union address on Tuesday, the president is expected to call on Congress to enact new voting legislation. Several liberal Democrats have already introduced a bill styled the Voter Empowerment Act of 2013.

The effort is a cynical partisan undertaking, according to election lawyer Hans von Spakovsky. In December, some "three dozen of the most powerful liberal advocacy groups, including union organizations," held a strategy session, he says, citing a report from the liberal magazine Mother Jones. They agreed to "oppose all voter integrity efforts, things like voter ID," to push for federal legislation requiring states to permit voter registration on Election Day, and to institute "automatic" voter registration.

"They basically want to use the government to do Democratic voter outreach and voter registration for them," Mr. von Spakovsky says. "They believe that if they can get, for example, everyone registered to vote who is currently getting government benefits like welfare . . . then that will somehow get them more votes at the polls and make it easier to win elections."

The Voter Empowerment Act would also mandate automatic registration of individuals on motor-vehicle, tax and university rolls, many of whom are aliens or have multiple addresses in different states: "You're basically going to be registering lots of people who are ineligible and leading to many duplicate registrations." The groups pushing such efforts—among them the Brennan Center for Justice, the ACLU and the NAACP—include "the same organizations that have been filing lawsuits over the past few years trying to prevent states from verifying the accuracy and eligibility of people on their voter-registration databases," Mr. von Spakovsky says.

All this to solve what he argues is a nonexistent problem. "The number of people who don't vote or don't register because they have some kind of problem with registration is a tiny, tiny percentage. It is so easy these days to register to vote, including the fact that many states now allow online registration, that . . . it is not going to increase turnout."

Which would be just as well if, as Mr. Obama claims, polling places are too crowded. That problem too, in Mr. von Spakovsky's view, "has been widely exaggerated."

A Pew Center study found that in 2008—when, as Mr. von Spakovsky reminds me, "we had the highest turnout in a presidential election since the 1960s"—the average wait time was 10 to 20 minutes." In 2012, according to an MIT study, Florida had the longest average wait time, 45 minutes. Long waits can be a problem in big cities, but officials "can easily fix that themselves, without any federal help, by reducing the precinct sizes."

Hans Anatol von Spakovsky, born in Alabama in 1959, is a first-generation American. "My father was Russian," he says, and "my mother grew up in Nazi Germany." They met at a camp for displaced persons after World War II. "My childhood was filled with stories from them of what it's like living in a dictatorship, living with the secret police. I very early understood the importance of our democratic process and how important it is to protect our right to vote."

As a young Atlanta lawyer in the late 1980s, he was appointed to the Fulton County Board of Registrations and Elections. "That's where the rubber meets the road," he says in his Southern drawl. "That taught me a lot of lessons about how our elections are run and things that we could do to improve their accuracy and integrity."

He tells a story from the field: "The very first thing I ever did was to be a poll watcher in a local election. I walked into a polling place—this was in a housing project in Atlanta—and discovered that the local election officials who were working the desk where people checked in to vote were asking people coming in whether they were a Republican or a Democrat. This was in a general election, where you don't have to answer a question like that. . . . I called it in, I complained about it, and they sent an official down to stop this from happening."

In 2000 he served as a recount observer for the Bush campaign in Florida. He later joined the Justice Department's Civil Rights division as a career lawyer (that is, not a political appointee), where he had "four years of very intense experience" working on the enforcement of voting laws. In January 2006, Mr. Bush gave Mr. von Spakovsky a recess appointment to the Federal Election Commission, where he "learned the other side of the coin, which is our campaign finance rules." When Senate Democrats balked at confirming him for a full term, he withdrew his nomination. In 2008 he joined the Heritage Foundation, where he runs the Civil Justice Reform Initiative.

Mr. von Spakovsky is a vigorous critic of Attorney General Eric Holder, whom he accuses of politicizing the Justice Department by enforcing voting laws selectively. The bill of particulars starts with a sensational case: "They threw out and dismissed the voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party in Philadelphia, and that was one of the most obvious cases of intimidation that I have ever seen." On Election Day 2008, two members of the group, wearing paramilitary garb, had stood outside a polling place and shouted racial slurs. One of them was armed with a billy club.

The Justice Department dismissed the case, Mr. von Spakovsky says, "because they did not believe, and did not want, the Voting Rights Act used to protect white voters or to prosecute black defendants. We know that's the case because political appointees within the Justice Department said that in front of witnesses, and those witnesses eventually testified under oath."

Mr. Holder has also "fought every effort to improve the integrity of our election process." The then-chief of the Justice Department's Voting Section, a career lawyer, had "recommended at least eight states be investigated because it looked like they were not properly cleaning up their voter registration rolls by taking off people who had died or moved or otherwise become ineligible. He was told, again by an Obama political appointee, that they had no interest whatsoever in enforcing that law . . . [or] in doing anything that doesn't increase the registration and turnout of minority voters."

In this context, "minority" means "nonwhite," even when whites are a minority. In 2008 voters in Kinston, N.C., a majority-black city of 22,000, approved a ballot measure to establish nonpartisan elections for mayor and City Council. The following year, the Justice Department overrode those citizens by denying the city "preclearance" under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

"Their entire concern in the case was not for the actual racial minority there, which is whites, but for the blacks who were the majority," Mr. von Spakovsky says. The Justice Department "objected, saying that it was discriminatory to do this—even though black voters had voted for it—because black voters wouldn't know who to vote for if party labels weren't next to the names on the ballot." In the face of a court challenge, the department reversed itself and granted preclearance in 2012.

"The left is constantly working on these voting issues," Mr. von Spakovsky says. "They have dozens of organizations, with a lot of money." The goal, he says, is "to change the rules to give them an advantage in elections. The other side of the political aisle just doesn't do that."

The left often accuses the right of seeking to rig voting rules in its favor, often adding the additional poisonous charge of racism. "They keep trying to scare black voters into thinking that these voter ID laws are an attempt to take away the right to vote," Mr. von Spakovsky says. "We know that's not true. The experience of states that have had voter ID laws in place for [several] years, like Georgia and Indiana, shows that it does not suppress the vote of black voters; it doesn't in any way keep them out of the polls."

The liberal website TalkingPointsMemo.com reported that in December Chanelle Hardy of the National Urban League boasted that efforts to institute voter ID had (in the reporter's paraphrase) "flipped a switch with the African-American vote . . . rekindling whatever enthusiasm had waned after 2008's historic Obama win."

Far from being racist, Mr. von Spakovsky argues, "voter ID is just a basic measure to protect the integrity of the voter-registration process. . . . A lot of times, the victims of voter fraud are in fact black voters and people in poor communities. They are the ones who often are taken advantage of, particularly by some Democrats, because they are less likely to complain or find out that their vote has been stolen."

Example: In the 1990s, 11 defendants from 80% black Greene County, Ala., were convicted in a voter-fraud conspiracy whose aim, Mr. von Spakovsky says, was "to prevent reformers from winning elections." The reformers, also black Democrats, were challenging incumbents in primaries. "Those reformers wanted to clean up local government, which was very important to the well-being of African-American residents in this very poor community." The defendants received support from the NAACP Legal Defense Fund.

On the other hand, Mr. von Spakovsky acknowledges the partisan motives of Republican lawmakers in Virginia and elsewhere who have recently floated proposals to allocate their states' electoral votes by congressional district. That would enable GOP presidential candidates to carry a portion—in some cases a majority—of the state's electoral vote while losing the statewide popular vote.


'I think it's a horrible idea," Mr. von Spakovsky says. "We have enough problems right now with the way congressional districts are gerrymandered. Particularly, we have a real problem with racial gerrymandering in our congressional districts. Well, if state legislatures were suddenly given the opportunity to influence the outcome of a presidential election dependent on how they drew up congressional districts, that would make the kind of gerrymandering we see now look tame in comparison."

Mr. von Spakovsky says it's "disappointing" that voter issues have become a partisan flash point. "It's too bad that some folks try to use this to scare voters and to raise money. It should be a bipartisan effort. The best kind of election is one in which the losing candidate says, 'Well, I lost the election, but it was a fair election.' . . . That's the kind of elections we should be striving for."

President Obama, who has won two such elections himself, could do worse than to take heed.


Mr. Taranto, a member of the Journal's editorial board, writes the Best of the Web Today column for OpinionJournal.com.

Title: $100K Settlement To Former ACORN Employee
Post by: bigdog on March 08, 2013, 10:03:09 AM

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/07/report-james-okeefe-to-pay-100k-settlement-to-f/192958

According to court documents obtained by Wonkette, conservative activist James O'Keefe has agreed to a $100,000 settlement in a lawsuit filed against him by Juan Carlos Vera, a former employee of ACORN. Vera filed the suit against O'Keefe in 2010, alleging O'Keefe had illegally taped their conversation at an ACORN office in California as part of his fraudulent "exposé" of the community activist group.

Vera was one of the ACORN employees portrayed in O'Keefe's videos as offering assistance in setting up a nonexistent child prostitution ring. After his encounter with O'Keefe, Vera contacted the police to report "possible human smuggling," unaware that he had been duped. Vera claims he lost his job as a result of O'Keefe's deception after the conservative's video of their encounter was posted on a Breitbart website.

According to the settlement documents obtained by Wonkette, O'Keefe has agreed to "pay Vera $100,000.00," and that "as part of this settlement O'Keefe states that at the time of the publication of the video of Juan Carlos Vera he was unaware of Vera's claims to have notified a police officer of the incident. O'Keefe regrets any pain suffered by Mr. Vera or his family."

After the ACORN prostitution hoax fell apart, O'Keefe and his Project Veritas group released a series of heavily edited undercover sting videos attempting to document voter fraud, most of which collapsed under scrutiny, sometimes spectacularly so.

Title: Re: $100K Settlement To Former ACORN Employee
Post by: G M on March 08, 2013, 01:24:58 PM

Quote from: bigdog on March 08, 2013, 10:03:09 AM

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/07/report-james-okeefe-to-pay-100k-settlement-to-f/192958

According to court documents obtained by Wonkette, conservative activist James O'Keefe has agreed to a $100,000 settlement in a lawsuit filed against him by Juan Carlos Vera, a former employee of ACORN. Vera filed the suit against O'Keefe in 2010, alleging O'Keefe had illegally taped their conversation at an ACORN office in California as part of his fraudulent "exposé" of the community activist group.

Vera was one of the ACORN employees portrayed in O'Keefe's videos as offering assistance in setting up a nonexistent child prostitution ring. After his encounter with O'Keefe, Vera contacted the police to report "possible human smuggling," unaware that he had been duped. Vera claims he lost his job as a result of O'Keefe's deception after the conservative's video of their encounter was posted on a Breitbart website.

According to the settlement documents obtained by Wonkette, O'Keefe has agreed to "pay Vera $100,000.00," and that "as part of this settlement O'Keefe states that at the time of the publication of the video of Juan Carlos Vera he was unaware of Vera's claims to have notified a police officer of the incident. O'Keefe regrets any pain suffered by Mr. Vera or his family."

After the ACORN prostitution hoax fell apart, O'Keefe and his Project Veritas group released a series of heavily edited undercover sting videos attempting to document voter fraud, most of which collapsed under scrutiny, sometimes spectacularly so.

Media Matters? You really want to use that as a source, BD?  :roll:

Title: Media Matters
Post by: G M on March 08, 2013, 01:28:59 PM

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/mediamattersagendasandactivities.html

Media Matters: Agendas, Activities, and Worldviews

By Jacob Laksin
Discover The Networks
2005


Established in May 2004, Media Matters is a self-styled "Web-based, not-for-profit…progressive research and information center" whose animating mission is to "systematically monitor a cross-section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation." Falling under the category of "misinformation," however, is not merely "news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible," but also that which "forwards the conservative agenda."

Functioning, in effect, as a clearinghouse for leftwing outrage, the organization's stock in trade is feigning outrage at perspectives that clash with the far-left prejudices of its directors. As a consequence, Media Matters has a well-earned reputation for portraying honest differences of opinion as lies or worse.

In this, the organization takes its cues from its founder and CEO, the self-described former "right-wing hit man" turned left-wing hit man, David Brock. A former dirt-dishing reporter for the conservative magazine The American Spectator in the 1990s, Brock today claims to have undergone a political epiphany. He has renounced his past writings, critical of liberal figures from Anita Hill to President Bill Clinton, as a confection of lies and slanders. But the evidence suggests that while he now identifies with the political left, his modus operandi is unchanged. As his tell-all books, Blinded By The Right and The Republican Noise Machine demonstrate, dishing dirt and distorting the facts remain his stock-in-trade.

A case in point is Brock's justification for Media Matters. In Brock's judgment, and against all evidence, the mainstream media has fallen under the sway of conservative ideology, thus explaining, in Brock's conspiratorial view, the many discussions about "liberal bias" in prominent media outlets. "The right wing in this country has dominated the debate over liberal bias. By dominating that debate, my belief is they've moved the media itself to the right and therefore they've moved American politics to the right," Brock says. Hence the supposed need for Media Matters: "I wanted to create an institution to combat what they're doing."

During a February 2005 talk at the leftwing Center for American Progress, Brock said: "We have seen the mainstream media increasingly accommodating conservatism and this is not an accident. This is the result of coordinated and financed effort by the right wing to pressure, push and bully the media to do that. The media today is a political issue. I believe it is conservatives that have politicized it." The same theme pervades Brock's 2004 book, The Republican Noise Machine: Right-Wing Media and How It Corrupts Democracy, in which he claims that the "most important sectors of the political media—most of cable TV news, the majority of popular op-ed columns, almost all of talk radio, a substantial chunk of the book market, and many of the most highly trafficked Web sites," provide a "structural advantage for the GOP and conservatism." It does not seem to occur to Brock that such alternative media outlets, unlike the ostensibly non-partisan news media that they charge with liberal bias and that reach many times the audience, are designed specifically to express conservative opinions.

Although polls indicate that Americans overwhelmingly reject the assertion that mainstream media outlets espouse a conservative bias, the claim has found an enthusiastic audience among increasingly bitter Democrats and leftwing political operatives eager to account for the diminished fortunes of the Democratic Party and the dwindling appeal of welfare-statism and liberal appeasement attitudes as a governing ideology. So when Brock announced his intention to counter the supposedly bullying influence of conservatives on the media, leftwing billionaires lined up to bankroll his cause.

Standing behind Brock was John Podesta, a former chief of staff in the Clinton administration and the head of the "progressive" Washington DC think tank, the Center for American Progress. Beyond helping Brock develop Media Matters, Podesta provided Brock with office space in the capitol for his fledgling outfit. Well-to-do liberals followed in short order. Media Matters received over $2 million in seed donations from a roster of affluent donors. (This was a sum larger than a ten year budget for a site like www.frontpagemag.com.)

The list of Brock's donors included Leo Hindery Jr., a former cable magnate; Susie Tompkins Buell, a co-founder of the fashion company Esprit and a close ally of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York; James Hormel, a San Francisco philanthropist who nearly served as ambassador to Luxembourg during the Clinton administration; Bren Simon, a Democratic activist and the wife of shopping-mall developer Mel Simon; and New York psychologist and philanthropist Gail Furman. Media Matters, which can accept tax-deductible contributions under section 501(c)(3) of the tax code, has also benefited from the patronage of Peter Lewis, chairman of Progressive Corp. Lewis, a longtime consort of leftwing financier George Soros, has disbursed more than $7 million to so-called "527s," activist groups that affect political neutrality in order to solicit unlimited contributions under a provision of the Internal Revenue Service tax code.

Media Matters has not always been forthcoming about its high-profile backers. In particular, the group has long labored to obscure any financial ties to George Soros. The tactic met with success until December 1, 2004, when conservative journalist and author David Horowitz published a column in Front Page Magazine connecting Media Matters to Soros. Horowitz's allegations prompted an indignant response from Media Matters, subtlely titled "Proven Liar Horowitz said Media Matters Ignores the Facts," accusing him of dealing in "outright falsehood." Wrote Media Matters: "Horowitz asserted that Media Matters has received funding from billionaire philanthropist George Soros. To date, neither Media Matters nor its president and CEO David Brock has received any money from Soros or from any organization with which he is affiliated." (emphasis added)

But in March 2003, the Cybercast News Service (CNS) had detailed the copious links between Media Matters and several Soros "affiliates"—among them MoveOn.org, the Center for American Progress and Soros confederate Peter Lewis. Confronted with this story, Media Matters was forced to retreat from its phony defense (but did not offer any apologies to Horowitz). A Media Matters spokesman cautiously explained that "Media Matters for America has never received funding directly from George Soros" (emphasis added), a transparent evasion.

Nor were groups cited by CNC the only connection between Media Matters and Soros. As investigative journalist Byron York has noted, another Soros-affiliate that bankrolled Media Matters was the New Democratic Network. In addition, Soros is reported to be involved in the newly formed Democracy Alliance, a partnership between some 80 affluent leftwing financiers who have each vowed to contribute $1 million or more in order to build up an ideological infrastructure of leftwing thinks tanks and advocacy groups. News reports reveal that one of the main beneficiaries of the Alliance's funding will be Media Matters. Brock, for his part, has no hesitation about conscripting his organization into the embryonic movement that aims to amplify the agenda of the political left. "I view Media Matters as part of a large machine that's being built," Brock told an interviewer in August of 2004. The organization's budget has kept pace with its escalating importance to the political left. By August of 2004, Media Matters' operating budget had already doubled to $4 million.

Much of this success is attributable to Media Matters' nakedly partisan mission. That mission is essentially to smear and defame every conservative spokesperson, reporter, TV anchor or public figure that comes in its sights. Typically Media Matters labels any conservative viewpoint as "a lie" "false" "a smear" "racist" or some other anti-intellectual epithet designed to discredit rather than dispute its political opposition. Media Matters compiles an archive of these distortions which the leftwing network spreads throughout the Internet.

An August 19, 2005 posting on the Media Matters website was headlined "The Angry Right Smears Cindy Sheehan." It focused on remarks made by conservative commentators critical of the anti-war activist. Notably, however, Media Matters made no effort to rebut the arguments advanced by those commentators, evidently deeming it axiomatic that the mere reproduction of conservative opinion was sufficient demonstration of its falsehood. Indeed, the only "smear" that appeared on the site was the one hurled by a Media Matters writer at David Horowitz, whom the organization denounced as "reliably offensive." Earlier, in December of 2004, Media Matters had attempted to convict Horowitz of "racial insensitivity." The organization provided no evidence for the incendiary charge. Instead, it adduced several instances in which Horowitz had criticized public figures, including Democratic Party figures like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton for expressing racist opinions themselves.

Besides Horowitz, Media Matters nurses a special contempt for conservative and nationally syndicated radio host Rush Limbaugh. Inevitably in its zeal to shatter Limbaugh's credibility, Media Matters routinely engages in unwarranted attacks. In June of 2005, for instance, the organization lashed out at Limbaugh for his opinion on the so-called Downing Street memo, which accused the Bush administration of manipulating evidence and otherwise fudging facts in order to promulgate its policies. "Limbaugh baselessly suggested Downing Street memo 'may be a fake,'" screamed a Media Matters headline. Yet, as Media Matters was forced to acknowledge in the compass of its attack, Limbaugh's remarks, far from being "baseless," were actually derived from a report that had appeared in the Associated Press. Moreover, Media Matters itself was unsure of the veracity of the AP's account, describing it tentatively as an "apparently inaccurate AP account." This did not lead it to exonerate Limbaugh, however.

It is a measure of Media Matters' disdain for Limbaugh that the organization has put its website at the service of his most virulent critics. When liberal MSNBC host Keith Olbermann pronounced host Rush Limbaugh the "worst person in the world" in August of 2005, Media Matters gleefully splashed the slander on its website. In 2004, David Brock even hired Democratic pollster Geoffrey Garin to conduct a survey focusing on, among other media-related topics, public perceptions of Limbaugh. Journalist Byron York recounted the survey's not quite earth-shaking revelations: "Among other things, Garin found that a majority of those surveyed believe Limbaugh often presents views that are biased, 'rather than impartial and balanced.' Garin also found that a large part of Limbaugh's audience is politically conservative." York noted that Media Matters assigns two full-time researchers to monitor Limbaugh's statements and transcribe his program. That's something money can definitely buy.

Media Matters' zeal to bury conservative viewpoints under a mountain of smears is not surprisingly accompanied by a disdain for the First Amendment. In August 2004, Tim Chavez, a columnist for The Tennessean, reported receiving an email from a Media Matters employee named Melissa Salmanowitz. In it, Salmanowitz, a Deputy Director of Media Relations at Media Matters, pressed Chavez to write about Media Matters' efforts to get chain book retailers to ban sales of Unfit for Command, a book critical of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. Chavez did not comply. Media Matters launched a month-long assault on Unfit for Command and the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth," the group responsible for the book, devoting its website to a blitz of denunciatory articles that attempted to discredit its members as, alternatively, Republican shills and liars.

Driving Media Matters' fusillades against the Swift Boat veterans was its partisan support for Democrat John Kerry. Even as it paid lip service to fairness, stressing that "honest scrutiny of [John Kerry's] record might be 'fair game,'" its provenance as a Democratic Party hit squad made the Media Matters team's gesture of objectivity seem even more empty than usual. Media Matters spent the months leading up to the 2004 presidential campaign dismissing conservative criticism of Kerry as nothing more than "distortions." To take one example, Kerry's critics disproved his claims that he spent Christmas of 1968 "sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia." Rather than making a concession to this reality - which was generally conceded -- Media Matters brazenly portrayed all attacks on Kerry's record as "unfounded, contradictory, and discredited." The leftwing Tides Foundation, evidently impressed by Media Matters' willingness to place pro-Democratic partisanship above accuracy, gave Media Matters $100,000 in 2004 for what it described as "voter education."

The length to which Media Matters went to protect Kerry from conservative critics was representative of its intimacy with the Democratic Party, whose operatives, led by Podesta, were in fact responsible for its creation. Prior to founding Media Matters, David Brock met with a number of leading Democratic Party figures, including Senator Hillary Clinton, former Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, and former Vice President Al Gore. Today, more than a few of the organization's roughly 30 staff members are Democratic operatives. To cite just a handful of examples, Dennis Yedwab, the chief communications strategist for Media Matters, is the erstwhile director of strategic resources at Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Similarly, Brock's personal assistant, Mandy Vlasz is a Democratic pollster and a veteran consultant to Democratic campaigns, including the 2000 Gore/Lieberman campaign. Katie Barge, the director of research at Media Matters, formerly presided over opposition research for Senator John Edwards' unsuccessful 2004 presidential campaign.

In its short history, Media Matters has established itself as one of the most vocal and irresponsible combat organs of the Democratic Party. In 2004 the organization boasted that its website had elicited some 150,000 comments in its discussion forums and that over 22,000 subscribers had registered to receive its e-mail alerts. Brock has also become a regular feature on leftwing radio stations like Air America, where he appears every Wednesday. The show, according to Brock, "is a great means for us to be able to disseminate our material…" More specifically, programs like those of Air America provide Brock with a venue to defame conservatives as individuals who "are simply willing to lie," and who "are not necessarily trying to win these arguments on a factual level" - a perfect self-description. Media Matters staffers are also favorites of such supposedly non-partisan radio programs as National Public Radio's On The Media, which invites them to complain, as Media Matters senior advisor Jamison Foser did during a July 2005 appearance, that media coverage of the Bush administration is insufficiently critical.

Title: Project Veritas, see for yourself
Post by: G M on March 08, 2013, 01:40:05 PM

"After the ACORN prostitution hoax fell apart, O'Keefe and his Project Veritas group released a series of heavily edited undercover sting videos attempting to document voter fraud, most of which collapsed under scrutiny, sometimes spectacularly so."

You want to stand behond that BD? Go to the youtube channel below and you can view the uncut Project Veritas videos unedited. You'll note that the MSM never posts the uncut video of anything they do. Yes?

http://www.youtube.com/user/veritasvisuals

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 08, 2013, 07:11:03 PM

Very pertinent responses GM, but the question remains as to why O'Keefe is coughing up $100,000.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on March 08, 2013, 07:24:05 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 08, 2013, 07:11:03 PM

Very pertinent responses GM, but the question remains as to why O'Keefe is coughing up $100,000.

Per their website, it was cheaper to settle rather than continue prolonged litigation. Which is a viable scenario.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 08, 2013, 07:38:15 PM

That is plausible, and unfortunate in more than one way , , , as BD post illustrates , , ,

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on March 08, 2013, 07:40:52 PM

Soros money buys a lot of lawyers.

Title: Forbes on O'Keefe settlement
Post by: bigdog on March 09, 2013, 03:44:46 AM

GM, I would like to apologize for using the MediaMatters website. I won't again. But, the damned thing is I can't find on FOX. Weird, huh?



James O'Keefe Pays $100,000 To ACORN Employee He Smeared-Conservative Media Yawns

Remember James O’Keefe?

That would be the same James O’Keefe who brought down community organizing and voter registration organization ACORN in his march to becoming a conservative icon for his alleged ‘good works’.

Matthew Phelan and Liz Farkas over at Wonkette have broken the story about the first bit of blowback resulting from O’Keefe’s brand of ‘journalism’.

It seems that the master of the cleverly edited—if highly deceptive—video reel is now being required to pay the sum of $100,000 to Juan Carlos Vera, a one time California employee of ACORN. Mr. Vera had been portrayed by O’Keefe as being a willing participant when O’Keefe and his accomplice, Hanna Giles, proposed smuggling young women into the United States to work as prostitutes.

While Mr. Vera had no idea he was being surreptitiously video taped—which is not surprising given that California law expressly bars the secret recording of one’s voice or image—there was also something Mr. O’Keefe did not know until after he released the damaging video of his conversation with Vera for broadcast.

As soon as O’Keefe and his partner-in-crime left the ACORN location, Mr. Vera called the police to report the entire incident. It turns out that Vera had been playing along with O’Keefe in an effort to ensnare O’Keefe and Giles whom Vera believed were in the act of breaking the law by proposing to engage in the importing of young women to become prostitutes.

Oops.

As part of the settlement, Mr. O’Keefe was required to say that he “regrets any pain” he caused Mr. Vera—although I have some doubts as to whether O’Keefe has been losing any sleep over his illegal behavior and the harm he did to Mr. Vera.

Why might I feel that way?

Because Mr. O’Keefe’s lawyer—Los Angeles attorney Michael Madigan—wasted no time in characterizing the $100,000 payment as a “nuisance settlement.”  Apparently, when releasing videos smearing an innocent man by suggesting he is willing to participate in the flesh trade turns out to do that individual serious damage, it counts as nothing more than a nuisance to Mr. O’Keefe and his attorney.

A report issued by the California Attorney General in 2010 revealed that O’Keefe and Giles were given immunity from prosecution (a serious mistake in my opinion) in exchange for turning over the complete and unedited tapes that O’Keefe shot in Los Angeles, San Francisco and National City where O’Keefe worked his magic on Juan Carlos Vera.

The AG’s report highlighted how Mr. O’Keefe edited his videos to appear as if he was engaging in his ACORN hi-jinks wearing “stereotypical 1970’s pimp garb”, the intent being to suggest that ACORN employees would willingly do business with someone dressed in this manner. However, it turns out that O’Keefe was actually wearing a coat and tie when he entered the ACORN offices. The report also stated that ACORN employees “may be able to bring a private suit against O’Keefe and Giles for recording a confidential conversation.”

Here’s hoping that Mr. Vera is but the first of many to take advantage of the opportunity to bring such a legal action.

Oddly, a Google scan revealed no coverage of the settlement in Breitbart.com or any of the other conservative media who so enjoyed Mr. O’Keefe’s exploits.

Go figure.

 :roll: :roll: :roll: Indeed.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 09, 2013, 06:13:48 AM

Looks like BD is making a fair point here-- though I would give a few days for it to trickle across the frontiers of ideology before definitively jumpin on FOX et al.

Given that JCV did call the police promptly, it would appear that O'Keefe has come up quite short in a matter of integrity.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on March 09, 2013, 06:18:23 AM

California is a two party state, when it comes to audio taping. It would be interesting to read the statute and the AG's report.

Title: Re: ACORN review
Post by: DougMacG on March 09, 2013, 10:29:07 AM

If true, I also find the post helpful.  I did not know one ACORN office had already called the police. It would be nice if they added to the report the timing of that and the actual police report if it is public information.  There were many ACORN offices approached in that film, did they all call the police?

That film was beyond bizarre. Entertaining perhaps, but not among the original allegations levied against ACORN.

If Fox misses this update after playing up the original story then shame on them.  Mark it against them on their career scorecard.  The other main conduits are missing much bigger stories every day IMHO.  I resent having to go to right wing sources for basic facts and I appreciate when Bigdog or anyone else helps set the record straight.  It does not advance a partisan political agenda to be repeating a falsehood, (unless you are liberal).


Going back a step on ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now was founded in 1970.

1) My first allegation against ACORN is strictly political.  They are highly funded, highly organized, EXTREMELY left wing and highly effective at getting their message out in urban areas to people vulnerable to that message.  They were so highly targeted that they operated under the radar of nearly everyone not running in those circles.  I was shocked to discover them in my inner city operations and how far off of mainstream they really were.  So far so good, there is nothing wrong with being left wing, extreme, political, organized and effective.  As a matter of politics I think people who favor economic freedom ought to be aware of the operations of these extreme groups in order to expose their extreme views and counter them politically with a more hopeful message than shaking down others for money.  Jump forward to the Obama reelection campaign of 2012 and remove the tarnished name ACORN, these organizations perhaps delivered the political victory more than almost any other factor.

One of their their main political and legal causes was to cause more housing resources to go to people who could not afford them, a big factor leading to the collapse in housing, banking, employment and the economic prospects for the people they purport to help.  Here is a video, not of ACORN, but of their view represented at the highest levels, then Sec. of Housing (HUD) a youthful Andrew Cuomo in 1998 admitting these federally backed housing loans would not be made on creditworthiness criteria and yes "there will be a higher risk and I'm sure there will be a higher default rate...": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFlYmLAMbrw&feature=player_embedded

2) ACORN merged its extreme left wing political activities with community do-gooding.  Nothing wrong in concept with that.  A non-profit operating to help a community in need ought to be able to have a political voice too, like businesses and unions should.  IRS questions come up because they are subsidized by the taxpayers in the form of tax deductible donations for different purposes.  Are they political, are they charity, does it matter?

3) ACORN mixing political activism with charitable work receives direct taxpayer support - big time.  To this, I object.  We shouldn't have taxpayer money supporting a political message.  They were funded to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, almost unmeasurable, and they were funded in different names after congress voted to revoke their funding.  Because they know their political operations shouldn't be taxpayer funded, they built the FIREWALL.

4) A FIREWALL that separates all charitable work from all political activities, if you believe that!  I watched the head of ACORN tell us on the PBS News Hour, posted somewhere in this thread, that taxpayer money cannot bleed over into political operations because of the FIREWALL.  I will offer a reward for an authentic photograph of the firewall or information that would lead to the discovery of its exact location.  I believe it may sit right next to the social security lockbox - or in the safety deposit box area of Gringotts.

5) And then we have the criminal, electoral corruption of ACORN, enough to have put this operation in the category of an organized crime ring IMO, also documented in this thread.  


http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-complete-guide-to-acorn-voter-fraud/?singlepage=true

October 14, 2008    ACORN Voter Fraud Guide

...a national community organizing group is being investigated in at least 14 states and several swing states for massive irregularities. This news would make headlines anyway, but what made it worse was that Barack Obama was a key player in this organization, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, in the past. Obama trained its local leaders, represented the organization in court, and worked to funnel funds to the organization. The Obama campaign also donated $800,000 this year to an ACORN affiliate.

What is ACORN?

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) is a community-based organization that advocates for low and moderate income families founded in 1970 by Wade Rathke and Gary Delgado. Rathke, one of the most powerful hard-Left activists in America, is a former member of a radical 1960s group, the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). The Weathermen terrorist group split off from the SDS in 1969. ACORN says its priorities include better housing and wages for the poor, more community development investment from banks and governments, and better public schools.

ACORN is also known for its voter registration efforts.  This year alone (2008) ACORN has registered 1,315,037 voters.

Although the organization prides itself for its registration efforts, it also has a long history of scandal. In the state of Missouri in 1986, 12 ACORN members were convicted of voter fraud. But that case was not an isolated incident in the state. In December 2004, in St. Louis, six volunteers pleaded guilty of dozens of election law violations for filling out registration cards with names of dead people and other bogus information. Authorities launched an earlier investigation after noticing that among the new voters was longtime St. Louis alderman Albert “Red” Villa, who died in 1990. The volunteers worked for “Operation Big Vote” — a branch of ACORN — in St. Louis.

On February 10, 2005, Nonaresa Montgomery, a paid worker who ran Operation Big Vote during the run-up to the 2001 mayoral primary, was found guilty of vote fraud. Montgomery hired about 30 workers to do fraudulent voter-registration canvassing. Instead of knocking on doors, the volunteers sat at a St. Louis fast food restaurant and wrote out names and information from an outdated voter list. About 1,500 fraudulent voter registration cards were turned in.

In October 2006, St. Louis election officials discovered at least 1,492 “potentially fraudulent” voter registration cards. They were all turned in by ACORN volunteers.

In November 2006, 20,000 to 35,000 questionable voter registration forms were turned in by ACORN officials in Missouri. Most all of these were from St. Louis and Kansas City areas, where ACORN purportedly sought to help empower the “disenfranchised” minorities living there. But the ACORN workers weren’t just told to register new voters. The workers admitted on camera that they were coached to tell registrants to vote for Democrat Claire McCaskill.

In 2007, in Kansas City, Missouri, four ACORN employees were indicted for fraud. In April of this year eight ACORN employees in St. Louis city and county pleaded guilty to federal election fraud for submitting bogus voter registrations.

And, that was just Missouri.

This year there have been several accusations of fraud against ACORN. Over a dozen states are investigating the organization already. Here is a complete list of the ongoing investigations:

North Carolina — State Board of Elections officials have found at least 100 voter registration forms with the same names over and over again. The forms were turned in by ACORN. Officials sent about 30 applications to the state Board of Elections for possible fraud investigation.

Ohio — The New York Post reported that a Cleveland man said he was given cash and cigarettes by aggressive ACORN activists in exchange for registering an astonishing 72 times. The complaints have sparked an investigation by election officials into the organization, whose political wing has supported Barack Obama. Witnesses have already been subpoenaed to testify against the organization.

Nevada — Authorities raided the headquarters of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now on Tuesday October 7, 2008, after a month-long investigation. The fraudulent voter registrations included the Dallas Cowboys starting line-up.

Indiana — More than 2,000 voter registration forms filed in northern Indiana’s Lake County filled out by ACORN employees turned out to be bogus. Officials also stopped processing a stack of about 5,000 applications delivered just before the October 6 registration deadline after the first 2,100 turned out to be phony.

Connecticut — Officials are looking into a complaint alleging ACORN submitted fraudulent voter registration cards in Bridgeport. In one instance, an official said a card was filled out for a 7-year-old girl, whose age was listed as 27. 8,000 cards were submitted in Bridgeport.

Missouri — The Kansas City election board is reporting 100 duplicate applications and 280 with fake information. Acorn officials agreed that at least 4% of their registrations were bogus. Governor Matt Blunt condemned the attempts by ACORN to commit voter fraud.

Pennsylvania — Officials are investigating suspicious or incomplete registration forms submitted by ACORN. 252,595 voter registrations were submitted in Philadelphia. Remarkably, 57,435 were rejected — most of them submitted by ACORN.

Wisconsin — In Milwaukee ACORN improperly used felons as registration workers. Additionally, its workers are among 49 cases of bad registrations sent to authorities for possible charges, as first reported by the Journal Sentinel.

Florida — The Pinellas County Elections supervisor says his office has received around 35 voter registrations that appear to be bogus. There is also a question of 30,000 felons who are registered illegally to vote. Their connections with ACORN are not yet clear.

Texas — Of the 30,000 registration cards ACORN turned in, Harris County tax assessor Paul Bettencourt says just more than 20,000 are valid. And just look at some of the places ACORN was finding those voters. A church just next door is the address for around 150 people. More than 250 people claim a homeless outreach center as their home address. Some listed a county mental health facility as their home and one person even wrote down the Harris County jail at the sheriff’s office.

Michigan — ACORN in Detroit is being investigated after several municipal clerks reported fraudulent and duplicate voter registration applications coming through. The clerk interviewed said the fraud appears to be widespread.

New Mexico – The Bernalillo County clerk has notified prosecutors that some 1,100 fraudulent voter registration cards were turned in by ACORN.

Other links:
http://blog.heritage.org/2008/10/22/morning-bell-the-lefts-fraudulent-embezzzling-illegal-vote-stealing-machine/
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2003806904_webvotefraud26m.html
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Reform-group-turned-in-2-000-suspicious-voter-1229151.php
http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/86913867.html
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/region/7-acorn-workers-charged-with-forgery-341234/
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/nov/23/ex-acorn-official-gets-probation-voter-registratio/
http://www.lvrj.com/news/acorn-pleads-guilty-to-felony-compensation-for-registration-of-voters-119367839.html
http://www.lvrj.com/news/judge-fines-acorn-5-000-for-voter-registration-scheme-127467598.html
http://www.doj.state.wi.us/media-center/2008-news-releases/october-14-2008-2

Give CNN credit for this excellent piece:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkUKOSnv2zY&feature=youtu.be[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gkUKOSnv2zY

Title: CA. AG's ACORN report
Post by: G M on March 09, 2013, 10:34:56 AM

http://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/brown-releases-report-detailing-litany-problems-acorn-no-criminality

Brown Releases Report Detailing a Litany of Problems with ACORN, But No Criminality


Thursday, April 1, 2010



Contact: (415) 703-5837




SAN DIEGO – California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today released a report, including newly obtained videotapes, that shows some members of the community organizing group ACORN engaged in “highly inappropriate behavior,” but committed no violation of criminal laws.
 
Brown’s report also uncovered “likely violations” of state law, including dumping 500 pages of confidential records into a dumpster, failure to file a 2007 tax return, and four instances of possible voter registration fraud by ACORN in San Diego in connection with the 2008 election, as well as other irregularities in the group’s California operations. These irregularities have been referred to the appropriate authorities.
 
“A few ACORN members exhibited terrible judgment and highly inappropriate behavior in videotapes obtained in the investigation,” Brown said. “But they didn’t commit prosecutable crimes in California.”
 
Last September, Gov. Schwarzenegger asked Brown to investigate the activities of ACORN in California. His request was triggered by tapes made by undercover videographer James O’Keefe III that purported to show ACORN employees providing advice on how to conduct a prostitution ring and commit other serious crimes.

But new, unedited videotapes discovered through Brown’s investigation, as well as other evidence, shed clearer light on interactions between O’Keefe and the now-defunct ACORN.
 
Videotapes secretly recorded last summer and severely edited by O’Keefe seemed to show ACORN employees encouraging a “pimp” (O’Keefe) and his “prostitute,” actually a Florida college student named Hannah Giles, in conversations involving prostitution by underage girls, human trafficking and cheating on taxes. Those videos created a media sensation.

Evidence obtained by Brown tells a somewhat different story, however, as reflected in three videotapes made at ACORN locations in California. One ACORN worker in San Diego called the cops. Another ACORN worker in San Bernardino caught on to the scheme and played along with it, claiming among other things that she had murdered her abusive husband. Her two former husbands are alive and well, the Attorney General’s report noted. At the beginning and end of the Internet videos, O’Keefe was dressed as a 1970s Superfly pimp, but in his actual taped sessions with ACORN workers, he was dressed in a shirt and tie, presented himself as a law student, and said he planned to use the prostitution proceeds to run for Congress. He never claimed he was a pimp.
 
“The evidence illustrates,” Brown said, “that things are not always as partisan zealots portray them through highly selective editing of reality. Sometimes a fuller truth is found on the cutting room floor.”
 
The original storm of publicity created by O’Keefe’s videotapes was instrumental in ACORN’s subsequent denunciation in Congress, a sudden tourniquet on its funding, and the organization’s eventual collapse.

In New Orleans, O’Keefe faces a maximum sentence of six months in prison and a fine of $5,000 on reduced federal charges related to misrepresentation in gaining access to the Louisiana office telephones of U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu.

Brown’s report found numerous faults with ACORN’s activities in California, including:
 
• Failure to “recruit, train and monitor its employees to ensure compliance” with state law.
 
• Likely violation of state civil laws designed to protect personal information when employees of the San Diego office disposed of 20,000 pages of records in a dumpster. These violations could result in private litigation if any of the victims were injured by disclosure.

• Four instances of “possible voter registration fraud in San Diego in connection with the 2008 election.”
 
• Failure to file a 2007 state tax return, an omission the Franchise Tax Board is pursuing.
 
• Sloppiness in its handling of charitable assets, although no misuse of those assets was found. The California Attorney General will monitor investigations into ACORN’s overall finances by the IRS and Louisiana Attorney General.
 
ACORN announced that it is closing its operations nationwide today. While a successor to ACORN in California called ACCE emphasizes that it is no longer part of ACORN, the Attorney General’s report notes that ACCE is “run by the same people, raising concerns about its ability to cure the defects in the organization.” The report notes that the Attorney General will closely scrutinize ACCE’s operations.

The full Attorney General’s report is attached. The unedited O’Keefe videotapes from California are available on the Attorney General’s website at http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/multimedia/index.php. Tapes from other states are available on request.

You can get the PDFs by going to the above URL

Title: From Cali AG's report
Post by: G M on March 09, 2013, 10:48:53 AM

Liability Under California Law for Making Covert Recording of Confidential Conversation

California law generally prohibits the recording of confidential communications without the consent of all participants where there is an objectively reasonable expectation that the conversation is not being overheard or recorded. To meet the Governor’s request to investigate ACORN, this Office needed the complete, unedited video and audio recordings made by O’Keefe and Giles, who are not in California. O’Keefe and Giles agreed to produce the full recordings if the Attorney General agreed not to prosecute them for violations of California’s privacy laws. This Office determined that the fastest and most efficient means to comply with the Governor’s request was to agree not to prosecute.
In light of this limited grant of immunity, we did not focus on the circumstances surrounding the conversations to determine if the recordings themselves violated California law. Nevertheless, we take this opportunity to note the legal principles governing clandestine recording of conversations in California. Whether a recording of a conversation is unlawful depends on the circumstances of the conversation and the expectations of the parties. In 1967, the California Legislature adopted the Invasion of Privacy Act, codified at Penal Code sections 630 through
638. The Act is designed to protect the right of privacy by requiring the consent of all parties before a confidential conversation is recorded. (Flanagan v. Flanagan (2002) 27 Cal.4th 766, 768-769 (Flanagan).) The eavesdropping and recording provision, section 632, provides that any person who intentionally and without consent of all parties to a confidential communication records such conversation is guilty of an alternate felony/misdemeanor. (Penal Code, § 632(a).) A private cause of action also exists for any person injured by a violation of the Act.20 (Id., § 637.2.) Section 632 defines confidential communication to include “any communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the parties thereto.” (Id., § 632(c).) A communication made in a public place or “in any other circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded” does not qualify as a confidential communication under the statute. (Id.) Confidentiality “appears to require nothing more than the existence of a reasonable expectation by one of the parties that no one is ‘listening in’ or overhearing the conversation.” (Flanagan, 27 Cal. 4th at pp. 772-773.) The fact that the subject matter of the conversation might later be discussed with a third party has no bearing on a finding of confidentiality under the statute. (Coulter v. Bank of America (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 923, 929.) Although the Act contains exemptions for particular individuals or circumstances, no exemption exists for filmmakers, the media, or journalists.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 09, 2013, 07:13:51 PM

Doug, GM:

Excellent work gentlemen!

Marc

Title: Detroit mayor found guilty
Post by: DougMacG on March 11, 2013, 09:37:44 AM

Shocking.  Detroit ex-Mayor found guilty of corruption.

Wonder if the Pravda's will fit party affiliation into the headline.  

Title: The Cali AG that didn't bite....
Post by: G M on March 12, 2013, 05:01:03 PM

They had O'Keefe dead-bang busted, yet they granted him immunity. Why? They didn't need the original footage. The video posted online coupled with sworn statements from the ACORN employees would be enough for a grand jury or information to be issued. They could have gotten the original footage for trial through a grand jury subpoena or search warrant.

Title: Morris: BO's Exec Orders federal takeover of elections.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 11, 2013, 09:40:21 PM

http://www.dickmorris.com/stop-obama-takeover-of-election-regulation-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on May 13, 2013, 10:37:20 AM

The IRS targeting scandal is about cheating in elections, preventing opponents from organizing and acting in the same ways that your own campaign and supporters are organizing and acting.

GM: "There should be criminal investigations regarding this conduct."

Undermining our elections, to me, is treason, extreme acts against one's nation.  Beheading, after a fair trial, comes to mind as a remedy that might discourage similar acts in the future.

If these were "low-level" employees, how much do we pay people who decide how to allocate resources in the IRS?  Minimum wage?  Were they laid off, considered no more essential than air traffic controllers, during the sequester?  I don't think so.

This one tip of a big iceberg, with no one looking under it.  There is no way this was the only cooperation between the Obama Executive Branch of our government and the Obama campaign.  There is no question in my mind that the "data mining" and turnout operations of the campaign were getting welfare and program recipients lists from inside the federal government.

Title: IRS messed with group fighting vote fraud too
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 21, 2013, 05:01:31 AM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/20/group-fighting-voter-fraud-among-those-waiting-on-/
Group fighting voter fraud among those waiting on IRS; reams of documents still not enough
By Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times
Monday, May 20, 2013


A Texas group dedicated to combatting voter fraud applied for tax-exempt status in 2010 and has suffered three years of delays, been through four different IRS agents, undergone six FBI inquiries and submitted thousands of pages of documentation — and its still hasn’t been approved.

True the Vote is just one of the dozens of groups caught up in the IRS plan to give extra scrutiny to conservative groups in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

SEE RELATED: Carney: White House aides insulated Obama from IRS scandal

As Congress delves into the question of whether the burgeoning scandal was bureaucratic malfeasance, as the IRS now acknowledges, or a more sinister political witch hunt, as some Republicans believe, True the Vote’s experience is poking holes in the IRS‘ version of events, and lending credence to the nefarious explanations.

In one example, the IRS asked other Texas-based tea party groups what their relationship was with True the Vote — a fishing expedition that group President Catherine Engelbrecht didn’t learn about until the IRS scandal burst onto front pages.

“It suggests that they are trying to construct some kind of web in which to trap groups that they believe are somehow working together,” Ms. Engelbrecht said.

Enlarge Photo

The IRS‘ inspector general released a report last week that found the IRS targeted conservative groups for added scrutiny beginning in 2010, looking particularly at those that used “tea party,” “patriot” or “9/12” in their names.

The IRS acknowledges asking inappropriate questions but bristles at other charges. Acting Commissioner Steven Miller said the agency was trying to weed out groups engaging in political activity in violation of tax laws. He said the scrutiny was enhanced because of a surge of new groups after the 2010 Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case.

The IRS also said that the actions were taken by employees in an Ohio office, and that the agency has been taking steps to curtail inappropriate information requests in 2011.

But most of those claims appear to be untrue, based on the experience of True the Vote and other groups subjected to extra scrutiny.

Both Ms. Engelbrecht and True the Vote’s lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, said they had conversations with IRS agents who indicated that the files were being scrutinized in Washington, not in the Cincinnati office blamed by the IRS.

“More than one agent in Cincinnati has advised me that his/her instructions regarding the processing of my ‘tea party’ related organization client(s) were coming from the Washington, D.C., office,” Ms. Mitchell said in a letter to the IRS earlier this month.

And the probing letters continued well after the time the IRS said it began curtailing them, with the most recent inquiries to True the Vote coming in November and again in March.

Conservative target

True the Vote stemmed from Ms. Engelbrecht’s experience in the 2008 and 2009 elections, when she said she worked the polls and saw everything from administrative dysfunction to situations that looked like they could lead to fraud.

In July 2010, she and other supporters formed King Street Patriots under the tax code’s section 501(c )(4), which allows groups to do some politicking as long as it’s not their primary purpose.

Title: Re: The electoral process, IRS targeted conservative college interns
Post by: DougMacG on May 21, 2013, 10:33:05 AM

Talk about a drip, drip, drip, the story of IRS political badgering is not going to go away anytime soon.  And it wasn't an isolated case of a low level employee in a faraway outpost affecting just a few groups.  It was something far larger, intended to intimidate and affect elections.  Conservative college interns pose a threat to revenue collections?!?!

We should cut a hundred IRS agent jobs for every infraction discovered until the bias inside the agency changes to even-handedness.

IRS targeted conservative college interns

Daily Caller 05/20/2013
http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/20/irs-targeted-conservative-college-interns/

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) demanded information about conservative groups’ college-aged interns, prompting outrage from one of the country’s top conservative activist organizations and leading one former intern to wonder whether his family’s pizza parlor would be endangered.

The IRS requested, in an audit, the names of the conservative Leadership Institute’s 2008 interns, as well as specific information about their internship work and where the interns were employed in 2012, according to a document request the IRS sent to the Leadership Institute, dated February 14, 2012.

The IRS requested:

“Copies of applications for internships and summer programs; to include: lists of those selected for internships and students in 2008.
– In regards to such internships, please provide information regarding where the interns physically worked and how the placement was arranged.
– After completing internships and courses, where were the students and interns employed?”

The Arlington, Virginia-based Leadership Institute is a conservative activist training organization founded in 1979 by Virginia Republican National Committeeman Morton C. Blackwell, the youngest elected delegate to the 1964 Republican convention that nominated Barry Goldwater. The institute was audited in 2011. As The Daily Caller has reported, at least two different IRS offices made a concerted effort to obtain the group’s training materials.

The Leadership Institute’s audit, which was conducted by the IRS’ Baltimore office and which ended with no determination of wrongdoing but cost the conservative group $50,000 in legal fees, only covered the year 2008, leading employees to speculate that the IRS’ primary interest was figuring out how the group operates during a presidential election year.

“They were very interested in seeing what conservative organizations were doing in 2008, and where the interns from 2008 were now employed,” Leadership Institute vice president of programs David Fenner told the Daily Caller, adding that he “absolutely” believed the IRS audited information from 2008 because it was an election year.

“We declined to give them the names” of former interns, Fenner said.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on May 21, 2013, 11:29:19 AM

In Obama's America, Bill Ayers is a "respected academic" while the federal government gathers intelligence on conservative college students.

Title: Washington Post: The Most Curious Whopper in the IRS Story
Post by: DougMacG on May 22, 2013, 09:04:09 PM

The IRS targeting scandal is a blockbuster that is sweeping the nation.  Imagine if the reaction to it now was the reaction to it then, if made public heading into the summer before the election, when Obama was ripping Romney's business background and Sandra Fluke was making her plea for free birth control - at a Catholic College.

The President's Chief of Staff knew and the President didn't.  

A special prosecutor in the IRS matter is inevitable

By Ed Rogers, Published: May 22, 2013 at 10:56 amE-mail the writer
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/05/22/the-insiders-a-special-prosecutor-in-the-irs-matter-is-inevitable/

This administration’s management of the Obama Internal Revenue Service scandal so far consists of a slow-walking, rolling disclosure of facts; equal parts equivocation, amnesia and indignation from IRS witnesses; deer-in-the-headlights non-responses by the White House press secretary; parsed, lawyerly statements from the president himself; and now one of the central key players is taking the Fifth. And all this comes from what the president claimed would be the “most transparent administration ever…”

If we give the president the benefit of the doubt and assume he knows the truth is going to come out, the question remains: Does the administration appoint the special prosecutor sooner or later? The calculus inside the White House is how to best protect the president’s political interests. They have two options. They could delay the appointment and let more of the story develop, weather the ugly piecemeal disclosures, give the players time to get their stories straight and lawyer-up and hope Republicans continue their overreach, giving the whole affair a nutty partisan patina. Or, they could accelerate the appointment of a special prosecutor, thereby slowing the congressional inquiries and giving Jay Carney some relief from his daily embarrassing routine by supplying him with the escape hatch of not being allowed to comment on matters associated with the special prosecutor’s ongoing investigation. Not to mention, the White House all the while could blast the appointed counsel as a partisan ideologue à la the hatchet job that was done on Ken Starr.

Anyway, if the president is innocent, he will end up needing and wanting a special prosecutor sooner rather than later. If he and his White House already have too much to hide, then they must clam up, cry partisanship and hope their allies on the Hill and in the media have the stamina for the long, hard slog ahead.

- – - – -

My personal favorite of all the new revelations from the Obama IRS scandal is that White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler told White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough about the impending IRS inspector general report, but of course the White House chief of staff did not tell the president.

I sat in a White House chief of staff’s office every day for more than two years. The only reason the legal counsel would tell the chief of staff about an impending report or disclosure would be so the chief of staff could tell the president. The legal counsel would assume the chief of staff would know how and when to bring up the matter. The chief of staff would be expected to know if there were additional factors surrounding the issue that needed to be considered before the president was told, or whether or not others needed to be included in the conversation when the information was shared with the president. There are many valid reasons why the chief of staff would tell the president, but I can’t think of a reason why he and the legal counsel would both agree that this news nugget would go no further. It’s very odd.

The legal counsel would never assume that information shared with the chief of staff would not go to the president. In my experience, a legal counsel never would believe that there was information that was appropriate for the chief of staff to know but that was inappropriate for the president to know. Out of all the news that has emerged regarding the Obama IRS scandal, this is the most curious whopper I’ve heard so far. I can’t wait to hear the real story.

Title: The IRS political targeting scandal: Sorry about that little IRS error
Post by: DougMacG on May 23, 2013, 08:42:17 AM

I think it was a House member who said when they break into the bank, we assume it is for the money, and when they step on the free speech and political association rights of tea party groups we assume it is for partisan political reasons.
-----------------

But imagine you made the mistake to the IRS and make your apology back to them.  This letter was published in the Philadelphia Inquirer yesterday:

Sorry about that little IRS error
May 22, 2013  Philadelphia Inquirer 
http://articles.philly.com/2013-05-22/news/39448243_1_trixie-tax-return-customer-service

By George Parry

Dear Internal Revenue Service:

Regarding your targeting of conservatives before the presidential election, I found last week's testimony by your former commissioner to be very reassuring. As he explained it, what appeared to be your intentional and politically motivated punitive, totalitarian, and chilling measures against conservative groups and individuals in a clandestine effort to affect the outcome of the election were, in fact, simply the inadvertent consequences of "horrible customer service" provided by a bunch of flunkies in Cincinnati. What a relief!

Which brings me to the purpose of this letter. As you may recall, my business is being audited for reporting gross annual income of $12,125 when, as your revenue agents have so snarkily noted, the actual figure is closer to $9.75 million. As I have repeatedly explained, though I signed the tax return as CEO, this regrettable mistake is attributable to Trixie, our bookkeeper who forgot to disclose in her job interview that she had failed arithmetic for seven straight years before dropping out of grade school and joining an outlaw biker gang.

To further explain, when I first met Trixie in a Las Vegas hot tub, she was employed in the escort hospitality industry. Though I found her to be amply well-qualified for a position under me, I must admit that the subject of her math skills may not have been sufficiently discussed under the distracting circumstances. Boy, have I learned my lesson! No more job interviews of bikini-clad women in hot tubs!

In any event, I wish to apologize to you for the somewhat inaccurate tax return and the horrible customer service that produced it. Once I learned how the error had occurred, I immediately removed Trixie as bookkeeper and put her in charge of our Obamacare Compliance Unit. So, as you can see, we took the problem seriously, and it has been solved.

In light of my sincere apology and prompt corrective measures, I ask that you cease your efforts to collect all back taxes, penalties, and interest. Hopefully this apology will mark a new beginning to our relationship, one based on mutual trust and belief in each other's integrity.

Sincerely,

L. George Parry

P.S. And could you also ask the Justice Department to withdraw Trixie's grand jury subpoena?

George Parry is a former state and federal prosecutor practicing law in Philadelphia.

Title: IRS Chief Wife went after Romney on Taxes
Post by: DougMacG on June 03, 2013, 09:23:30 AM

The political activities of the wife bring into further question the political activities of the IRS chief during his 167 trips to the White House.  Maybe they were hammering out new depreciation schedules and not planning and executing Nixonian enemy targeting.  In that case, where are the new depreciation schedules?

Wife of Former IRS Chief Campaigned for Obama, Questioned Romney's Taxes

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/02/Wife-of-Former-IRS-Chief-Campaigned-for-Obama-Questioned-Romney-s-Taxes

Former Internal Revenue Service Commissioner Douglas Shulman is under fire from Congress for his agency's targeting of Tea Party and other conservative organizations. Shulman himself is under suspicion for his numerous visits to the White House compared to other administration officials. Additionally, Shulman's wife Susan L. Anderson reportedly works for the Washington D.C. based liberal organization Public Campaign.

Anderson's group, Public Campaign, describes itself as, "a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to sweeping campaign reform that aims to dramatically reduce the role of big special interest money in American politics."

(The article goes on at the link to publish many of her tweets during the campaign. "If Romney loses the election, I bet he can file an amended return and claim the deductions he didn't claim.”",  "Romney in class by himself - see @SunFoundation charts comparing Romney's tax returns to other presidents. ", "Folks go to Caymans to dodge taxes or dive reefs - wanna bet what Mitt was doing there?")

During a Congressional hearing, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) questioned Shulman if he knew how Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) had information in supporting a July 2012 claim that Romney had not paid taxes for the last ten years. Shulman appeared not to know how or why Senator Reid made such a claim.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on June 03, 2013, 07:17:07 PM

"Shulman himself is under suspicion for his numerous visits to the White House compared to other administration officials"

Aren't there records of any of these meetings?  Minutes?

If yes why can't they be had the same as Nixon tapes?

Too bad we can't water-board...

Issa called Carney a liar.  I am very glad to see the L word is suddenly not so politically incorrect.   Time to call a spade a spade.

Title: Are you confused? I am
Post by: ccp on June 08, 2013, 08:13:45 AM

I tried to look up if non citizens can vote or not.  No succinct answer.  I get this endless diatribe.   So when Brock the Terrible gestures that illegals would have to get in the back of the line for citizenship (and learn English) that does not mean they wouldn't be able to vote for his party effective immediately.   Brock the scheister doesn't tell us that. 

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/07/the-threat-of-non-citizen-voting

Title: Re: non-citizens voting
Post by: DougMacG on June 08, 2013, 12:15:28 PM

Quote from: ccp on June 08, 2013, 08:13:45 AM

I tried to look up if non citizens can vote or not.  No succinct answer.  I get this endless diatribe.   So when Brock the Terrible gestures that illegals would have to get in the back of the line for citizenship (and learn English) that does not mean they wouldn't be able to vote for his party effective immediately.   Brock the scheister doesn't tell us that. 
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/07/the-threat-of-non-citizen-voting

Good question.  What I take from this piece is that those non-citizens are voting illegally - because they are here, already illegal, and because they can.  One could quite easily make the argument that under 'reform', those who were formerly illegal and choose the contract for the 'pathway' would be less likely to risk committing vote fraud while working and paying their way to citizenship. 

Their inability to vote for 14 year(?) is one reason Obama wanted his own plan, not this one, IMO.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on June 08, 2013, 07:22:19 PM

Voter suppression !!

Next thing you know, the dead will be denied their right to vote democrat.

Title: Corruption: FBI Director Doesn't Know Who's Leading Investigation in IRS Case
Post by: DougMacG on June 14, 2013, 08:12:44 AM

FBI Director Testifies He Doesn't Know Who's Leading Investigation in IRS Case

http://cnsnews.com/blog/joe-schoffstall/fbi-director-testifies-he-doesnt-know-whos-leading-investigation-irs-case#sthash.xJyCnL17.dpuf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPrUCPTWTAo&feature=player_embedded

Good luck America.

Title: Jail time for 2008 fraud in Indiana
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 18, 2013, 07:05:03 AM

http://www.wsbt.com/news/wsbt-former-st-joseph-county-democratic-chairman-sentenced-to-4-years-in-petition-fraud-20130617,0,1153255.story

Title: SCOTUS: In effect, aliens can vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 18, 2013, 07:26:53 AM

I was disappointed to see a 7-2 decision penned by Scalia banning AZ from requiring proof of citizenship to vote on the basis of federal pre-emption.

Title: Re: SCOTUS: In effect, aliens can vote
Post by: G M on June 18, 2013, 01:19:58 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 18, 2013, 07:26:53 AM

I was disappointed to see a 7-2 decision penned by Scalia banning AZ from requiring proof of citizenship to vote on the basis of federal pre-emption.

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2013/06/17/left-loses-big-in-arizona-supreme-court-case/

Left Loses Big in Citizenship-Verification Supreme Court Case

June 17th, 2013 - 5:35 pm

Something perverse happened after the Supreme Court’s decision today invalidating citizenship-verification requirements in Arizona for registrants who use the federal voter registration form. The Left knows they lost most of the battle, but are still claiming victory. That’s what they do. Election-integrity proponents and the states are saying they lost, but don’t realize they really won.
 
The Left wins even when they lose, and conservatives are often bewildered and outfoxed in the election-process game.

 


Earlier today, I called the decision a nothingburger. After re-reading the case and reflecting a bit more, it’s clear that the decision was a disaster for the Left and their victory cackles are hollow — and they know it.
 
Worse, conservatives dooms-dayers who have never litigated a single National Voter Registration Act case have taken to the airwaves, describing the case as a disaster which invites illegal-alien voting.
 
In the last year, I’ve litigated five NVRA cases and worked on the preemption issues for years, and there is more to cheer in today’s opinion than there is to bemoan. Those complaining about the opinion don’t understand what the Left’s goal was in this case: total federal preemption. On that score, Justice Scalia foiled them; indeed, the decision today was a huge war won, even if the small Arizona battle was lost.
 
From my time in the Justice Department Voting Section, I can remember intimately the wars over some of the preemption issues decided today.
 
The Left essentially believes that anyone who fills out a federal Election Assistance Commission registration form should be allowed on the rolls, no questions asked. There were complex fights over the “citizen check-off box” issues, with the Left wanting the box rendered meaningless, and conservatives and election-integrity proponents believing a registration cannot be processed until a registrant affirms on the box that he or she is a citizen.
 
Before the decision today, here is what the Left wanted:
 
● Invalidation of Arizona’s requirement that those submitting a federal form provide proof of citizenship with their federal form. Mind you, the citizenship-proof requirement is NOT part of federal law and the Election Assistance Commission does NOT require it in the form they drafted.
 
● Invalidation of state citizenship-verification requirements when a state voter registration form is used (yes, such forms exist separate from the federal requirement) on the basis of federal preemption. They wanted the Arizona case to invalidate all state citizenship-verification requirements.
 
● Automatic registration if a registrant submits a completed federal EAC approved registration form, no questions asked.
 
● Federal preemption on the ability for states to have customized federal EAC-approved forms that differed from the default EAC form.
 
● Federal preemption over states, like Florida and Kansas, looking for independent information on citizenship to root out noncitizens from the voter rolls. Again, the Left wanted the federal EAC form to be the no-questions-asked ticket to the voter rolls.
 
So what is the score on these five goals after Justice Scalia’s opinion today? Election-integrity advocates are batting .800; left wing groups, .200. And the most insignificant issue of the five is the one issue the Left won. Justice Scalia foiled 4 of 5 of their goals, and the 4 biggest ones.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 18, 2013, 01:31:34 PM

Thank you for that piece GM.

Title: Re: SCOTUS: In effect, aliens can vote
Post by: DougMacG on June 18, 2013, 01:50:17 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 18, 2013, 07:26:53 AM

I was disappointed to see a 7-2 decision penned by Scalia banning AZ from requiring proof of citizenship to vote on the basis of federal pre-emption.

[Silver lining aside, addressing the point lost], yes, this seems terrible!  Analysis is saying that Scalia and the others are throwing it back on congress to correct the standard. Arizona should sue the Feds to fix the problem?  

"Justice Thomas’s dissent was mainly devoted to arguing that the Constitution gives Congress no role in judging who may register to vote, and that this is a power given exclusively to the states."

If true, does this tend to support my contention that we are down to about one conservative/originalist on the Court.  Okay, add Justice Alito to the very short list in this case.  Alito's dissent is separate.  Who has time to do the Court's work for them, and finding the right answer in the dissent doesn't solve anything.

The Constitution "authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied," Thomas said in his dissent.

Is it not part of equal protection that my right to one vote cannot be diluted by liberals facilitating the vote of undocumented Dems?  Where is our protection?

Arizona law goes further than a 1993 federal law to address a serious problem.  But how does Arizona law violate the constitution?  Unequal protection?

I don't know if the Scalia-Ginsburg coalition gets out much, but a driver's license is not proof of citizenship in a state that issues licenses to non-citizens.  It is also not proof of citizenship in the state does not require proof of citizenship to check the citizen box on the driver's license application.

The remedy for a wrongly decided Supreme Court question is to elect a new President, new Senate and wait for current Justices to die.  How does that work when the issue is election fraud?  A different remedy, overlooked by Scalia, for the total malfeasance of the federal government to do its job is secession.

Right now we have government of the Washington DC, by the Washington DC, and for the Washington DC, IMHO.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2013/06/opinion-recap-one-hand-giveth/
http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/AZ-reaction.pdf
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/17/supreme-court-arizona-citizenship-proof-law-illegal/
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 18, 2013, 02:04:39 PM

"The Constitution "authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied," Thomas said in his dissent."

This seems rather definitive to me, what was Scalia thinking?

Title: Did IRS tilt the election?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2013, 06:55:48 PM

Hope 'n' Change: IRS Scandal Broadens
New IRS chief Danny Werfel revealed this week that -- surprise -- the agency's targeting of political groups went on longer than previously stated. Investigators originally claimed that the persecution of conservative groups ended in May 2012, but in fact it continued even after the scandal broke a few weeks ago. Werfel told Congress that he has called for an immediate end to the practice although he insists that there wasn't a pattern of intentional wrongdoing. That, however, is actually more troubling than if the IRS received marching orders from the White House because it indicates that the agency took it upon itself to placate the party in power in Washington (by sheer chance the Democrats). If that's true, then the federal government is fundamentally corrupt, not just run by a few corrupt politicians.
Congress finally received lists of trigger words that IRS agents used to target non-profit applications for further scrutiny, and most of the identifiers track back to a variety of conservative causes. In an attempt to take the heat off the agency and the Obama administration, congressional Democrats contend that "progressive" groups were also targeted. The Treasury Department Inspector General made clear, however, that his investigation revealed that only six leftist groups were probed while at least 292 Tea Party groups were given "special" attention.
The American Enterprise Institute makes the case that the IRS targeting and harassment of Tea Party groups swung the 2012 election in Democrats' favor. Researchers compared voter turnout in 2010 and 2012 using data from a variety of government and media sources and surmised that the neutralization of many Tea Party groups by the IRS in the 2012 election cycle led to a suppression of conservative voter turnout. According to the report, had the Tea Party groups' effect been similar in 2012 to that of the "shellacking" they dealt Obama and Democrats in the 2010 midterm elections, "they would have brought the Republican Party as many as 5 - 8.5 million votes compared to Obama's victory margin of 5 million."

Title: Obama Administration supports voter ID , , , for Kenyans
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 30, 2013, 07:24:07 PM

http://www.tpnn.com/obama-admin-supports-voter-ids-for-kenyans/

Title: Military voted being thrwarted
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 01, 2013, 08:48:42 PM

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/090712-624998-obama-ignores-military-absentee-voting-problems.htm?ven=OutBrainCP

Title: WSJ: LA voter test from the 1960s
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 02, 2013, 04:31:37 PM

Representative John Lewis of Georgia speaks with considerable authority on the question of voting rights, for he still bears the scars of his March 1965 beating at the hands of a racist mob in Selma, Alabama. Not surprisingly, Mr. Lewis was unhappy last week when the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act establishing a formula that kept voting practices in certain jurisdictions, including most of the Deep South, under strict federal supervision.

Mr. Lewis claimed on MSNBC that in recent years "there's been a systematic, deliberate attempt to take us back to another period," by which he meant the Jim Crow South. He observed that the Justices who decided the case "never had to pass a so-called literacy test." That's probably true, since Justice Clarence Thomas wasn't old enough to vote until 1969.

For a little historical perspective, the liberal online magazine Slate last week reproduced a transcript of a Louisiana "literacy" test, believed to date from 1964, which it obtained from the Civil Rights Movement Veterans website (http://www.crmvet.org). The test is a baffling series of 30 brainteasers that was to be administered to anyone who could not "prove a fifth grade education." You can see the original at http://on.wsj.com/1964orig.

Some of the questions were confusingly worded: "Circle the first, first letter of the alphabet in this line." (We guess that's the "a" in "alphabet.") Others tried to overload the test-taker with instructions: "Place a cross over the tenth letter in this line, a line under the first space in this sentence, and circle the last the in the second line of this sentence." And some tested not reading but math: Would-be voters had to complete the sequence "2 4 8 16 __" and to "draw five circles that have one common interlocking part."

To be permitted to vote, a citizen had to answer every question correctly within 10 minutes—an average of 20 seconds per question. That would be a tall order even for somebody with a college education.

The test powerfully illustrates how determined white Southern Democrats were to keep blacks from voting, and why the Voting Rights Act's extraordinary measures were necessary in 1965. Louisiana was among the states subjected to federal "preclearance" until last week.

But today no one is proposing to reinstitute literacy tests, which are banned by a section of the Voting Rights Act that was unaffected by last week's decision. Louisiana has an Indian-American Governor, an African-American Member of Congress and a 32-member Legislative Black Caucus in Baton Rouge. Without meaning to, Slate has offered a powerful illustration of how far we have left that "earlier period" behind—and how little reason there is to fear its return.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud,corruption: Electioon by 'Data Mining"
Post by: DougMacG on July 05, 2013, 11:04:52 AM

Does anyone remember a) that in 2009 the Obama White House took the 2010 Census away from the Commerce Dept and brought it in-house, and b) in 2010 the Obama allies got their asses handed to them by the tea party.

Then in the 2012 campaign the Obama-IRS shut down tea party operations and then won the election based on turnout derived from "data mining" in "The Cave" in Chicago with secret sources of information that they already happened to have via Census, IRS etc.
---------------
Today on Townhall.com:  http://townhall.com/columnists/barneybrenner/2013/07/05/data-mining-and-elections-n1633684/page/full

Data Mining and Elections
Barney Brenner | Jul 05, 2013

"these anything goes, Alinsky acolytes now have access to data, and its electoral ramifications, which Nixon couldn’t begin to dream of. And this administration can’t be trusted not to use it. ...

The Left is attempting a bloodless coup."
---------

Please see also:   
 
JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
    February 10, 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123423384887066377.html
Why Obama Wants Control of the Census
Counting citizens is a powerful political tool.


Get Ready For the U.S. Census Fight, Chicago-style
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2009/02/get_ready_for_the_us_census_fi.html
Republicans are fit to be tied over the Obama administration's Tom DeLay-style strategy of removing the U.S. Census Bureau from the jurisdiction of the Commerce Department and transfering it to the White House.

Let Statisticians, Not White House, Conduct the 2010 Census
http://www.discovery.org/a/9071
By: Bruce Chapman
DiscoveryBlog.org
February 7, 2009

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2013, 11:50:56 AM

Nice work supporting with relevant citations!

Title: Electoral process fraud, SEIU, corruption, Lois Lerner: "A Behavior Changer"
Post by: DougMacG on July 10, 2013, 12:34:39 PM

Lois Lerner, the IRS’s director of tax-exempt organizations who is overseeing the investigation, says many schools are rethinking how and what they report to the government. Receiving a thick questionnaire from the IRS, she says, is a “behavior changer.”

  - November 17, 2011 Business Week,  article about business operations of non-profits

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/the-irs-takes-a-closer-look-at-colleges-11172011.html

Title: Strassel: Another Scandal waiting to happen
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 12, 2013, 12:43:27 PM

Another IRS Scandal Waiting to Happen
Federal Elections Commissioner Donald McGahn wants to rein in the bureaucracy of this sensitive agency. The political left is furious.

    By
    KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
 

The Obama administration claims it wants to ensure that the rank political abuse perpetrated by the Internal Revenue Service is never repeated. Ask Donald McGahn how that's going.

Mr. McGahn is a Republican appointee to the Federal Election Commission, an agency with every bit as much potential for partisan meddling as the IRS. Due to leave the agency soon, Mr. McGahn's parting gift is a campaign to rein in an out-of-control FEC bureaucracy. But the left is fighting that oversight and is determined to keep power in the hands of unaccountable staff.


The FEC was created in the wake of Watergate, in part to remove primary power over political actors from the Justice Department. It sports an equal number of Democratic and Republican commissioners, so that neither side can easily impose a partisan agenda. This means a lot of deadlocks, a situation that infuriates the left, which prefers a fire-and-brimstone regulator.

It also frustrates the FEC's staff, which has responded by going around the commissioners. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), for instance, makes it clear that staff may not commence investigations until a bipartisan majority (four members) of the commission votes that there is a "reason to believe" a violation has occurred. In theory, this provision should guard against IRS-like witch hunts.

Except that over the years staff have come to ignore the law, and routinely initiate their own inquiries—often on little more than accusations they find on blogs or Facebook FB -0.15% . For a sense of how these investigations can go off the rails, consider that Lois Lerner—before serving as the center of today's IRS scandal—was the senior enforcement officer at the FEC. A Christian Coalition lawyer has testified that during a (sanctioned) FEC investigation in the 1990s—in addition to generating endless subpoenas, depositions and document requests, Ms. Lerner's staff demanded to know what Coalition members discussed at their prayer meetings and what churches they belonged to. Once staff gets rolling, there is little to stop them.

More troubling to some FEC commissioners has been the staff's unsanctioned and growing ties to the Obama Justice Department. In September 2011, Tony Herman was named FEC general counsel. Mr. Herman in early 2012 brought in Dan Petalas, a Justice prosecutor, as head of the agency's enforcement section. FECA is clear that a bipartisan majority of commissioners must vote to report unlawful conduct to law enforcement. Yet FEC staff have increasingly been sending agency content to Justice without informing the commission.

For instance, when a complaint is filed with the FEC against a political actor, the general counsel is required to write a report for the commissioners on whether there is a "reason to believe" the actor committed a violation. This report is confidential and never made public until a case is closed. Yet FEC staffers have sent these reports to Justice, in one case before the report was considered by the commissioners.

In a June memo, Mr. Herman defended staff supremacy with the astonishing argument that big decisions are best made by "non-partisan, career leadership." (No joke.) That way, the commission is shielded from "claims that it is deciding whether to assist DOJ criminal prosecutions" on the basis of "political considerations." Better, apparently, to keep the public completely in the dark.

These ties are disturbing, since the Obama campaign pioneered the tactic of demanding that Justice pursue criminal investigations of its political opponents as a means of intimidation. The FEC's info-funneling to Obama Justice raises the obvious question of whether Obama Justice wasn't in turn influencing FEC reports. (It also raises another question: If Justice had this kind of pipeline to the FEC, did it have one to the IRS?)

These questions are why election law requires bipartisan diligence over investigations and information sharing. Mr. McGahn is attempting to right the ship by getting the commission to adopt a new enforcement manual that would require uniform procedures. Yet FEC Chairman Ellen Weintraub has been uncharacteristically quiet on the issue, and liberal groups such as the Center for American Progress (via its Think Progress blog) have launched howling accusations that Mr. McGahn is trying to "block enforcement" and "weaken the agency." Some have suggested he's trying to ram through the change while the commission has a temporary 3-2 Republican majority.

In fact, Mr. McGahn hasn't forced this issue, because he's intent on getting all his colleagues to stand up for institutional responsibility. He's made clear he's not trying to end the relationship with the DOJ, or to stop investigations. As he told me this week, the only question is who will make the decisions: "The presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed commissioners who answer to the public, or an unaccountable staff?"

The left wants the latter, since it provides more latitude to use the FEC to their political ends. This has worked to their benefit at agencies like the (currently illegitimate) National Labor Relations Board, where (Acting) General Counsel Lafe Solomon is single-handedly running U.S. labor policy, much to their liking.

But Americans, and the FEC commissioners, need only recall our recent experience of letting federal employees meddle in politics. Mr. McGahn deserves great credit for trying to avoid the potential for another IRS scandal. Let's see if the Obama team is just as serious.

Title: Sen. Feinstein writes Crafty Dog
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 18, 2013, 03:05:05 PM

Dear Mr. Denny:
 
Thank you for contacting my office to express your opposition to more federal regulation of elections.  I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond. 
 
Our Constitution sets out an extraordinary balance between Federal and State regulation of elections to Federal office.  Under the Elections Clause of the Constitution, the States generally have power to regulate Federal elections.  However, Congress can create or change such regulations, and supersede state law, with respect to Federal elections.  For example, in 1842, Congress provided for the first time that members of the U.S. House of Representatives would be elected from single-member districts.  This is still done today.  In addition, the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact appropriate legislation to protect voting and civil rights.  The landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 is an example of such legislation. 
 
As you mentioned, several bills have been introduced in Congress that would encourage improvements in how federal elections are conducted.  These pieces of legislation include the "Streamlined and Improved Methods at Polling Locations and Early Voting Act" (H.R. 50), to provide early voting procedures for federal elections; the "Same Day Registration Act" (H.R. 280), to allow same day registration at polling places; the "Value Our Time Elections Act" (H.R. 289), to allow online voting; and the "Voter Access Protection Act" (H.R. 281) to make photo ID laws unlawful. 
 
I understand your concern that these bills could lead to increased voter fraud, and I share your concern that elections must be conducted in a fair and secure manner.  For example, in 2008, as Chair of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, I held a hearing on requiring photo identification by voters.  I found no evidence that in-person voter fraud – the kind of fraud that would be prevented by requiring that a voter present a photo ID at the polls – is a widespread problem.  In my view, the right to vote is the foundation of our democracy, and it must be protected – including by legislation at the federal level where appropriate.  Should any of the legislation you reference come before me for consideration in the Senate, I will be sure to carefully evaluate it to make sure that the right to vote and the security of our elections are protected.
 
Again, thank you for contacting my office. If you have any additional questions or comments, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. office directly at (202) 224-3841 or on the Internet at http://feinstein.senate.gov. Best regards.

Sincerely yours,


  Dianne Feinstein
         United States Senator

Title: Hallelujah!!!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2013, 06:34:55 PM

http://www.westernjournalism.com/poll-worker-headed-to-prison-for-voter-fraud/

Title: Re: Hallelujah!!!
Post by: G M on July 22, 2013, 07:20:03 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2013, 06:34:55 PM

http://www.westernjournalism.com/poll-worker-headed-to-prison-for-voter-fraud/

Strange that the MSM hasn't picked this story up....

Title: Re: Sen. Feinstein writes Crafty Dog
Post by: DougMacG on July 23, 2013, 09:02:29 AM

"I understand your concern that these bills could lead to increased voter fraud..." [Yet I support the bills and the heroic efforts of these newly enfranchised, fraudulent, Democratic voters.  Thanks for writing.]
  Dianne Feinstein
         United States Senator

Title: Vote fraud, corruption etc.: Getting ballots to Obamacare recipients
Post by: DougMacG on July 23, 2013, 09:47:39 AM

I have been arguing lately that the magic 'data mining - turnout operation' of the Obama reelection effort was focused on sharing government program recipient data with campaign targeting, while shutting down tea party opposition.

John Fund exposes the connection between program recipients and ballots:

Obamacare’s Branch of the NSA
Community organizers will use a Federal Data Hub to sign up people for subsidies — and even ballots.
By John Fund

President Obama has had a poor record of job creation, but at least one small economic sector is doing well: community organizing.

The Department of Health and Human Services is about to hire an army of “patient navigators” to inform Americans about the subsidized insurance promised by Obamacare and assist them in enrolling. These organizers will be guided by the new Federal Data Hub, which will give them access to reams of personal information compiled by federal agencies ranging from the IRS to the Department of Defense and the Veterans Administration. “The federal government is planning to quietly enact what could be the largest consolidation of personal data in the history of the republic,” Paul Howard of the Manhattan Institute and Stephen T. Parente, a University of Minnesota finance professor, wrote in USA Today. No wonder that there are concerns about everything from identity theft to the ability of navigators to use the system to register Obamacare participants to vote.
...
Indeed, voter registration is among the goals of the folks hawking Obamacare. The People’s World newspaper reports: “California’s Secretary of State Debra Bowen is designating the state’s new Health Benefit Exchange, Covered California, as a voter registration agency under the National Voter Registration Act. That means Covered California will be incorporating voter registration into every transaction — online, in-person and by phone — it has with consumers.” It seems as if some Obama supporters have found a new way to fill the void left by the bankruptcy of ACORN, the notorious left-wing voter-registration group that saw dozens of its employees in multiple states convicted of fraud.

...if Obamacare isn’t repealed, the government can, with enough effort and money, get the Data Hub up and running. That concerns many members of Congress.

“Giving community organizers access to the Federal Data Hub is bad policy and potentially a danger to civil liberties,” House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan told me recently. “But it’s one of the most under-reported stories I’ve seen. If people only knew about this Data Hub program, it would touch off a huge public outcry.”

Title: Holder seeks to endrun SCOTUS voting rights decision
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 25, 2013, 08:08:26 AM

Holder Seeking to Require Texas to Clear Voting Changes With U.S.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced on Thursday that the Justice Department would ask a court to require Texas to get permission from the federal government before making voting changes in that state for the next decade. The move opens a new chapter in the political struggle over election rules after the Supreme Court struck down a portion of the Voting Rights Act last month.
In prepared remarks for a speech before the National Urban League in Philadelphia, Mr. Holder also indicated that the court motion — expected to be filed later on Thursday — is most likely just an opening salvo in a new Obama administration strategy to try to reimpose “preclearance” requirements in parts of the country that have a history of discriminating against minority voters.
His statements come as states across the South, from Texas to North Carolina, have been rushing to enforce or enact new restrictions on voting eligibility after the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Shelby County v. Holder case, which removed that safeguard.
READ MORE »
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/26/us/holder-wants-texas-to-clear-voting-changes-with-the-us.html?emc=edit_na_20130725

Title: Use RICO to prosecute IRS targeting and election corruption scandal
Post by: DougMacG on July 25, 2013, 03:15:25 PM

Yes, the IRS targeting scandal road leads to Lerner and Wilkins which ties it to the President, his political handlers andto the campaign.  Sitting out here one might ask how you can tie all these small, illegal acts to swing the election together to expose the wider corruption and criminal enterprise that it embodies.  The answer is RICO, the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act.
----------------------------

http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/23/rico-the-real-way-to-hold-the-irs-accountable/

RICO: The real way to hold the IRS accountable

If you are looking for a political-judicial solution, such as congress, impeachment, or a special prosecutor to hold accountable the unlawful acts coming out of the Obama administration, beginning with the Internal Revenue Service’s abuse and targeting of conservatives, Tea Party groups, and Christians, you are looking in the wrong place. What the IRS did tilted President Barack Obama’s re-election in his favor.

The IRS targeting reportedly began as early as 2010. Three years later, no one has been held accountable and the facts continue to drip out in slow motion.

Last week, for instance, as the Daily Caller reported, retiring IRS lawyer Carter C. Hull testified before California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and implicated Obama appointee, IRS Chief Counsel William J. Wilkin, in addition to the Washington-based head of the IRS’s exempt organizations office, Lois Lerner, in the IRS targeting scandal. Lerner already has pled the Fifth. Hull made it clear that the targeting of conservatives and Tea Party groups started in Washington.
Ads by Google

Meanwhile, Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department declined to prosecute a government employee who apparently knowingly improperly accessed former Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell tax records.  Does anyone really believe they will see justice from the Obama administration in these cases?

The bottom line is this. You can’t get justice within the political system in America anymore because the politicians own it. What ultimately stopped the mafia? The Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). What can stop the Obama administration, starting with holding corruption at the IRS accountable? RICO.

For years, as documented in The Whistleblower: How the Clinton White House Stayed in Power to Reemerge in the Obama White House & World Stage, Washington’s ruling elite have comprised a protected class, with rules that don’t apply to everyday Americans. If you or I lied before Congress or to federal investigators we would have been charged with perjury long ago.

In Washington, Attorney General Holder and National Security Director James Clapper can lie to Congress and hold onto their powerful positions without consequence.

People forget how the Office of Independent Counsel Special Prosecutor Robert Ray used his prosecutorial discretion when he declined in the 1990’s to charge Hillary Clinton with perjury and obstruction of justice. Others might not know that additional potential crimes were not included in the articles of impeachment during former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment hearings which might have prevented the Clintons and the Clintonistas from re-emerging in the Obama administration and on the world stage. People have failed to recall how the Bush administration declined to prosecute quid-pro Pardongate in which Eric Holder was knee deep in.

Aside from the occasional PR-savvy fall-guy resignations the federal justice system has been dead for decades.

This is why RICO — the Racketeer Influence and Corrupt Organizations Act is the solution for Americans to use to see some long overdue justice in Washington. RICO provides a peaceful way to hold corruption accountable.

Successful cases against organized crime have been built around RICO, which was enacted in 1970 to target the mafia. What is needed is to use RICO to specifically hold corrupt politicians and federal officials accountable.

RICO has already held corrupt politicians like former mayor of Detroit Kwame Kilpatrick, and his childhood friend Bobby Ferguson, accountable. Under the RICO statute, they were convicted on March 11, 2013 of using Kilpatrick’s office to run a criminal organization to extort bribes in exchange for city contracts. It can be done.

According to 18 USC § 1961, crimes under RICO include everything from extortion, obstruction of justice, obstruction of a criminal investigation, and witness tampering, to kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter and financial institution fraud. RICO also permits a private individual harmed by the actions of an enterprise to file a civil suit, and if successful, to collect treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).

In the U.S. the act of engaging in criminal activity as a structured group is referred to as “racketeering.” In short, RICO requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, establishing a pattern which occurred within ten years after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity. It’s clear based on the number of conservatives and Tea Party groups that were targeted by the IRS that a pattern exists. It’s also clear from the testimony before Congress and in the Inspector General report that a number of officials were involved who were following orders from above. The evidence of a pattern and conspiracy already has been established. It’s time to use it.

Americans who have been targeted by the IRS or deprived of their rights by other government agencies should consider filing civil RICO suit under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 – Civil Remedy for Deprivation of Rights and RICO: Civil Remedies for Conspiracies to Deprive Rights. Civil RICO does not rely on the politicized criminal justice system to work. This is especially critical considering those politics appear to have corrupted justice within AG Holder’s own department.

This American University Law Review report called, Using the Master’s Tools: Fighting Persistent Police Misconduct with Civil RICO, by Steven P. Ragland, could serve as a blueprint. This case shows how civil RICO was successfully used to root out corrupt policemen in the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and can be applied to corrupt officials at the IRS and other agencies where corruption exists. Substitute the bad cops with the individual corrupt government workers, LAPD with the government agency in question and off you go.

Remember, the beauty of RICO is it can begin at the local and state level, and be brought as a civil RICO action first that doesn’t require the federal government to participate. It “provides for extended criminal penalties and a civil cause of action for acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization.” That means state and local lawyers, sheriffs, attorney generals, and prosecutors can bypass the corrupted Federal justice system. From there, as these civil RICO suits evolve and new potential criminal information is brought to light through the discovery process, these suits can merge and potentially become criminal actions that can be brought before a grand jury and spread to D.C. But victims of IRS targeting can and should start throwing down the gauntlet now.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: bigdog on July 25, 2013, 03:27:35 PM

Interesting read, Doug. Thanks!

Title: FEC part of IRS Scandal?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2013, 06:50:41 PM

http://nationalreview.com/corner/354801/e-mails-suggest-collusion-between-fec-irs-target-conservative-groups-eliana-johnson

 E-mails Suggest Collusion Between FEC, IRS to Target Conservative Groups
By  Eliana Johnson
July 31, 2013 6:00 AM
 

Embattled Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner and an attorney in the Federal Election Commission’s general counsel’s office appear to have twice colluded to influence the record before the FEC’s vote in the case of a conservative non-profit organization, according to e-mails unearthed by the House Ways and Means Committee and obtained exclusively by National Review Online. The correspondence suggests the discrimination of conservative groups extended beyond the IRS and into the FEC, where an attorney from the agency’s enforcement division in at least one case sought and received tax information about the status of a conservative group, the American Future Fund, before recommending that the commission prosecute it for violations of campaign-finance law. Lerner, the former head of the IRS’s exempt-organizations division, worked at the FEC from 1986 to 1995, and was known for aggressive investigation of conservative groups during her tenure there, too.

“Several months ago . . . I spoke with you about the American Future Fund, a 501(c)(4) organization that had submitted an exemption application the IRS [sic],” the FEC attorney wrote Lerner in February 2009. The FEC, which polices violations of campaign-finance laws, is not exempted under Rule 6103, which prohibits the IRS from sharing confidential taxpayer information, but the e-mail indicates Lerner may have provided that information nonetheless: “When we spoke last July, you had told us that the American Future Fund had not received an exemption letter from the IRS,” the FEC attorney wrote.

The timing of the correspondence between Lerner and the FEC suggests the FEC attorney sought information from the IRS in order to influence an upcoming vote by the six FEC commissioners. The FEC received a complaint in March 2008 from the Minnesota Democratic Farmer Labor Party alleging that the American Future Fund had violated campaign-finance law by engaging in political advocacy without registering as a political-action committee. The American Future Fund responded to that complaint in June 2008, telling the commission that it had applied for tax exemption in March of that year and was a “501(c)(4) social-welfare organization that was organized to provide Americans with a conservative and free-market viewpoint and mechanism to communicate and advocate on the issues that most interest and concern them.” According to the e-mail correspondence, a month after receiving the American Future Fund’s response, the FEC general counsel’s office — which is prohibited under law from conducting an investigation into an organization before the FEC’s six commissioners have voted to do so — contacted Lerner to investigate the agency’s tax-exempt status.

The FEC general counsel’s office, in its recommendation on the case, apparently didn’t tell the agency’s commissioners about how it had obtained the information about the group’s tax-exempt status. Recommending that the commissioners prosecute the American Future Fund, the general counsel’s office wrote, “According to its response, AFF submitted an application for tax-exempt status to the Internal Revenue Service . . . on March 18, 2008.” The footnote to that sentence reads, “The IRS has not yet issued a determination letter regarding AFF’s application for exempt status. Based on the information from the response and the IRS website, it is likely that the application is still under review.” In fact, an FEC lawyer knew that the organization had yet to obtain tax-exempt status because Lerner provided the confidential information.

The general counsel’s report was issued in September 2008, but it was over five months before the six FEC commissioners voted, in late-February 2009, on whether to prosecute the American Future Fund for violations of campaign-finance laws. (The typical lag time between the submission of a general counsel’s recommendation and a commission vote is about a month, according to a source familiar with the workings of the commission.) As the vote approached, on February 3, 2009, the FEC lawyer went back to Lerner for an update on the status of the American Future Fund’s application. “Could you please tell me whether the IRS has since issued an exemption letter to the American Future Fund? Also if the IRS has granted American Future Fund’s exemption, would it be possible for you to send me the publicly available information and documents related to American Future Fund?”

Despite the recommendations of the general counsel’s office, the six FEC commissioners split on whether to pursue the American Future Fund’s case and voted six-to-zero to close the case.

House Ways and Means Committee chairman Dave Camp and oversight-subcommittee chairman Charles Boustany are calling on the IRS, in the wake of these revelations, to provide all communications between the agency and the FEC between 2008 and 2012. “The American public is entitled to know whether the IRS is inappropriately sharing their confidential tax information with other agencies,” Camp and Boustany write in a letter they will send to acting IRS administrator Danny Werfel on Wednesday.

The FEC enforcement attorney also inquired about the tax-exempt status of another conservative organization, the American Issues Project. “I was also wondering if you could tell me whether the IRS had issued an exemption letter to a group called the American Issues Project? The group also appears to be the successor of two other organizations, Citizens for the Republic and Avenger, Inc.” Also sought were “any information and documents that would be publicly available in relation to the American Issues Project, Citizens for the Republic, or Avenger, Inc.”

Lerner was placed on paid administrative leave in late May after she revealed the IRS had inappropriately targeted conservative groups. The IRS has yet to respond to requests from lawmakers about her current employment status with the agency.

UPDATE: This piece has been amended since its initial posting.

Title: Re: FEC part of IRS Scandal?
Post by: DougMacG on July 31, 2013, 09:17:27 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2013, 06:50:41 PM

http://nationalreview.com/corner/354801/e-mails-suggest-collusion-between-fec-irs-target-conservative-groups-eliana-johnson
 E-mails Suggest Collusion Between FEC, IRS to Target Conservative Groups

Good for Eliana Johnson to keep the reporting of this going and thanks to Crafty for posting.  My belief is that this is still barely the tip of the iceberg of the RICO level, reelection conspiracy scandal.  I believe the 'data mining' operation was using government program recipient data and contact information in the campaign.

Title: Dems looking to use voter registration to turn red states blue
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 05, 2013, 03:35:25 PM

http://www.nextgeneration.tv/?cmd=mpg&load=8732&mpid=517

Title: Re: Dems looking to use voter registration to turn red states blue
Post by: G M on August 05, 2013, 05:05:59 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 05, 2013, 03:35:25 PM

http://www.nextgeneration.tv/?cmd=mpg&load=8732&mpid=517

Re: Dems looking to use voter registration fraud and amnesty for illegal aliens to turn red states blue.

Fixed it!

Title: Re: Dems looking to use voter registration to turn red states blue
Post by: DougMacG on August 05, 2013, 08:33:17 PM

Quote from: G M on August 05, 2013, 05:05:59 PM

Re: Dems looking to use voter registration fraud and amnesty for illegal aliens to turn red states blue.
Fixed it!

Vote fraud, aiding and abetting vote fraud, and conspiracy to commit vote fraud are crimes that undermine and attack our republic on a par equivalent to treason.  The penalty for these crimes should be severe enough that an illegal would face certain deportation and a citizen would never again vote after serving his or her felony level sentence. Vote fraud committed on a large scale is comparable to an act of war against the United States.

Somewhere near the start of this thread I posted a story of ACORN block workers telling me they had neighbors ready to vouch for me to vote on election day in a neighborhood in which I did not live.  While some want to make it easier and easier and easier to vote and harder and harder and harder to detect vote fraud, reasonable people I think should favor far greater enforcement and far stiffer penalties for subverting any basic founding principle of our nation.

Right to vote, right to bear arms, and the right of law abiding tea party leaning people to form political associations are all similar constitutional rights.  Maybe the restrictions and waiting periods for all of these should defined in law as exactly the same.

Title: FEC-IRS nexus- 3.0
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 06, 2013, 10:06:49 AM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/08/06/fec-official-new-emails-show-agency-may-have-colluded-with-irs-in-political-targeting-scandal/

Title: Foreign voters in the UK
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 30, 2013, 06:20:28 AM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10268870/Million-foreign-voters-could-sway-result-of-next-general-election-warns-report.html

Title: Hmmm , , , that's odd , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 06, 2013, 10:19:19 AM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/05/this-county-had-124-more-registered-voters-than-eligible-voters-counting-dead-people-and-felons/

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/23/No-Car-Finds-2-214-Registered-Voters-110-Years-of-Age-Older

http://gunsnfreedom.com/early-voting-fraud-already-seen-in-colorado-recall-elections/

Title: IRS' Lois Lerner's Own Words
Post by: DougMacG on September 12, 2013, 05:47:28 AM

(Use RICO to prosecute these co-conspirators)

Lois Lerner's Own Words
Emails undercut the official IRS story on political targeting.

Congress's investigation into the IRS targeting of conservatives has been continuing out of the Syria headlines, and it's turning up news. Emails unearthed by the House Ways and Means Committee between former Director of Exempt Organizations Lois Lerner and her staff raise doubts about IRS claims that the targeting wasn't politically motivated and that low-level employees in Cincinnati masterminded the operation.

In a February 2011 email, Ms. Lerner advised her staff—including then Exempt Organizations Technical Manager Michael Seto and then Rulings and Agreements director Holly Paz—that a Tea Party matter is "very dangerous," and is something "Counsel and [Lerner adviser] Judy Kindell need to be in on." Ms. Lerner adds, "Cincy should probably NOT have these cases."

That's a different tune than the IRS sang in May when former IRS Commissioner Steven Miller said the agency's overzealous enforcement was the work of two "rogue" employees in Cincinnati. When the story broke, Ms. Lerner suggested that her office had been unaware of the pattern of targeting until she read about it in the newspaper. "So it was pretty much we started seeing information in the press that raised questions for us, and we went back and took a look," she said in May.

Earlier this summer, IRS lawyer Carter Hull, who oversaw the review of many Tea Party cases and questionnaires, testified that his oversight began in April 2010. Tea party cases under review are "being supervised by Chip Hull at each step," Ms. Paz wrote to Ms. Lerner in a February 2011 email. "He reviews info from TPs, correspondence to TPs etc. No decisions are going out of Cincy until we go all the way through the process with the c3 and c4 cases here." TP stands for Tea Party, and she means 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) nonprofit groups.

The emails also put the targeting in the context of the media and Congressional drumbeat over the impact of conservative campaign spending on the 2012 elections. On July 10, 2012 then Lerner-adviser Sharon Light emailed Ms. Lerner a National Public Radio story on how outside money was making it hard for Democrats to hold their Senate majority.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee had complained to the Federal Election Commission that conservative groups like Crossroads GPS and Americans for Prosperity should be treated as political committees, rather than 501(c)(4)s, which are tax-exempt social welfare groups that do not have to disclose their donors.

"Perhaps the FEC will save the day," Ms. Lerner wrote back later that morning.

That response suggests Ms. Lerner's political leanings, and it also raises questions about Ms. Lerner's intentions in a separate email exchange she had when an FEC investigator inquired about the status of the conservative group the American Future Fund. The FEC and IRS don't have the authority to share that information under section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code. But the bigger question is why did they want to? After the FEC inquiry, the American Future Fund also got a questionnaire from the IRS.

Ms. Lerner famously invoked her right against self-incrimination rather than testify under oath to Congress. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee reported this summer that its investigation had found Ms. Lerner had sent official IRS documents to her personal email account, and many questions remain unanswered. Democrats want to pretend the IRS scandal is over, but Ms. Lerner's role deserves much more exposure.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, corruption: IRS Targeting Timeline
Post by: DougMacG on September 19, 2013, 06:41:31 PM

 Senior Treasury Department Officials Knew of IRS Targeting in Spring 2012, Documents Suggest
By  Eliana Johnson
September 19, 2013 1:05 PM

New documents are raising questions about when senior Treasury Department officials, including deputy treasury secretary Neal Wolin and even former treasury secretary Timothy Geithner, learned about the Internal Revenue Service’s targeting of tea-party groups. They suggest top brass at the Treasury Department may have been aware of the scandal in spring of 2012, a year before it became public.

An e-mail uncovered in the course of the House Oversight Committee’s investigation into the scandal shows that Treasury Department inspector general J. Russell George was briefed by his staff in preparation for a “Secretary’s meeting” that was to take place at the Treasury Department on June 4, 2012. The briefing notes sent to George by a member of his staff read, “We obtained documentation indicating that certain organizations’ applications for tax-exempt status were targeted by the Exempt Organizations Determination office based on the organizations’ name or political beliefs. Additional audit work is needed to determine the extent, if any, of inconsistent treatment of these organizations’ applications for 501(c)(4) status.” Another document indicates that George briefed Treasury Department general counsel Christopher Meade the same day.

It is unclear if either Geithner or Wolin were present at the June 4, 2012, meeting. It does not appear on Geithner’s public schedule for the day (see below). In May, George described the secretary’s meetings to the committee this way: “The secretary holds a monthly meeting with bureau heads and in conjunction with those meetings, I meet monthly with the general counsel of the Department of the Treasury and then on an as-needed basis with the deputy secretary, Mr. Wolin.” George said that he told Wolin about the scandal “shortly” after he briefed Meade, but could not recall the precise day. Wolin has testified that he was made aware of an audit of “the IRS’s review of tax-exempt organizations” in 2012. George’s testimony is consistent with Wolin’s statement: He told Congress he informed the deputy treasury secretary and the department’s general counsel only about “the nature of the audit,” though the notes prepared for him by his staff go into further detail.

The documents also show that former IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman knew more about the scandal than he has previously disclosed. On May 30, 2012, according to a timeline from the inspector general’s office, Shulman learned that ”criteria targeting ‘tea party,’ ‘patriots,’ or ‘9/12′” as well as “educating on the Constitution and Bill of Rights” were being used in reviewing applications for tax-exempt status.

Shulman told Congress in March 2012 that no targeting was taking place. Asked why he did not approach lawmakers to correct the record, he said, “What I knew sometime in the spring of 2012 was that there was a list who was being used, knew that the word ‘tea party’ was on the list” but ”didn’t know what other words were on the list” or “the scope and severity” of the problem.

On the basis of the newly discovered documents, Oversight Committee chairman Darrell Issa and subcommittee chairman Jim Jordan are demanding all Treasury Department documents and communication “referring or relating to the IRS’s misconduct.” In a letter to treasury secretary Jack Lew on Thursday, they wrote, “This information raises serious questions about the awareness of the Treasury Department in the IRS’s mistreatment of tax-exempt applications.” Issa and Jordan are reiterating a previous request to Lew with which the treasury secretary has yet to comply. The department, they said, “has produced only about 350 pages of responsive documents and did not provide any responses to several of our requests.”

UPDATE: A public schedule provided by the Treasury Department shows that former treasury secretary Timothy Geithner did not attend the June 4, 2012 meeting.

http://nationalreview.com/corner/358969/senior-treasury-department-officials-knew-irs-targeting-spring-2012-documents-suggest

Title: ACORN Obamacare 'Navigators', corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 02, 2013, 11:57:09 AM

The overlap and data share between these groups is so obvious IMO that no one hardly bothers to investigate or report on it:

The workforce that did the census, asked every person what programs they are on and how much they make, whether the kids go to daycare etc., and the people that come back to work the neighborhoods for Obamacare, and the people that used to do community action for ACORN and the people that worked the street on voter identification, registering and getting out the vote for Obama and all the local liberals - these people tend to be one and the same. It is RICO level corruption that these people pay each other salaries to go out and find out everything about you and then use that data to know exactly who to contact politically to elect and re-elect all the people who build and continue these programs.

It takes a far-right publication to even be suspicious about the connection.
---------------------------

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/matthew-vadum/acorn-crooks-on-the-march-for-obamacare/

ACORN Crooks on the March for Obamacare

A corrupt union ringleader who orchestrated massive campaigns involving identity fraud in furtherance of voter fraud and who covered up a million-dollar embezzlement involving pension funds will soon have unfettered access to confidential information on thousands of people seeking health insurance.

The union thug is disgraced ACORN founder Wade Rathke whose shady union will soon be helping people enroll in Obamacare exchanges.

Rathke’s labor vehicle, United Labor Unions (ULU) Local 100 in New Orleans, announced on its Facebook page Sept. 15 that it was gearing up “to do mass enrollment and help navigate people into the marketplaces in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas under the Affordable Care Act!”

“Local 100′s role as a Navigator, suggest the program is less about health care and more about building a new progressive infrastructure,” says longtime ACORN-watcher Mike Flynn of Breitbart.com.

The fact that Wade Rathke, a disreputable, radical left-wing community organizer, is allowed anywhere near the enrollment process ought to give all Americans pause. The only reason Rathke hasn’t been federally investigated for racketeering is because his allies control the federal law enforcement apparatus. President Obama pretends he has no connection to ACORN and Attorney General Eric Holder doesn’t care what laws have been broken because he approves of ACORN’s goals.

Of course, ACORN and the labor movement go way back. In 1979, ACORN created the United Labor Unions, which it used to organize low-wage, fast-food, and home healthcare workers in Louisiana, Arkansas, and Texas.

Yes, that’s President Obama’s former employer, ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

ACORN is the nonprofit group that knowingly hired felons convicted of identity theft to work on voter registration drives, giving them custody of sensitive voter information.

As I showed in my ACORN/Obama expose, Subversion Inc., ACORN is also infamous for hiring felons without bothering to do background checks, storming hospital emergency rooms and city council chambers, using voter fraud to turn graveyards across the nation into Democratic electoral strongholds, using mob violence against bank executives and other shakedown targets, and for ruthlessly exploiting its own employees and going to court to seek an exemption from minimum wage laws.

The 400,000-member organization, which filed for bankruptcy almost three years ago, was the nation’s preeminent Saul Alinsky-inspired street protest group — and the creepiest by far.

There are so many reasons why anyone connected to ACORN, especially the sleazy, smooth-talking, neo-communist con man Wade Rathke, cannot be trusted.

Dale Rathke, younger brother of Wade Rathke, stole a bit over $948,000 from ACORN in 1999 and 2000. Some of the money came from pension funds. Wade covered up the theft until it was discovered in mid-2008 at which point ACORN’s national board fired him and stifled an internal investigation into the crimes. With the richly deserved adverse publicity, grants from foundations began to dry up. ACORN filed bankruptcy on Election Day 2010.

The undercover videos shot by James O’Keefe III and Hannah Giles in 2009 that showed ACORN employees giving helpful advice on how to lie to the government, commit tax fraud, and trick banks into providing loans for brothels, helped kill off the group. That year Congress, which had given ACORN about $79 million in grants over the years, approved a law removing ACORN from the public teat.

It’s not that easy to get booted out of SEIU, America’s preeminent radical union, but somehow the ACORN-controlled Local 100 managed to do it.

As an SEIU official told me in October 2009, Local 100, which affiliated with SEIU in the mid 1980s, had its charter revoked by SEIU headquarters in September 2009. The bargaining unit was “not financially viable” and “simply couldn’t meet requirements to be a stand alone union,” she said without elaborating.

Given who’s running ULU, it is a foregone conclusion that ULU activists will abuse the sensitive financial, medical, and demographic information they take from vulnerable Americans, using the data for community organizing and partisan political advantage. That’s how Rathke operated over the 38 years that he headed ACORN.

Among the other left-wing organizations riding the Obamacare navigator gravy train are the Democrat-friendly groups Planned Parenthood, National Urban League, and Virginia Poverty Law Center Inc.

Many left-wing groups have not signed contracts with HHS or received government grants to enroll new patients but have nonetheless pledged to help promote the exchanges being created under Obamacare. Each recognized “Champion of Coverage” group vows to promote enrollment by emailing its members, hanging posters or giving out fact sheets and brochures, holding a conference call, or promoting enrollment in other ways.

Among the Champions of Coverage are Americans United for Change, Enroll America, Families USA, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), NAACP, MomsRising, Service Employees International Union, U.S. PIRG Education Fund, and Young Invincibles (Center for Community Change).

Enrollment will be a dangerous free-for-all because Obamacare “navigators” are barely regulated at all. By the way, the only reason there are any “navigators” is to help the Left, as Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has more or less admitted. Imposing rules would only interfere with community organizers’ ability to wreak havoc and spread the gospel of so-called social justice.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a Republican office holder who is painfully aware of ACORN’s antics over the years, warns that the Obamacare navigator program, like all of Obamacare, is deeply flawed.

“‘Navigator’ is a crafty name, but in reality, there are very few restrictions on who they are, and what exactly they are supposed to be doing,” Jindal says. “‘Navigators’ are supposed to be hired to help consumers understand the law and the insurance coverage provisions in the new health exchanges. Sounds like a job for a rocket scientist.”

“The ‘navigators’ are prohibited from having financial ties to an insurance company, but other than that there are few constraints. Union organizers and community activists are among the types that are allowed to be hired as ‘navigators’, and having prior experience working in the health care field doesn’t seem to necessarily be a pre-requisite for the job. I wonder what percentage of these ‘navigators’ will be partisan Democrats?”

The navigators will have to undertake a mere 20 hours of online training, “which will apparently make them experts on the 1,000 page ObamaCare bill.”

These community organizers will have access to “social security numbers and tax information” and HHS isn’t even planning on running background checks before sending them out into the field. “Besides the obvious identity theft concerns, this is a frightening development in light of the political activities and invasion of privacy, which the IRS and others have engaged in during the Obama presidency,” Jindal writes.

But as we’ve learned in the Obama era, this kind of craziness is par for the course with community organizers.

HHS Secretary Sebelius previewed the Obamacare navigators program as she supplicated before racial arsonist Rev. Al Sharpton’s radical left-wing National Action Network (NAN) at its convention in the nation’s capital in April 2012. She urged activists to get into the trenches and fight for the misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (a.k.a. Obamacare) and to play Santa Claus, letting their neighbors know that the law gives them access to mountains of taxpayer-funded freebies.

“In our country what we know is health care inequality [has been] one of the most persistent forms of injustice but over the past three years, as Rev. Sharpton reminded us, we have begun to turn the tide,” Sebelius said. “Now is not the time to turn back.”

“We know that the best way to keep moving in the right direction is to get people the facts. Right now there are a lot of people who are benefiting from this law who don’t even know that’s why they are benefiting.”

“We need your help,” said the former Kansas governor, herself an accomplished shakedown artist.

Just last week President Obama picked up this statist narrative, declaring that his Soviet-style government health care scheme was all about civil rights. He expounded the ugly, neo-Marxist view that every American has the right to extract free medical care from taxpayers and unwilling providers.

“In the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one should go broke just because they get sick,” Obama bloviated. “In the United States, health care is not a privilege for the fortunate few, it is a right.”

Translation: No individual American will go broke because of Obamacare. Instead, the whole country will go broke.

And Wade Rathke’s ULU Local 100 will be at the forefront, helping to throw dirt on America’s coffin.

Title: Law stacks the deck for incumbents
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 10, 2013, 04:52:25 AM

This could also go in the First Amendment thread

Notable & Quotable
Justice Scalia asks about limits on aggregate campaign contributions during oral arguments in McCutcheon v. Federal Election.


From oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Tuesday in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, a case challenging limits on aggregate campaign contributions. Lawyer Bobby Burchfield argued against the caps:

Justice Scalia: Counsel, is it—is it correct that the consequence of this provision has been very severe with respect to national political parties?

Mr. Burchfield: It is, Your Honor, particularly in the current environment where the national political parties are—are being marginalized by outside forces.

Justice Scalia: And—and much of the money that used to go to them now goes to PACs; isn't that what has happened?

Mr. Burchfield: Exactly right, Your Honor.

Justice Scalia: So that this is really, you know, turning the dials on—on regulating elections. Now, I ask myself, why would—why would members of Congress want to hurt their political parties? And I answer—I answer to myself—

(Laughter.)

Justice Scalia: —well, ordinarily, the national political parties will devote their money to elections in those States where the incumbent has a good chance of losing. So, in fact, if you're an incumbent who cares about political parties, I don't want money to go to my opponents. And if you—if you turn down the amount of money that the national political parties have, that's that much less money that can be devoted against you if you're challenged in a close race. Isn't that the consequence of this?

Mr. Burchfield: Let me see you and raise you one. There are separate limits here, Your Honor, for candidates and for political parties. The effect of this is to insulate the incumbents from competing with the political parties for the dollars. And by imposing a cap on the candidate—on the amount candidates can raise, the incumbents realized that they're the favored class among—among candidates who are going to be getting the contributions.

Justice Scalia: What a surprise.

Title: The old girl network
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 30, 2013, 08:27:33 AM

Toni Townes-Whitley is senior vice president at CGI Federal, which was awarded the no-bid contract to build the $678 million Healthcare.gov fiasco. Turns out that Toni is a classmate of Michelle Obama (Princeton '85) and they share membership in the Association of Black Princeton Alumni, which has fewer than 200 members for the entire decade, but plenty of Obama "friends." For example, John Rogers was Obama's Presidential Inaugural Committee Co-Chair.

Title: Vote fraud alleged in VA but not in Texas
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2013, 07:55:30 PM

http://nationalreport.net/evidence-voter-fraud-found-virginia-governors-race/

but not in Texas

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/11/06/so-how-many-votes-did-the-texas-voter-id-law-suppress/

Title: WSJ: WI Political Speech Raid
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2013, 06:36:45 AM

Wisconsin Political Speech Raid
Subpoenas hit allies of Scott Walker as his re-election campaign looms.


Updated Nov. 15, 2013 6:53 p.m. ET

Americans learned in the IRS political targeting scandal that government enforcement power can be used to stifle political speech. Something similar may be unfolding in Wisconsin, where a special prosecutor is targeting conservative groups that participated in the battle over Governor Scott Walker's union reforms.

In recent weeks, special prosecutor Francis Schmitz has hit dozens of conservative groups with subpoenas demanding documents related to the 2011 and 2012 campaigns to recall Governor Walker and state legislative leaders.

Copies of two subpoenas we've seen demand "all memoranda, email . . . correspondence, and communications" both internally and between the subpoena target and some 29 conservative groups, including Wisconsin and national nonprofits, political vendors and party committees. The groups include the League of American Voters, Wisconsin Family Action, Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, Americans for Prosperity—Wisconsin, American Crossroads, the Republican Governors Association, Friends of Scott Walker and the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

One subpoena also demands "all records of income received, including fundraising information and the identity of persons contributing to the corporation." In other words, tell us who your donors are.
***

The probe began in the office of Milwaukee County Assistant District Attorney Bruce Landgraf, though no one will publicly claim credit for appointing Mr. Schmitz, the special prosecutor. The investigation is taking place under Wisconsin's John Doe law, which bars a subpoena's targets from disclosing its contents to anyone but his attorneys. John Doe probes work much like a grand jury, allowing prosecutors to issue subpoenas and conduct searches, while the gag orders leave the targets facing the resources of the state with no way to publicly defend themselves.

That makes it hard to confirm any details. But one target who did confirm receiving a subpoena is Eric O'Keefe, who realizes the personal risk but wants the public to know what is going on. Mr. O'Keefe is director of the Wisconsin Club for Growth, which advocates lower taxes, limited government and other conservative priorities. He has worked in political and policy circles for three decades, including stints as national director of the Libertarian Party in 1980 and a director of the Cato Institute, and he helped to found the Center for Competitive Politics, which focuses on protecting political speech.

Mr. O'Keefe says he received his subpoena in early October. He adds that at least three of the targets had their homes raided at dawn, with law-enforcement officers turning over belongings to seize computers and files.

Mr. O'Keefe and other sources say they don't know the genesis of the probe, and Mr. Schmitz declined comment. The first public reference appeared in an October 21 blog post by Daniel Bice of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Mr. Bice is well known for his Democratic sources.

The kitchen-sink subpoenas deserve skepticism considering their subject and targets. The disclosure of conservative political donors has become a preoccupation of the political left across the country. In the heat of the fight over Governor Walker's reforms, unions urged boycotts of Walker contributors and DemocraticUnderground.com published a list of Walker donors for boycotting.

The subpoena demand for the names of donors to nonprofit groups that aren't legally required to disclose them is especially troubling. Readers may recall that the Cincinnati office of the IRS sent the tax-exempt applications of several conservative groups to the ProPublica news website in 2012.

The subpoenas don't spell out a specific allegation, but the demands suggest the government may be pursuing a theory of illegal campaign coordination by independent groups during the recall elections. If prosecutors are pursuing a theory that independent conservative groups coordinated with candidate campaigns during the recall, their goal may be to transform the independent expenditures into candidate committees after the fact, requiring revision of campaign-finance disclosures and possible criminal charges.
***

Another reason for skepticism is the probe's timing as Mr. Walker's 2014 re-election campaign looms. This is the second such investigation against Mr. Walker in three and a half years, following one that began in the office of Milwaukee County Democratic District Attorney John Chisholm in spring 2010.

That probe examined whether staffers used government offices for political purposes while Mr. Walker was Milwaukee County Executive, but after three years turned up nothing on Mr. Walker and embarrassingly little else. The final charges included a case of an aide sending campaign emails on county time, two Walker aides stealing money, and charges of child enticement against the domestic partner of a former staffer.

Mr. Walker's Democratic recall opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, nonetheless used the probe against the Governor, saying in a debate that "I have a police department that arrests felons, he has a practice of hiring them." So it's notable that the new batch of subpoenas began flying just days before Democrat Mary Burke announced her candidacy for Governor. District Attorneys are partisan elected officials in Wisconsin, and Mr. Landgraf works for Mr. Chisholm. Neither of them returned our call for comment.

The investigation's focus on campaign-finance law also falls into the wheelhouse of the Government Accountability Board, Wisconsin's political speech regulator. The GAB, which is made up of retired judges appointed by the Governor, has a history of pushing aggressive regulations of issue advertising. Mr. O'Keefe's Wisconsin Club for Growth has fought in court with the GAB over regulating political speech.

A person who has seen one of the Wisconsin search warrants tells us that the warrants were executed based on the request of Dean Nickel, who filed an affidavit for probable cause. Mr. Nickel is a former head of the Wisconsin Department of Justice Public Integrity Unit and has worked as an investigator for the GAB. Mr. Nickel told us he is a contractor for the GAB but wouldn't discuss the John Doe probe. GAB Director and General Counsel Kevin Kennedy declined to comment.
***

Perhaps the probe will turn up some nefarious activity that warrants this subpoena monsoon and home raids. But in the meantime the effect is to limit political speech by intimidating these groups from participating in the 2014 campaign. Stifling allies of Mr. Walker would be an enormous in-kind contribution to Democrats. Even if no charges are filed, the subpoenas will have served as a form of speech suppression.

Mr. O'Keefe told us that the flurry of subpoenas "froze my communications and frightened many allies and vendors of the pro-taxpayer political movement in Wisconsin and across the country." Even if no one is ever convicted of a crime, he says, "the process is the punishment."

Title: Census Bureau faked election jobs report
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 19, 2013, 09:21:49 AM

http://nypost.com/2013/11/18/census-faked-2012-election-jobs-report/

In the home stretch of the 2012 presidential campaign, from August to September, the unemployment rate fell sharply — raising eyebrows from Wall Street to Washington.

The decline — from 8.1 percent in August to 7.8 percent in September — might not have been all it seemed. The numbers, according to a reliable source, were manipulated.

And the Census Bureau, which does the unemployment survey, knew it.

Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy.

And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.

“He’s not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked.

The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.

Ironically, it was Labor’s demanding standards that left the door open to manipulation.

Labor requires Census to achieve a 90 percent success rate on its interviews — meaning it needed to reach 9 out of 10 households targeted and report back on their jobs status.

Census currently has six regions from which surveys are conducted. The New York and Philadelphia regions, I’m told, had been coming up short of the 90 percent.

Philadelphia filled the gap with fake interviews.

“It was a phone conversation — I forget the exact words — but it was, ‘Go ahead and fabricate it’ to make it what it was,” Buckmon told me.

Census, under contract from the Labor Department, conducts the household survey used to tabulate the unemployment rate.

Interviews with some 60,000 household go into each month’s jobless number, which currently stands at 7.3 percent. Since this is considered a scientific poll, each one of the households interviewed represents 5,000 homes in the US.

Buckmon, it turns out, was a very ambitious employee. He conducted three times as many household interviews as his peers, my source said.

By making up survey results — and, essentially, creating people out of thin air and giving them jobs — Buckmon’s actions could have lowered the jobless rate.

Buckmon said he filled out surveys for people he couldn’t reach by phone or who didn’t answer their doors.

But, Buckmon says, he was never told how to answer the questions about whether these nonexistent people were employed or not, looking for work, or have given up.

But people who know how the survey works say that simply by creating people and filling out surveys in their name would boost the number of folks reported as employed.

Census never publicly disclosed the falsification. Nor did it inform Labor that its data was tainted.

“Yes, absolutely they should have told us,” said a Labor spokesman. “It would be normal procedure to notify us if there is a problem with data collection.”

Census appears to have looked into only a handful of instances of falsification by Buckmon, although more than a dozen instances were reported, according to internal documents.

In one document from the probe, Program Coordinator Joal Crosby was ask in 2010, “Why was the suspected … possible data falsification on all (underscored) other survey work for which data falsification was suspected not investigated by the region?”

On one document seen by The Post, Crosby hand-wrote the answer: “Unable to determine why an investigation was not done for CPS,” or the Current Population Survey — the official name for the unemployment report.

With regard to the Consumer Expenditure survey, only four instances of falsification were looked into, while 14 were reported.

I’ve been suspicious of the Census Bureau for a long time.

During the 2010 Census report — an enormous and costly survey of the entire country that goes on for a full year — I suspected (and wrote in a number of columns) that Census was inexplicably hiring and firing temporary workers.

I suspected that this turnover of employees was being done purposely to boost the number of new jobs being report each month. (The Labor Department does not use the Census Bureau for its other monthly survey of new jobs — commonly referred to as the Establishment Survey.)

Last week I offered to give all the information I have, including names, dates and charges to Labor’s inspector general.

I’m waiting to hear back from Labor.

I hope the next stop will be Congress, since manipulation of data like this not only gives voters the wrong impression of the economy but also leads lawmakers, the Federal Reserve and companies to make uninformed decisions.

To cite just one instance, the Fed is targeting the curtailment of its so-called quantitative easing money-printing/bond-buying fiasco to the unemployment rate for which Census provided the false information.

So falsifying this would, in essence, have dire consequences for the country.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on November 19, 2013, 09:44:44 AM

Another milestone in the death of the dollar. The world is waking up to the fact that America has been fundamentally transformed into Chicago writ large.

Title: Re: Census Bureau faked election jobs report, Obama stole an election
Post by: DougMacG on November 19, 2013, 02:41:06 PM

Is this Watergate yet?

What is monumental about this scandal is that it is on top of the other reelection scandals, IRS targeting conservative groups, blocking the Benghazi discovery, the Obamacare fraud and the use of government data in the reelection.  Now the doctoring of economic data to influence the election.  The executive executive branch and the campaign are one and the same, breaking laws and destroying the integrity of our nation.  This calls for a special prosecutor and a RICO criminal prosecution (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) to connect all the different parts of a criminal organization.

Talk about a double standard, Scooter Libby went to jail without being being the source and Lois Lerner is a free woman 6 months after saying that the answers to routine questions might incriminate her.  Watergate was a lie about a two bit burglary and this was an organized operation to break laws in the effort to reelect the President.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on November 19, 2013, 04:33:19 PM

Your right of course.  But,

it is not the lies that will undue Brock full of crock.
It is only when more of us get hit in the wallet then get checks that will make the difference.

I guess we are seeing this now with the drop in poll numbers with the AHA thing.  Now and only now. 

Unfortunately, truth and honesty doesn't seem to mean as much these days.

IF it did we wouldn't even be listening to Bill Clinton.  Yet we have to hear his opinion on the MSM to this day.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 19, 2013, 06:07:25 PM

O'Reilly mentioned the cooking of the pre-election unemployment numbers tonight and said it would be covered more tomorrow.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on November 20, 2013, 05:22:33 AM

Rush reminded us he predicted the unemployment rate would magically dip below 8 well before the election.  In fact I remember him saying this.  I doubt that there was not one listener who did not agree with his prediction.  I also doubt there was not one listener who also did not agree with his insinuation that the "books would be cooked" to achieve this "magical" number.

The MSM is silent. 

"oh these are career government officials"

as though their integrity and honesty is above reproach.

Unfortunately there are no Nixon tapes of Obama and/or his henchman Axelrod  to be discovered.

I guess only then could we speak of impeachment.  Like the mafia.   It is hard to connect the evidence to the masterminds pulling the strings.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 20, 2013, 07:27:28 AM

Quote from: ccp on November 20, 2013, 05:22:33 AM

Rush reminded us he predicted the unemployment rate would magically dip below 8 well before the election.  In fact I remember him saying this.  I doubt that there was not one listener who did not agree with his prediction.  I also doubt there was not one listener who also did not agree with his insinuation that the "books would be cooked" to achieve this "magical" number.

The MSM is silent. 
"oh these are career government officials"
as though their integrity and honesty is above reproach.

Unfortunately there are no Nixon tapes of Obama and/or his henchman Axelrod  to be discovered.

I guess only then could we speak of impeachment.  Like the mafia.   It is hard to connect the evidence to the masterminds pulling the strings.

Wesbury warned that the economy alone wouldn't be bad enough to defeat the President.  But ccp is right, Rush predicted for a year that the manipulation of the data would magically happen coming into the election.  Jack Welch also commented on the cooked books and the media, refusing any role as a watchdog, just lazily claimed the critics to be wearing tin foil hats.  Now it turns out to be true, much worse than we thought, and there will be no consequence?

"Unfortunately there are no Nixon tapes of Obama and/or his henchman Axelrod  to be discovered."

Yes there are, such as the IRS targeting communications contradicting the testimony and reports in the Federal Register exposing the President's lies. We just don't have them 'Obama administration tapes' yet because no one is demanding their release.  We won't get them without an effective and relentless special prosecutor.

I keep pointing to this one example.  A group called ACORN was banned from federal funding for their co-mingling of taxpayer dollars and political activities - and they have since reappeared under many different names.  The head of ACORN said the co-mingling of funds was impossible due to the impermeable "firewall" (what a joke!) separating these activities, even though it was the same people working both sides in the same office.  Yes there is attrition, but largely the same community organizers became the Census 2010 paid workers, learning everything about everyone in the neighborhoods, outside the constitution and at taxpayer expense, who then became the paid workers of the Obama 2012 campaign to 'get out the vote'.  They called it a magical and top secret "data mining" operation.  But they knew who was black.  They knew who was Hispanic, and they knew who was in every other identifiable demographic group.  They knew who relied on food stamps.  They knew who was on Section 8.  They knew who got medicaid and all other federal programs and they came to their doors with iphones and clipboards tracking voters, arranging rides and making sure all the targeted people voted.  It was not data mining, it was illegal data sharing.  I came from the people to the government, and then to the campaign.  All the while, in a different agency of the same executive branch, conservative groups were targeted, questioned and prevented from organize in opposition, while in a third agency they were cooking the books to change the story line, and in a fourth agency they were covering up events overseas that contradict the President saying al Qaida was 'on the run' even though he slept while they were surrounding and killing Americans.

The idea that there is no trail to the top turned out to be false when we looked at the IRS.  It went to the top, to a guy who had daily meetings with the White House.

If we investigate, subpoena evidence and compel testimony on the rest of these irregularities, we will find the 'Nixon tapes and much worse.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on November 20, 2013, 06:50:34 PM

"If we investigate, subpoena evidence and compel testimony on the rest of these irregularities, we will find the 'Nixon tapes and much worse."

How can "we" do this?

Title: Risk of Obamacare enrollee data being mined for election purposes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 22, 2013, 04:07:26 AM

http://patriotpost.us/posts/21802

Title: Re: Risk of Obamacare enrollee data being mined for election purposes
Post by: DougMacG on November 22, 2013, 09:32:43 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 22, 2013, 04:07:26 AM

http://patriotpost.us/posts/21802

Yes, where did we first hear that the top secret, highly successful, campaign data mining operation was really the illegal leaking of private data by partisan government workers also working on the campaign?  And that the government workers gathering our private data and the campaign workers using that same data were actually the same people?  :wink:
 
In answer to ccp's question, how can we get this investigated, it is good to see people are following up on the points made here on the forum:

Same healthcare 'navigator' caught by James O'Keefe releasing private data for political purposes was also regional field director for Organizing for Action, Barack Obama's campaign arm.

As I wrote earlier, if you investigate, you will find it is the same people and same data.  Highly illegal.  No consequence.
------------------
http://www.examiner.com/article/busted-enroll-america-employee-latest-sting-video-former-ofa-official

Earlier Thursday, we reported that James O'Keefe released a video showing an Obamacare navigator conspiring to release personal data obtained through the healthcare website for partisan political purposes. The plot thickened, however, when the Gateway Pundit's Jim Hoft revealed on Wednesday that Christopher Tarango, the navigator in O'Keefe's video, was also the regional field director for the El Paso office of Organizing for Action, Barack Obama's campaign arm.

"In fact," Hoft said, "Tarango is mentioned on Obama’s official Organizing for Action website."

Tarango, Hoft added, was a top official with Obama's campaign arm.

"Now he’s working for Enroll America – and he’s willing to release private data for political purposes,"

"there's a lot of talent that got sucked into Enroll America, but we are all Obama people."

SMU political science professor Matthew Wilson told KDFW there are strict barriers regarding the sharing of information and resources.  "The difficulty is, how bright a line can you draw between the non-partisan activities and the specifically political activities when it's exactly the same people doing both?"
-----------------

Attorney General of the United States Eric Holder will be all over this, I'm sure!  A special prosecutor?  RICO prosecution? 

An organized, criminal operation undermining our electoral system - on a national scale, large enough to swing a Presidential election is treason, is it not?  Or was this, too, "just the Cincinnati office"?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on November 22, 2013, 09:39:59 AM

Another "fake" scandal that will get no coverage from the MSM.

Title: False job numbers: Did the White House know?
Post by: DougMacG on November 25, 2013, 08:08:51 AM

The Census is our private data, taken forcibly and unconstitutionally from us by the government, and then shared with leftist political thugs. The White House and the campaign and control of the 2010 Census operation are all one and the same.  I watched the campaign work the inner city this past campaign. They knew exactly who they were looking for and skipped the others.  That information didn't come from "data mining".  It came from the Census, food stamp rolls etc.  Finally a reporter has emerged with an informant is on the edge of this massive scandal.  Maybe more activists and insiders will begin to see the lies they were told and come forward with their stories.
-----------------------------------------------------------
False job numbers: Did the White House know?

By John Crudele,  NY Post
November 23, 2013
False job numbers: Did the White House know?
Photo:  Rahm Emanuel and President Obama at a DNC fundraising event in 2011.


Let me be the first to ask: Did the White House know that employment reports were being falsified?

Last week I reported exclusively that someone at the Census Bureau’s Philadelphia region had been screwing around with employment data. And that person, after he was caught in 2010, claimed he was told to do so by a supervisor two levels up the chain of command.

On top of that, a reliable source whom I haven’t identified said the falsification of employment data by Census was widespread and ongoing, especially around the time of the 2012 election.

There’s now a congressional investigation of how Census handles employment data. And we can hope that we’ll find out this was just an isolated incident.

But let me tell you why it might not be.

Back in 2009 — right before the 2010 census of the nation was taken — there was an announcement that the Obama administration had decided that the Census Bureau would report to senior White House aides.

The rumor was that Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel was in charge of the nationwide head count.

The chief of the Commerce Department usually oversees the Census, which determines how many congressional representatives and how much money each state gets for the next decade. But the Obama administration had decided — the story went — that Emanuel was a better guy for the job.

The idea that a political creature like Emanuel would be calling the shots on how states would be redistricted in coming elections sent Republicans into a tizzy.

“This is nothing more than a political land grab,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah).

Other Republicans expressed similar dismay. And the tension got so high that Judd Gregg, a Republican senator from New Hampshire, even withdrew his nomination to be Commerce secretary. (Gary Locke assumed that post.)

And why wouldn’t the Republicans be bothered? Even though the average American might think the census is nothing more than a nuisance, by Washington’s two most important standards — votes and money — it’s anything but.

So here’s where my story picks up.

Back in 2010, I started getting reports that the Census Bureau had some very unusual hiring practices. Census takers and supervisors — at risk of heavy fines — were reporting to me that large numbers of people were being hired only to be fired shortly afterward. And then rehired.

I theorized at the time that Census was trying to make the job-creation totals look better nationwide in those bleak months leading up to the midterm congressional elections.

This employment policy seemed too coordinated. The regional higher-ups at Census couldn’t be doing this on their own; there had to be a grander plan.

I still don’t know what was going on.

But then I heard about the falsification in Philly. This time, however, it wasn’t the employment numbers that were being doodled with. This time it was the unemployment data, which are gathered at the Census Bureau and handed over raw to the Labor Department.

I don’t want to get ahead of myself on this, but Philadelphia is pretty close to Washington, DC. And the census taker who was caught cheating — a guy named Julius Buckmon — had been canvassing the DC area when he was filling out forms for people who didn’t exist.

And the Census Bureau had been inexplicably downsized in recent years from eight regions to only six, giving more control to whoever had seized control.

The supervisor who was fingered by Buckmon did admit that he told other survey takers to hand in half-filled-out interviews. And the White House always has pretty good influence at the Census Bureau, even if it didn’t get its wish for Emanuel.

Maybe it’s just my deeply ingrained distrust of authority — especially when it resides in Washington — or my hope that a good story will last, but I’m betting 60/40 that the White House had grand plans for Census. And some of those may have been carried out.
http://nypost.com/2013/11/23/cooked-census-reported-to-obama-and-rahm/

Title: Obamacare rigging the future
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 26, 2013, 02:42:15 PM

Pasting this over here too from the Health Care thread


http://pjmedia.com/blog/rigging-the-future-obamacare-creates-50-new-state-databases-with-no-function-beyond-gathering-potential-voter-information-real-or-fraudulent/?singlepage=true

RIGGING THE FUTURE: Obamacare Creates 50 New State Databases With No Function Beyond Gathering Potential Voter Information, Real or Fraudulent

It was never just a health care “fix”: A series of precise, brilliant, secretive, and illegal decisions by Obamacare authors led to the creation of 50 unbeatable election tools — and to nothing else. As you read, try to identify a rational explanation besides malevolence. (This is Part One of a two-part article.)
by David Steinberg
Nov 26, 2013 - 8:25 am


Since the passage of Obamacare, all fifty state Medicaid agencies have been forced to create a new standalone database that contains nothing besides the contact information of Medicaid applicants who used Healthcare.gov.
 
Some of these new databases mail out voter registration forms automatically. You cannot refuse them.

 



No worthwhile verification occurs before the forms are mailed. Apply for Medicaid and the form will be mailed to you, be you a verifiable citizen or Ayman al-Zawahiri on a computer in Pakistan.
 
Further, these new databases are accessible by groups like Organizing for Action, the reconstituted ACORN, and malevolent figures like Chris Tarango.
 
And no reasonable purpose exists for creating the databases besides making them available to the aforementioned Democratic activists.
 
———————
 
Heard nothing regarding this before? Not only are you not alone, several state secretaries of State we contacted had no clue any of this was occurring under their watch. One source involved in the recently initiated legal battle to expose and dismantle the databases described the situation as follows:
 

Evil genius.
 
A complete disregard for certain federal law, the skirting of others, the exploitation of existing Medicaid structures, the issuing of rules and regulations with virtually none of the required paper trail. …
 
Just evil genius. They friggin’ thought of everything.
 
The remainder of this article is composed of descriptions of the several decisions made by Obamacare authors that led to the construction of the databases. The listing of these decisions is intended to illustrate the impossibility that these databases were created unintentionally, or due to incompetence — a “fumble.”
 
We hope to show that a rational, disinterested observer must arrive at the conclusion that these actions could not have been taken for any reason beyond the intended exploitation of the Affordable Care Act as a vehicle for future Democratic election victories.
 
We invite readers to offer alternative interpretations. We have reached out to several Democratic congressional offices to give them the opportunity to offer their own.
 
We also have reached out to GOP officials to see if any are willing to go on record stating the lone reasonable conclusion: objectively, some authors of the ACA were not “bleeding hearts,” but white-collar criminals.
 


Decision #1: The “Honor System”
 
Applicants to Healthcare.gov must enter their current income level. This is a pivotal piece of data for the system: income alone is used to determine if the applicant will be presented with the option to: a) purchase full-price or subsidized health insurance policies; or b) if the applicant will be directed towards Medicaid/CHIP programs. This determination is calculated according to the new Modified/Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) scale.
 
However, Healthcare.gov does not perform any checks at all (such as requiring the submission of pay stubs, the prior year’s tax return, etc.) to verify the income amount entered by the applicant. This all-important piece of data is accepted by Healthcare.gov on the “honor system.”
 
 
 
Decision #2: The Community Organizing, Aggressive Application of “Motor Voter” Law
 
If an applicant’s entered income is low enough to be eligible for subsidy, the applicant will soon be asked by Healthcare.gov if he or she does not wish to receive a voter registration form. This question alone utilizes aggressive application of three provisions of federal law.
 
The 1993 National Voter Registration Act, or “Motor Voter,” requires all municipal and government facilities which provide public assistance to also offer voter registration services. The Obama administration claims that “Motor Voter” thus applies to Healthcare.gov, and subsequently Healthcare.gov must provide voter registration services. Some states have disagreed with this application as it relates to state exchanges, but expect those states to face DOJ litigation – Rhode Island and other states have.
 

1. Since the adoption of Motor Voter in 1993, the Federal Government has successfully forced states to push voter registration in all on-line contexts.
 
This represents a significant distinction: the federal government has necessarily crafted entirely new fields of law to handle the development of electronic interactions.
 

2. Motor Voter specifies that facilities offering public assistance must have voter registration services available, and the Federal Government is forcing applications to specifically reject voter registration, sometimes multiple times.
 
As such, you can draw your own conclusions about the motivation behind applying Motor Voter to the ACA, and behind phrasing the question in that manner.
 

3. A stunning apparent violation of federal law: In practice, Healthcare.gov does not let you say “no” to a voter registration form.

Even if you say “no,” you may be mailed a form automatically.
 
You may receive a form that is pre-populated with the identifying information you entered into Healthcare.gov. Comprehension of the form is thus unnecessary; the recipient of the pre-populated form need only determine where to sign it.
 
As explained below, this will occur at the state level, where the design and implementation of Obamacare regarding voter registration make these transparently intentional abuses of Motor Voter seem tame.
 
Among sources reached for this article, that phrase “evil genius” was employed when referring to what Obamacare requires of state Medicaid entities; we were told its usage has become commonplace.
 
Decision #3: Restructuring Medicaid’s — and Only Medicaid’s — Eligibility Screening Procedures
 
Since the enactment of LBJ’s Great Society public assistance programs, most state Medicaid agencies have not been responsible for handling eligibility screenings.
 
Generally, screening for the various public assistance programs has instead been handled by state departments of Health and Human Services, or by similar state entities. One system would screen for all of the public assistance programs; the individual state program agencies would only handle administration.
 
After 50 years of precedence, Obamacare has changed this. But only for Medicaid.
 
As discussed earlier, if an applicant enters a qualifyingly low income into Healthcare.gov, the applicant is sent to the Medicaid side of the website. At this point, those five decades of established fraud prevention procedures are jettisoned.
 
Identifying information entered on the Medicaid side of Healthcare.gov is treated differently than identifying information entered while applying to all other public assistance programs.
 
How it works now: each state Medicaid agency has been instructed to create a new stand-alone database for storing identifying information entered by Medicaid applicants via Healthcare.gov. (Note the word “instructed,” not “required by law” or something similar. We will get to that shortly.) As instructed, all fifty states have created one of these databases.
 
They have further been instructed that this identifying information should no longer be sent to whichever state organization formerly performed the eligibility screening. The information must only go to these new databases.
 
 
 
Decision #4: The Parting of Data
 
As instructed, each state designed these new stand-alone databases to be dedicated to storing only the identifying information of Healthcare.gov applicants — but no medical data.
 
If you happen to be familiar with the basics of both health care and election law, perhaps your pupils just grew wide. Because you are aware that medical records are treated by the law as private and sacrosanct, but voter rolls, consisting of only identifying information, are publicly accessible.
 
To summarize:
 •The federal government instructed states that they could not send any applicant data entered into the Medicaid side of Healthcare.gov to their traditional eligibility screeners.
 •They then instructed state Medicaid agencies to create stand-alone databases for this new applicant information, and that these new databases would be forbidden from containing any medical information.
 •Per an incorrect application of Motor Voter law, the Obama administration considers the Medicaid side of Healthcare.gov to be a public assistance “office,” and as such, required to offer voter registration services.
 •The Obama administration also considers it legal to treat the distribution of voter registration forms as “must opt-out,” instead of “must opt-in.”
 
These four bullet points are the basis of Decision #5.
 
 
 
Decision #5: The Illegal, Automatic Mailing of Voter Registration Forms and “Opt-Out” Forms
 
States were instructed that, to comply with Motor Voter, these new databases must automatically mail voter registration forms to each new individual applicant sent over from Healthcare.gov.
 
Recall, you may have said “no” earlier. It doesn’t matter.
 
The new databases must also mail a second form that states “I do not wish to register to vote,” which you must sign and return.
 
Otherwise, it is assumed you wish to register.
 
If the Feds notice you still haven’t replied?
 
Remember Decision #4: the new databases are publicly accessible, since they do not contain any medical information.
 
Anyone – perhaps Organizing for Action, or Battleground Texas – can get their hands on it, and then show up at your door with yet another form.
 
——————–
 
Review the prior five decisions: are you able to determine a reasonable explanation for all five of them besides getting potential voter information in the hands of Democratic organizing groups? Groups populated by bad actors like Chris Tarango, but which nonetheless have the blessings of the administration?
 
Recall that this is voter information gathered via Medicaid applications, a program whose recipients vote almost exclusively Democrat.
 
If Orwell comparisons strike you as tedious, an additional instruction to the states about how they are allowed to screen eligibility, along with the precedent-breaking, whispered demands from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) that follow may have you granting an exception.
 
Decision #6: Eliminating the State Medicaid Screeners
 
For the past five decades, states have dedicated a tremendous amount of resources to providing a “second-level review” of applicant information transmitted to them via a federal agency.
 
But now, and quite simply, that has been ended. But only for Medicaid.
 
States are no longer allowed to challenge the validity of applicant information sent to them from the Medicaid side of Healthcare.gov.
 
Instead, states are to assume that if information was transmitted to them, the federal government has deemed that information to be valid. States haven’t simply been instructed to no longer let their traditional public assistance eligibility screeners touch Medicaid information from Healthcare.gov — they have been instructed that state Medicaid agencies can’t screen it, either. This isn’t an administrative shift of the state screening processes, it’s the forbidding of state screening processes.
 
We already know what little concern Healthcare.gov itself has for the validity of applicant information. The site employs the “honor system” for income, the most important piece of data. Also, as previously reported at PJ Media, the Medicaid side of Healthcare.gov allows anyone on Earth to secure at least 90 days of Medicaid with just two easily forged documents and a lie about being a legal alien.
 
The security bar is even lower for entrance into one of the new state “Medicaid/voter roll” databases. In fact, it’s non-existent: apply for Medicaid as a citizen, you’re going to end up in your state’s new “Medicaid/voter roll” database.
 
And the state is forbidden from checking the application’s validity.
 
————————-
 
This development represents an endpoint, with identifiable products of those six federal decisions. The products are:
 •Fifty unscreened databases, accessible to all, of identifying information of likely Democratic voters.
 •Fifty databases of likely Democratic voters, which automatically mail voter registration forms and required “opt-out” forms to each applicant.
 
What is the rational result of these two final products following their implementation?
 •The Democratic Party exploiting a federal law passed without a single Republican vote, a law that mandates citizen participation, a law that mandates citizens purchase a product to sustain the law financially, to produce an unbeatable tool to utilize for winning elections.
 •Bad actors within the Democratic Party, both within and outside of government, using this tool to easily commit voter fraud.
 •An organized entity hostile to the United States exploiting the massive security holes created by this Democratic law to flood the Medicaid rolls with fraudulent enrollees, rendering the massive program database unusable.
 •An organized entity hostile to the United States exploiting the massive security holes created by this Democratic law to flood the voter rolls with fraudulent identities, rendering the administration of elections impossible.
 
To employ an example from our prior article on fraudulent 90-day Medicaid enrollments:
 1.Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, from a computer in Pakistan, can tell Healthcare.gov that his income this year is zero.
 2.He will be directed to the Medicaid side of the website, where he can claim to be an American citizen temporarily living abroad.
 3.He can enter the address of his local post office.
 4.Al-Zawahiri will have himself a voter registration card arrive shortly.
 5.He can instruct his millions of supporters to do the same.
 
If Healthcare.gov was actually working, al-Qaeda could get that done by the weekend.
 
——————
 
How did the Obama administration accomplish this? Where’s the paper trail? Aren’t there established processes for the development and implementation of rules and regulations applying to a federal bill, and aren’t all of those deliberations required to be publicly released?
 
Yes. But in perhaps the Obama administration’s worst “fumble,” they bypassed just about the entire rule-issuance process.
 

Decision #7: Breaking All the Rules
 
In Part Two of this article, to be published following the Thanksgiving holiday, we will discuss how the federal government’s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, acted in a precedence-shattering, secretive manner in issuing orders to state Medicaid agencies regarding how to construct the databases.
 
We will also discuss the massive security holes created by the allowance of “telephonic signature,” and the secretaries of State who were left completely in the dark.
 
We will link, post, and discuss the paper trail — and who was involved.
 
And we will discuss the George Soros-funded Demos organization, which helped push the “opt-out” approach to Motor Voter, and which happened to be one of the few entities that had any knowledge of the new databases.
 
Indeed, they happened to have enough knowledge regarding the databases to prepare and publish a report containing state-by-state strategies for taking advantage of them.

Title: CA court says CA Sec. State Bowen must accept signatures
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2014, 06:15:43 AM

http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/01/02/court-says-secretary-of-state-cannot-refuse-to-allow-counting-of-ballot-measure-signatures/

Title: Friends of Michelle dumped for Donors to Baraq
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 14, 2014, 08:13:58 AM

HealthCare.gov: Michelle's friends out, Obama campaign donors in. 
Published by: Herman Cain

Change you can believe in.

President Obama always finds someone other than himself to blame when things go wrong, and of course he especially likes to blame private-sector corporations. So never mind that CGI Federal, whose senior executive Toni Townes-Whitley was a college classmate of Michelle Obama's, was hired by the Obama Administration to build HealthCare.gov.  Nothing here is the White House's fault, ever, by definition, and now we learn that CGI Federal is being fired.

After spending all of that money they’ve now come to the conclusion that CGI Federal can’t get the job done. I guess that could make for some awkward conversation at Michelle's next class reunion.

You know who they’re gonna hire instead? They're hiring Accenture, which oh by the way just happened to contribute $280,000 to Obama's re-election campaign. I don't think they wanted me to tell you that, but I can't un-say it now! Sorry, Mr. President.

Now here’s what I know about IT projects, because as many of you know I've worked on my share of them. If CGI Federal has messed it up so badly that they can’t fix it, Accenture is going to have to start all over. They’re not going to be able to go in and take somebody else’s code and fix it. No one in IT does that. It’s gonna require a do-over.

So be ready because more delays and more excuses are coming down the road. It's inevitable. In all my years working in IT, I was never given a project where I was supposed to take somebody else’s code or system design and go in and fix it. You have to start over, and that’s what Accenture is going to do.

So Michelle's friends are out, Barack's contributors are in, and it pays to be connected but it doesn't pay to go shopping for health insurance on HealthCare.gov, because the darn thing still doesn't work.

The Barack Obama presidency. Making your life better through government.

Title: Team Obama gets way to silence against Tea Party in new spending law.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 18, 2014, 04:17:01 AM

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304603704579324783339931114

Title: Dark Money
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2014, 05:57:10 PM

What say we to this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/21/citizens-united-anniversary_n_4635014.html

Title: If we don't like the voters we have, we'll let in some new ones
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 22, 2014, 03:33:07 PM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/18/new-federal-ruling-forbids-states-checking-voters-/

Title: Re: Dark Money
Post by: G M on January 22, 2014, 03:55:17 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2014, 05:57:10 PM

What say we to this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/21/citizens-united-anniversary_n_4635014.html

It's obvious that's why president Romney won. Right?

Title: CA vote not so reliable or transparent
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 27, 2014, 05:06:14 AM

http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/01/26/officials-admit-california-voting-process-neither-transparent-or-reliable/

Title: Mukasey in the WSJ: The Criminal Vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 17, 2014, 04:32:20 AM

By
Michael B. Mukasey
Updated Feb. 14, 2014 6:35 p.m. ET

There is a worthwhile debate to be had over whether state laws that disenfranchise felons should be changed or even eliminated. There can be an interesting discussion of how the history of such laws affects that debate. But you would not have known that from Eric Holder's treatment of the subject in a Feb. 10 speech at the Georgetown Law Center in Washington.

The U.S. attorney general told us that statistics can be read to show that felon disenfranchisement laws actually promote recidivism. He said that such laws, which vary from state to state, are rooted in outdated notions going back to colonial days (when no one did any voting). He said that they were used during Reconstruction intentionally, and have been used since (whether intentionally or not is left hanging in the air) to deny the vote to blacks—who make up a larger percentage of those convicted of felonies than they do of the general population.

The statistical argument derives from a recent study in Florida that showed a lower recidivism rate for felons whose right to vote had been restored than for those whose right hadn't. However, there is more going on here.

Florida has had, and indeed has broadened, a system that requires felons to go through an application process before their voting rights are restored. Obviously, those who are motivated to navigate such a process self-select as a group less likely to repeat their crimes. Suggesting that the automatic restoration of voting rights to all felons would lower recidivism is rather like suggesting that we can raise the incomes of all college students if we automatically grant them a college degree—because statistics show that people with college degrees have higher incomes than those without them.

The history suggested by the attorney general is just as deeply flawed. A clue to the flaw lies in his failure to call for a federal law barring state felon disenfranchisement statutes. Why would an administration given to bold legislative action at the federal level—given to bold action even without legislation—shrink from calling for such action here?
Enlarge Image

United States Attorney General Eric Holder Reuters

The omission becomes less curious when one considers that the history of felon disenfranchisement statutes is tied up intimately in constitutional history. Most particularly, it is tied up with the history of what are known as the Reconstruction amendments: the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution—the very amendments that ended slavery and set out the basic guarantees of equality for all under state law.

Abolitionists, viewed at the time as radicals, embraced what has been called a philosophy of formal equality. They not only insisted on the liberation and enfranchisement of former slaves, but also supported the disenfranchisement of criminals, rebels and other wrongdoers.

In its first section, the 14th Amendment guarantees due process and equal protection to the residents of all states. Yet its second section directs that states which deny the right to vote to any male citizens over the age of 21 will lose electors for president and vice president (in proportion that those denied the right bear to the whole number of such citizens)—except when such denial is "for participation in rebellion, or other crime."

The Supreme Court has held that this apparent recognition of the legitimacy of felon disenfranchisement in the 14th Amendment insulates the practice against constitutional attack. Even the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude generally, carves out an exception "for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted."

That view, to be sure, has its critics, and their arguments are worth considering. For example, they argue that it is one thing to say that states cannot be denied electors for disenfranchising criminals, and quite another to say that the practice otherwise passes muster.

They note that the 14th Amendment's accommodation of gender-based voting distinction—using the population of 21-year-old male citizens as the measure—itself has been overtaken by history. Still, a fair reply would be that it took a constitutional amendment, the 19th, to do it.

The historical evidence suggests that even Reconstruction progressives saw the 14th Amendment's reference to gender as a political necessity and believed that the crime exception was principled. The concern that former slaves would be disenfranchised for trivial offenses was dealt with in the Military Reconstruction Act of 1867, which confined the sanction to felonies—serious crimes.

Rather than deal directly with the evidence, both statistical and historical, Mr. Holder put the issue squarely in terms of race: Because blacks stand convicted of crimes in greater numbers than their proportion of the population would dictate, the effect on them of felon disenfranchisement statutes is disproportionately high; that disproportion is unjust, and the laws should be repealed. The attorney general proposes substituting for current laws and practice what is essentially a transactional standard implicit in the phrase paying one's debt to society: Once the sentence has been served, the fine paid, it is time to make it—as a cleanup-company slogan says—like it never even happened.

Mr. Holder does not urge that we go as far as the states of Maine and Vermont, which bar disenfranchisement on any basis and thus permit convicts to vote from jail (assuming their residency requirements are otherwise in order). But neither does he display anything but contempt for the notion that there is a moral taint that attaches to a felony conviction—a taint that should require that one at least show some brief period of law-abiding existence before full readmission to the polity.

This failure actually hurts his case, because it invites cynicism about his motives. Thus a report in the Washington Post GHC +0.07% ended by citing an academic study showing that if disenfranchised felons had voted in the 2000 election, Al Gore would have been president. That may be true, but it probably doesn't help the attorney general's argument as much as sticking to the facts might have.

Mr. Mukasey served as U.S. attorney general (2007-09) and as a U.S. district judge for the Southern District of New York (1988-2006).

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud: Data sharing between govt and Dem campaigns
Post by: DougMacG on February 19, 2014, 09:28:49 AM

James O'Keefe exposes Texas Dems taking government data and using it for partisan, get out the vote operations.

Who has been making that allegation here?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXKwQI_0kDI[/youtube]

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/02/19/Exclusive-OKeefe-Busts-Battleground-Texas-Voter-Registration-Scheme
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXKwQI_0kDI

The footage shows Battleground Texas volunteer Jennifer Longoria saying the group uses the phone numbers from voter registration forms in later efforts to boost turnout on election day.

Texas Election Code prohibits the use of, or even the copying of, phone numbers provided by individuals registering to vote.

“Every time we register somebody to vote, we keep their name, address, phone number,” Longoria said.

The video also shows volunteers calling to boost turnout for Wendy Davis's gubernotorial bid.

The new revelations are likely to add to concerns about an apparent culture of data sharing among Democrat-aligned political and nonprofit organizations.

Title: Tin hat or true tragedy?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2014, 01:02:23 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/obamas-voter-id-scam-is-busted/

Title: Re: Tin hat or true tragedy?
Post by: G M on February 25, 2014, 02:44:20 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2014, 01:02:23 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/obamas-voter-id-scam-is-busted/

True  crime.

Title: Re: Tin hat or true tragedy?
Post by: DougMacG on February 25, 2014, 05:42:55 PM

Quote from: G M on February 25, 2014, 02:44:20 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2014, 01:02:23 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/obamas-voter-id-scam-is-busted/

True  crime.

Try entering a Dem event without 'Voter ID' !

Data-sharing between government agencies and the campaign completes the trifecta of 2012 election scandals, along with IRS targeting and voter fraud.  That doesn't count the ugliest part, Candy Crowley and her debate assist on Benghazi or the most blatant part of election stealing, lie to their face and repeat the lie until everyone has it:  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/  Other than all that, I thought it was a fair contest.

Title: Who is your sugar daddy?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 03, 2014, 11:57:13 AM

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/371275/biggest-all-time-donors-american-politics-are-jim-geraghty

Title: Majoirty of largest donors are unions
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 06, 2014, 02:21:37 AM

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10202334772388667&set=a.1305462074625.2043820.1172722410&type=1&theater

Title: 6100 dead voters in Nassau County, NY
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2014, 02:52:30 PM

http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/6-100-dead-people-on-nassau-voter-rolls-newsday-analysis-finds-1.6349860

Title: Voter fraud in Florida. Not a peep of this in MSM. Nada.
Post by: ccp on March 19, 2014, 05:24:39 PM

I don't know if anyone would recall I asked how can we find voter fraud if we don't ID people who are voting?  How would anyone really know if they are who they claim or even if they are entitled to vote?   This is what I mean:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/illegal-aliens-non-citizens-caught-voting-florida-vast-numbers/

Like Peter King asking for any evidence of unethical use of data acquired by the NSA.   "Not one shred of evidence" he  loves to shout.
So  I'll ask again.  How would any of us know?  How could we know?  How could anyone prove such a thing?  Good luck.

Crimes are committed all day long.   Smart criminals just do it in ways no one can see.   Especially true when no one is looking.  Or no one really cares.  Or those few who do an easily be persuaded to keep their mouths shut.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on March 28, 2014, 09:21:18 AM

Harry Reid used campaign funds to give granddaughter $17,000
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Harry-Reid-Reid-Granddaughter-Reid-Slush-Fund-Elisabeth-Ryan/2014/03/27/id/562124/

Isn't that the same crime that sent James Traficant to prison?  (A Democrat who ripped the Clinton administration ruthlessly in the 1990s.)

Harry Reid is still majority Leader.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on March 28, 2014, 09:25:32 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on March 28, 2014, 09:21:18 AM

Harry Reid used campaign funds to give granddaughter $17,000
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Harry-Reid-Reid-Granddaughter-Reid-Slush-Fund-Elisabeth-Ryan/2014/03/27/id/562124/

Isn't that the same crime that sent James Traficant to prison?  (A Democrat who ripped the Clinton administration ruthlessly in the 1990s.)

Harry Reid is still majority Leader.

I'm sure Eric Holder will get right on it, as soon as the IRS investigation is finished...

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2014, 09:27:45 AM

While those fit here and are quite pertinent, please note from here forward we now have a thread dedicated to corruption.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: G M on March 28, 2014, 09:29:58 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2014, 09:27:45 AM

While those fit here and are quite pertinent, please note from here forward we now have a thread dedicated to corruption.

Harry Reid and corruption probably deserves its' own thread...

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on April 02, 2014, 06:06:27 PM

Anyone care to guess which party these frauds voted for?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/374882/nc-state-board-finds-more-35k-incidents-double-voting-2012-andrew-johnson

Title: FL voter role case
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2014, 01:28:28 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/03/us/in-florida-bid-to-cut-voter-rolls-is-set-back.html?emc=edit_th_20140403&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193&_r=0

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: ccp on April 03, 2014, 03:44:08 AM

"Bid to cut voter roles" is of course the way the NYT describes this.

It wouldn't surprise me if 1,000,000 voters nationwide are fraudulent.

It can't even be measured.

Title: Massive voter fraud in NC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2014, 03:40:02 PM

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/04/massive-voter-fraud-in-north-carolina-35570-voters-with-same-last-name-and-dob-voted-in-two-states/

Title: CA voter fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 16, 2014, 04:59:26 AM

http://capoliticalnews.com/2014/04/15/voter-fraud-easy-in-california-proof/

Title: Electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 16, 2014, 05:19:06 AM

second post

http://dickmorris.rallycongress.com/15119/reject-proposal-to-bypass-electoral-college/

Would someone be so kind (BD are you out there?) as to give the argument for the electoral college?

Title: Re: Electoral college
Post by: DougMacG on April 18, 2014, 11:35:24 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 16, 2014, 05:19:06 AM

second post
http://dickmorris.rallycongress.com/15119/reject-proposal-to-bypass-electoral-college/
Would someone be so kind (BD are you out there?) as to give the argument for the electoral college?

Bringing this request forward with a few thoughts. 

a. The central point and purpose of the constitution is to define limits on all rule and majority rule in particular.   Division of powers and super-majorities required on various important things are examples of this.
b. We are a union of states so the is in each contest in each state for who we want to empower as chief executive.
c. Because of the EC, a distribution of support is required to win.
c. In a close election like happened in Florida 2000, imagine that recount fiasco happening simultaneously in all precincts of all 50 states.

To those who oppose the electoral college I would ask, do you oppose the Senate and the Supreme Court as well.  Both are also designed to potentially deny or delay the majority their will.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 18, 2014, 01:55:43 PM

"b. We are a union of states so the is in each contest in each state for who we want to empower as chief executive."

EXCELLENT soundbite!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, corruption etc.
Post by: DougMacG on April 19, 2014, 10:30:34 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 18, 2014, 01:55:43 PM

"b. We are a union of states so the is in each contest in each state for who we want to empower as chief executive."

EXCELLENT soundbite!

Cleaning up the wording: 

We are a union of states so there is a contest in each state for who we want to empower as chief executive. 

Then the states's choices are weighted by size of their populations to balance the states' interests with proportional representation of/by/for the people. 

Not a perfect system but better than all the alternatives.

I am also curious what Bigdog thinks of the wisdom of the EC.   

Title: More voters than adult residents , , , what could go wrong?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 23, 2014, 04:59:47 PM

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/131680-triple-facepalm-four-counties-alabama-active-voters-adult-residents/

Title: Re: More voters than adult residents , , , what could go wrong?
Post by: G M on April 23, 2014, 05:53:42 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 23, 2014, 04:59:47 PM

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/131680-triple-facepalm-four-counties-alabama-active-voters-adult-residents/

Republicans just Hate dead people. Haters!

Title: WSJ: Political Fraud about Voter Fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 28, 2014, 11:14:14 AM

Political Fraud About Voter Fraud
The president's selective statistics are red meat to supporters, but still bogus.
By Robert D. Popper
Updated April 27, 2014 6:25 p.m. ET

The Obama administration has been ramping up its rhetoric about the evil of voter identification as part of the run-up to the midterm elections. In January, Attorney General Eric Holder told MSNBC that voter fraud "simply does not exist to the extent that would warrant" voter ID laws, adding that many who favor such measures do so in order to "depress the vote." Vice President Joe Biden claimed in February that new voter ID laws in North Carolina, Alabama and Texas were motivated by "hatred" and "zealotry."

In an April 11 speech to Al Sharpton's National Action Network, President Obama recited statistics purporting to show that voter fraud was extremely rare. The "real voter fraud," he said, "is people who try to deny our rights by making bogus arguments about voter fraud."

These arguments themselves are bogus. Consider the two studies from which Mr. Obama drew his statistics. The first, which he said "found only 10 cases of alleged in-person voter impersonation in 12 years," is a 2012 report issued by News21, an Arizona State University project.


The News21 website explains that students "under the direction of journalism professionals" sent public records requests to state and federal officials asking for information about voting fraud cases. The project acknowledged significant gaps in its data. Several states made no meaningful response. Counties argued that "public records laws don't require officials to respond at all." Election officials and state attorneys general admitted that they did not track voter fraud. The Justice Department referred News21 to its 93 local U.S. attorneys but, the website reported, "many of those offices, in turn, referred News21 back to the department."

Crucially, News21 noted that "nearly all the data" it received had "some vital piece of information that had been requested specifically but that was missing." Responses lacked "important details about each case—from whether the person was convicted or charged to the circumstances of the alleged fraud to the names of those involved."

Given these limitations, it is hard to believe any valid conclusions about voter fraud can be drawn from this study.

Mr. Obama also cited an "analysis" showing that only 40 voters "were indicted for fraud" from 2002 to 2005. That number is drawn from an Aug. 2, 2005, Justice Department news release—which describes the department's "Ballot Access and Voting Integrity" initiative—and from a related list of federal cases. The release mentioned 120 pending election-fraud investigations, 89 prosecutions and 52 convictions.

It is preposterous to cite that news release as proof that voter fraud is rare. The release contains no information concerning prosecutions in any of the 50 state court systems for violations of state voting laws, even though these are far more common than prosecutions for violations of federal voting laws. Even as a list of federal offenses, the news releasee is inadequate. Justice did not claim to have compiled all convictions, prosecutions or investigations—let alone all known or unsolved cases—involving federal voter fraud. The release was only a list of legal actions relating to what was then a three-year-old initiative.

More generally, judging voter fraud by counting criminal proceedings is misguided. For any crime, convictions are a fraction of prosecutions, which are a fraction of investigations, which are a fraction of known offenses, which are, in turn, a fraction of committed crimes. This is even more likely to be true of voter fraud, which is often a low enforcement priority—as News21 confirmed, many states do not even track it. Moreover, the fraud may be all but impossible to investigate or prove if it is carried out successfully.

We do know that this country's decentralized system of election administration offers abundant opportunities for fraud. For example, a February 2012 report by the Pew Research Center on the States, "Inaccurate, Costly, and Inefficient: Evidence That America's Voter Registration System Needs an Upgrade," found that 1.8 million deceased registrants were listed as active voters, and that 2.75 million voters had active registrations in more than one state.

In court papers filed last year, Virginia noted that a limited cross-check with 21 other participating states—which did not include California, Texas or New York—showed that 17,000 voters were registered in three or more states. Imagine if the cross-check were extended to all 50 states and if Virginia's results were typical.

Voter fraud, whatever its extent, can matter. Many elections, particularly local elections, are decided by slim margins. In January, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted released remarkable statistics showing that 35 local races and eight local issues were decided in the Buckeye State in 2013 by one vote or by using the state's designated procedure, such as coin-flipping, to break a tie.

If the available evidence suggests that the amount of voter fraud is understated, the evidence that voter-ID laws suppress voting is nonexistent. In elections held after new voter-ID laws were enacted in Georgia and Tennessee, for instance, minority turnout either was stable or increased. In Tennessee, the turnout among Hispanics of voting age rose to 34.7% in 2012 from 19.2% in 2008, according to surveys by the U.S. Census Bureau, even though a strict new photo ID law was in effect in 2012. Turnout among blacks of voting age declined slightly, to 57.4% in 2012 from 58.1% in 2008, but this was within the Census survey's margin of error. In both years, black turnout was around 4% higher than the comparable white turnout.

When it comes to the subject of voter suppression, it is revealing that Mr. Obama avoided statistics earlier this month and relied entirely on conditional verbs: voters "could be turned away from the polls . . . may suddenly be told they can no longer vote . . . may learn that without a document like a passport or a birth certificate, they can't register."

The president's speech may have been red meat for his base and good for fundraising. But it failed to engage the serious issues relating to election integrity. The coming months don't promise an improvement.

Mr. Popper is a senior attorney for Judicial Watch and served as the deputy chief of the voting section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice from 2008-13.

Title: must be magic!
Post by: G M on April 28, 2014, 12:38:54 PM

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/131680-triple-facepalm-four-counties-alabama-active-voters-adult-residents/

Title: Here it comes: "Save the political system"
Post by: ccp on May 01, 2014, 08:23:15 AM

By making voting mandatory!
Voting is a right and a privilege.  Not a taxable offense if you don't vote.   First the comparison to jury duty is not equivalent.  People are screened before sitting on a jury.
Second, can anyone imagine the fraud if we all start voting from smartphones and other gadgets?  Third there is NO question this about progressives getting more of people who are big government advocates to dish them more money to vote.   All this will do is increase the centralization of power even more.  This will not fix the "system".  It will result in even more of our rights being taken away.   Fourth micro-targeting will not go away as suggested.   The battle for ideas will not go away.  Manipulating voters views will not go away.  Indeed it will likely and inevitably serve to have more ignorant people vote on emotional issues or whoever promises the most benefits to them.
Fifth, what if some people simply do not want to vote?  Now they commit a criminal offense?  This is purely a big moneyed Democrat trying to con us to coercing more Democrat votes.    (Didn't the napster punk steal the idea from someone else?)   These silicon guys may or may not be great business people but some still seem like punks to me.

The time should never come for this:   

****The time has come to make you vote

By Matt Bai 6 hours ago Yahoo News

Voting booths are set up in Waterloo, Iowa. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Word is that Sean Parker, the 34-year-old Web visionary who built Napster and then helped grow Facebook, is the latest billionaire with an idea to save the political system, or at least a lot of money in search of an idea to save the political system. Parker and other investors are said to be planning a startup aimed at organizing disaffected voters. They've hired some well-connected Washington consultants, because that's what you do when you really want to stick it to the status quo.

This isn't new space, exactly. A few years ago, some moderate operatives in both parties got together and started something called "No Labels," which sends a lot of admonishing petitions to Congress about partisanship and which has the backing of politicians who like to expound on the ugliness of our politics but don't actually want to do anything too controversial.

The truth is that incivility is more a symptom than a sickness; the root cause of our problem is the antiquated system by which we choose our leaders. And if Parker and his high-tech friends really want to "disrupt" our political stalemate in the way they disrupted record labels, then they should consider something more drastic than urging people to get involved. Maybe it's time we coerced them.

Let's first consider the situation in which we find ourselves. Once again this year, the two parties that dominate our politics will conduct parallel campaigns aimed at two distinct subsets of Americans, rather than engaging in any actual debate. One side will scream about liberal overreach and the other will scream about conservative greed and bigotry, and whoever arouses the most passion in their most reliable voters (generally the party out of power at the moment) will probably win.

It wasn't like this when we were a nation that joined and trusted institutions, including political parties. But now that fewer and fewer Americans feel compelled to support their local parties or even register as affiliated, primaries are dominated by an ever dwindling number of hardcore activists, and they're deciding options for the rest of us. And since more than half of voting-age Americans will find those options so uninspiring that they would rather stay home than vote this November, the vast majority of time and money on both sides will be focused on motivating voters who already agree with them.

There are some promising reform ideas out there. Californians have had some success with nonpartisan elections, which bypass the traditional primary system. There's a lot of talk about curtailing all the outside money flowing into campaigns, too – though the Supreme Court is unlikely to cooperate. Taking the responsibility for redistricting away from politicians is a no-brainer for everyone but the parties themselves, which continue to resist it.

But I recently heard a more radical argument from my friend Jonathan Cowan, who runs Third Way, the centrist Democratic think tank. Cowan has been kicking around the idea of compulsory voting – or, in other words, a government mandate just like the one that now forces you to buy health care insurance, except it would require everybody to vote.   

I first heard a version of this argument back in 2008, when I gave a series of talks in Australia. The Australians have compulsory voting and they're quite proud of themselves for it, and some of their politicians had fun engaging me in a spirited debate about whose democracy was really more of a model for the world, since they could boast 100 percent voter participation in every election.

The concept struck me then as essentially un-American. After all, as I argued to my Australian friends, part of being a free country is having the freedom to abstain. And anyway, as I rudely pointed out, a country whose Parliament can technically be dissolved by the British queen can hardly go around calling itself a democracy, much less a perfect one.

But Cowan makes a compelling case that compulsory voting in federal elections would actually be the most elegant way to revitalize our democracy overnight, without having to chase a series of piecemeal reforms in dozens of legislatures. Think about it: If voter participation suddenly went from, say, 40 percent in an off-year election to 95 percent (assuming there will always be some slackers and protesters who defy the law and risk the penalty), then the modern industry of voter turnout operations would magically go away.

No more arcane microtargeting and database wizardry. No more overwrought direct mail playing to the most irrational fears of gun owners or xenophobes. No more "base elections" where the only message is that the other guy is a Satan worshipper who will call forth the horsemen of the apocalypse if you let him win.

Suddenly candidates would have to think about ideas again – about how to persuade all of these skeptical, unaffiliated voters that they actually have a plan to govern. The parties would almost certainly open their primaries to independents, if not move entirely to nonpartisan elections, because it would be the only way to make sure their nominees had broad enough appeal to win. Candidates would have to be more responsive to the broad electorate than to the tiny number of wealthy contributors who currently help them get out the vote.

You'd have to decide, of course, whether to tax people who refuse to vote or whether to treat it as a criminal offense, like refusing to register for the draft. (Probably the former, practically speaking.) You'd have to make sure voters could still come to the polls and formally abstain, so there's no violation of free speech. And you'd have to make it a lot easier to vote than it is now, which means extending the voting period well beyond a single day and letting people e-vote from home.

(And before all you professors send me mail again telling me how the Internet can't even protect your credit card, much less protect your vote from Chinese hackers, let me just say: Yes, I know, online voting can never be as failsafe as, say, the days when we trusted some guy in Chicago to count up a box full of paper ballots and take them in his trunk to the county office. But I think we can figure it out.)

You could argue that Parker and his fellow investors would be wasting their time to campaign for something so hard to achieve. It's not entirely clear to scholars who've looked at the issue whether you could impose compulsory voting by statute, which would be pretty hard to do, or whether the Supreme Court would ultimately require a constitutional amendment, which might be nearly impossible.

But there's a value to starting a national conversation about ways to modernize the electoral system, which is long past due. And it's hard to imagine that even Silicon Valley's brightest minds can build a real movement of unaffiliated voters without having at least one big, serious proposal to rally them around.

Is compulsory voting un-American? No more so, now that I think about it, than making people serve on juries for their own civic good – which everyone complains about but no one really resents. I find the argument persuasive, which is more than you can say for our campaigns

Title: Al Sharpton calls for voter ID
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 17, 2014, 04:20:47 PM

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/16/al-sharpton-demands-voter-id/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 17, 2014, 06:50:33 PM

They have no problem when their fellow Democrats win ridiculous awards.   Every other week I see Hillary winning some award which is really a thinly veiled bribe to the next potential President.   :x

I heard no disclaimer from Shapman about George Herbert Bush winning an award recently at the Kennedy Center for you know what - his bravery at raising taxes against his campaign promise.   For THAT the "F" left has an award for him.  Not any other service he provied the country his entire life.  Just for raising taxes. 
And worse, he goes and "graciously" accepts the phony award.   The Bushes are great Americans.   Their politics suck.

 :x

Title: Michele Bachman and hubby being investigated for campaign finance law violations
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 21, 2014, 05:05:20 AM

http://www.politicususa.com/2013/09/06/michele-bachmann-congress-prison-doj-launches-investigation.html

Title: Rules? We don't need no stinkin' rules-- Conyers gets on ballot.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2014, 04:46:03 PM

Rep. John Conyers Jr., Longtime Lawmaker, Allowed on Ballot
Representative John Conyers Jr. narrowly escaped a political fiasco on Friday when a federal judge granted him a place on the November ballot, allowing him to survive a campaign misstep that left him hundreds of valid signatures short of the number required for his re-election petition.
Mr. Conyers, a Democrat who was first elected in 1964, found his place on the ballot at risk because his campaign failed to collect 1,000 valid signatures on petitions for re-election. What initially appeared to be a minor misstep quickly became a grievous error that threatened the career of one of the most senior members of Congress, who is a founder of the Congressional Black Caucus and the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.
READ MORE »
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/24/us/judge-rules-conyers-can-be-on-ballot.html?emc=edit_na_20140523

Title: Re: Rules? We don't need no stinkin' rules-- Conyers gets on ballot.
Post by: G M on May 23, 2014, 10:15:59 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2014, 04:46:03 PM

Rep. John Conyers Jr., Longtime Lawmaker, Allowed on Ballot
Representative John Conyers Jr. narrowly escaped a political fiasco on Friday when a federal judge granted him a place on the November ballot, allowing him to survive a campaign misstep that left him hundreds of valid signatures short of the number required for his re-election petition.
Mr. Conyers, a Democrat who was first elected in 1964, found his place on the ballot at risk because his campaign failed to collect 1,000 valid signatures on petitions for re-election. What initially appeared to be a minor misstep quickly became a grievous error that threatened the career of one of the most senior members of Congress, who is a founder of the Congressional Black Caucus and the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.
READ MORE »
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/24/us/judge-rules-conyers-can-be-on-ballot.html?emc=edit_na_20140523

Laws are for the little people.

Title: POTH on Conyers
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 24, 2014, 07:35:17 AM

Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan narrowly escaped a political fiasco on Friday when a federal judge granted him a place on the Democratic primary ballot in August, allowing him to survive a campaign misstep that left him hundreds of valid signatures short on his petitions for re-election.

Mr. Conyers, a Detroit Democrat who was first elected in 1964, had found his re-election prospects at risk when his campaign failed to collect the required 1,000 valid signatures. At least two workers collecting them were not properly registered to vote, another violation of state law. What initially appeared to be a minor mistake quickly became a grievous error that threatened the career of one of the most senior members of Congress, who is a founder of the Congressional Black Caucus and the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.


In his ruling on Friday, Judge Matthew F. Leitman of Federal District Court said that the “failure to comply with the registration statute was the result of good-faith mistakes.”

“They believed they were in compliance with the statute,” the judge wrote.

Judge Leitman added that the First Amendment rights of Mr. Conyers and the signature collectors working for his campaign were “severely burdened” under the current law.

The news, which arrived after a day of anxious waiting, was met with relief by the congressman’s supporters, said Bert Johnson, a state senator who is running Mr. Conyers’s campaign. Mr. Conyers, who is 85 and running for his 26th term, was “pretty happy” with the outcome, Mr. Johnson said.

Just hours earlier, the Michigan secretary of state, Ruth Johnson, had rejected an appeal from the campaign.

But after Judge Leitman’s decision, Mr. Conyers “had a nice smile,” Mr. Johnson said. “We believe it’s a very big win for the voters. It puts one of the more ugly parts of the campaign process behind us.”

The battle for Mr. Conyers began weeks ago, when it was discovered that of the more than 1,000 signatures his campaign had collected, hundreds of the names belonged to people who were not residents of his district or were not registered to vote.

Even more damaging was the revelation that at least two petition circulators were not qualified under state election law because they were not registered voters. In the end, Mr. Conyers was left with only 592 valid signatures.

That put Mr. Conyers in a precarious position. He quickly appealed to the Wayne County clerk, Cathy M. Garrett, a Democrat, who reviewed the signatures and reluctantly confirmed that he was not eligible to be on the ballot.

Ms. Garrett’s decision left Mr. Conyers with several options. He promised that if necessary, he would begin a write-in campaign, banking on his widespread name recognition in Detroit. There was some precedent for success by that route: Mike Duggan, the mayor of Detroit, was elected last year in a write-in campaign after he failed to win a place on the ballot because of an invalid registration.

Mr. Conyers’s lawyers mounted a challenge in federal court, saying Wednesday that the judge should throw out a state law requiring petition collectors to be registered to vote, arguing that the law violated the First Amendment. They cited an appeals court decision from 2008, Nader v. Blackwell, that struck down a similar law in Ohio.

On Wednesday, Judge Leitman seemed to struggle with the decision, calling it “an exceptionally difficult case.”

A lawyer for Mr. Conyers, John D. Pirich, said during the hearing on Wednesday that it would be “pretty outrageous” to make Mr. Conyers pay for technicalities involving the voter registrations of two signature collectors.

Experts in election law said Judge Leitman’s favorable ruling was not surprising considering the case’s similarities to Nader v. Blackwell, in which a panel of judges agreed that imposing voter registration requirements on signature circulators in Ohio was an impermissible restriction on political speech.

The primary will take place Aug. 5, with Mr. Conyers by far the most recognizable name on the ballot in a heavily Democratic district that includes Detroit. His most significant challenge comes from the Rev. Horace Sheffield, the pastor of New Destiny Christian Fellowship Church, whose family is well known in Detroit.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 24, 2014, 09:55:13 PM

Some animals are more equal than others.

Title: FL. voter fraud
Post by: G M on May 26, 2014, 08:15:04 AM

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/03/19/fraud-local-nbc-investigation-discovers-dozens-of-illegal-voters-in-florida-n1811547

Title: 6.9 million multiple voters in 28 states
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 30, 2014, 11:03:55 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/u-s-election-corruption-6-9-million-multiple-voters-in-28-states-report-finds/ 

Title: Study on effects of Voter ID laws
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 02, 2014, 05:20:42 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/01/critics-who-claim-voter-id-laws-are-racist-wont-like-the-results-of-this-study/ 

Title: Re: Study on effects of Voter ID laws
Post by: G M on July 02, 2014, 07:21:10 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 02, 2014, 05:20:42 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/01/critics-who-claim-voter-id-laws-are-racist-wont-like-the-results-of-this-study/ 

The voter ID laws harm key dem voting groups, like dead people, illegal aliens and multiple voters.

Title: Re: Study on effects of Voter ID laws
Post by: DougMacG on July 02, 2014, 08:58:17 PM

Quote from: G M on July 02, 2014, 07:21:10 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 02, 2014, 05:20:42 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/01/critics-who-claim-voter-id-laws-are-racist-wont-like-the-results-of-this-study/ 

The voter ID laws harm key dem voting groups, like dead people, illegal aliens and multiple voters.

2.8 million Americans (that we know of) registered to vote in more than one place.
One in eight active registrations is invalid or inaccurate.
There are about 1.8 million dead people listed as active voters.
12 million registrations have errors serious enough to make it unlikely that mailings based on them will reach voters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/us/politics/us-voter-registration-rolls-are-in-disarray-pew-report-finds.html?_r=0

Trust, but verify. 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 03, 2014, 07:29:30 AM

Interesting this is in the NYT.  Probably page 555.  Interesting too is Maryland's proposal to allow online registration if one has a valid ID! 

As a physician I "sign" online a person's death certificate that is in NJ's records.  Would it be that hard to notify SS, Medicare, and Election departments of the person's death?

The Darn Government is driving hospitals and doctors nuts with our reporting requirements.  So what about them doing this?   

Title: Republican voter fraud
Post by: ccp on July 16, 2014, 06:09:39 PM

The lawyer for state Sen. Chris McDaniel announced at a press conference on Wednesday afternoon in Jackson, MS, that he has enough evidence to file for an official challenge of the election results, and will do so in the coming days.


“The million dollar question: What did we find? We found a lot,” Mitch Tyner, of Tyner Law Firm, said after he and McDaniel supporter state Sen. Michael Watson walked the press and McDaniel supporters at the press conference through how they have serious concerns with the election review process in Mississippi.


“We’ve heard it our entire lives in Mississippi,” Tyner said. “Votes are being bought. Ballot boxes are being stuffed. There are false affidavit ballots. There are invalid affidavit ballots. There are invalid absentee ballots—we’ve heard it all our lives. I’m 51 years old and it’s the first time I saw it up close and personal. It exists. We are committed to finding it and rooting it out and stopping it.”


Tyner thanked Sen. Watson for standing up against alleged voter fraud and said Watson “can do something about it in the next legislative session.”


Tyner walked those at the press conference through how the McDaniel campaign’s attorneys, especially Sen. Watson, have been arguing before various courts in the state for judges to order election officials in a variety of Mississippi’s 82 counties for orders that they open election materials up for inspection. Every time, Tyner noted, the judges have sided with Watson’s arguments and order election officials to open the materials up for McDaniel campaign review.


The campaign is asking the Mississippi Supreme Court to rule on the matter so that the poll books and other election materials can be opened up to the McDaniel campaign for no charge. “That’s the issue that we want to make sure that the Supreme Court rules on: that it doesn’t matter how much money you have, you still get to look at the poll books,” Tyner said.


Tyner walked reporters through the “categories of information we’ve been finding” next.


“There’s crossover votes, we know that,” Tyner said. “There’s illegal votes—all types of illegal votes going on, absentee problems, votes that were cast—we’re going as far as into the boxes to see if how many people signed in are the same number that were cast. You’re going to be astonished. They aren’t. It’s amazing. You’re going to see problem after problem after problem.”


Tyner then addressed how Sen. Thad Cochran’s campaign and its supporters have said there’s no evidence in public yet, so there’s nothing there. “Am I going to sit right here and try my case in the media and do a tit-for-tat with the Cochran campaign?” Tyner asked rhetorically. “‘We found this but it says that.’ I’m not going to do that. We’re going to be mature about this.”


Tyner promised that soon, when the campaign files its challenge, it will publish all the evidence for the public to see. “We’re going to put it all together in a complete package,” Tyner said. “I was really hoping we’d have it today. Monday, a week ago, I was sure we would. But I wasn’t sure we were going to run into this many problems. We’re going to get that together and at the same time we file a challenge, we’re going to give you a complete copy of it.”


Tyner also told the reporters that he’ll be providing a copy of the evidence to federal and state law enforcement officials as well. “We’re not only going to give it to you guys in the media, we’re also going to give a copy of it to the U.S. Attorney, to the Federal Election Commission, and we’re also going to give it to the Attorney General of the State of Mississippi,” Tyner said to cheers from McDaniel supporters at the press conference.


Tyner said that this is “much bigger than” just differences between Cochran and McDaniel.


“I praise Chris for not throwing in the towel,” Tyner said. “The conventional wisdom is out there. Everyone knows he was a very popular candidate and everyone knows he could have conceded and written his ticket for any office next year. But Chris McDaniel said, ‘no, I want to root out the problems. I want to integrity in this process, and if it destroys my political career so be it.’ That’s the kind of candidate we need for every elected office in Mississippi as well as inside the beltway.”



When local reporter Scott Simmons asked them if they have enough evidence to file a legal challenge of the election, Tyner replied: “Yes. There’s already enough evidence to file the challenge.”

When Simmons followed up to ask if that evidence is entirely ineligible crossover votes—Democrats who voted in the June 3 Democratic primary then in the June 24 GOP primary runoff—Tyner responded that he’s “not going to go into the specifics of everything, but crossover votes are a big part of our challenge.”

Title: McDaniels' request denied by Supreme Court of Mississippi
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 18, 2014, 08:16:45 AM

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/07/17/Mississippi-Supreme-Court-Rejects-McDaniel-s-Request-For-Access-To-Election-Records?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+July+18%2C+2014&utm_campaign=20140718_m121390411_Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+July+18%2C+2014&utm_term=Mor 

Title: IL judge blocks vote on term limits
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 27, 2014, 02:13:32 PM

https://termlimits.org/illinois-judges-blocks-citizens-voting-term-limits/ 

Title: Obama's Catalist Database
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 18, 2014, 12:24:23 PM

http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2014/09/17/obamas-catalist-database/?singlepage=true

Title: Voter Fraud indespensable to Obama strategy
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 25, 2014, 01:36:12 PM

http://www.dickmorris.com/voter-fraud-indispensable-element-obamas-grand-plan-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/

Title: requiring a simple photo ID is apparently discriminatory
Post by: ccp on October 21, 2014, 03:22:35 PM

Politics Home
 Midterm Elections
 Executive
 Senate
 House of Representatives
 Defense
 Judiciary
 Scandals
 


Supreme Court

Supreme Court allows Texas to enforce new voter ID law, sparking mixed reaction

Published October 18, 2014·
FoxNews.com


Feb. 26, 2014: An election official checks a voter's photo identification at an early voting polling site in Austin, Texas (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)

The Supreme Court said Saturday that Texas' new voter-ID law can remain in effect for the November election, sparking mixed reaction.

In a rare weekend announcement, a majority of the high court’s justices rejected an emergency request from the Justice Department and civil rights groups to prohibit Texas from requiring voters to produce certain forms of photo ID to cast ballots. Three justices dissented.

The law was struck down by a federal judge last week, but a federal appeals court had put that ruling on hold.

The judge found that roughly 600,000 voters, many of them black or Latino, could be turned away at the polls because they lack acceptable identification. Early voting in Texas begins Monday.

"We are pleased the Supreme Court has agreed that Texas' voter ID law should remain in effect,” the state’s Attorney General’s Office said. “The state will continue to defend the voter ID law and remains confident that the district court's misguided ruling will be overturned on the merits.”

The high court’s order was unsigned, as it typically is in these situations. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented, saying they would have left the district court decision in place.

"The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters," Ginsburg wrote in dissent.

The law sets out seven forms of approved ID -- a list that includes concealed handgun licenses but not college student IDs, which are accepted in other states with similar measures.

"Hundreds of thousands of eligible voters in Texas will (now) be unable to participate in November's election because Texas has erected an obstacle course designed to discourage voting,” said Sherrilyn Ifill, president and counsel for the NAACP’s Legal Defense Fund. “A federal court has found that the obstacles erected by Texas were designed to discriminate against black and Hispanic voters. This is an affront to our democracy. "

The 143-page opinion from U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos called the law an "unconstitutional burden on the right to vote" and the equivalent of a poll tax in finding that the Republican-led Texas Legislature purposely discriminated against minority voters in Texas.

Texas had urged the Supreme Court to let the state enforce voter ID at the polls in a court filing that took aim at the ruling by Ramos, an appointee of President Obama. Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican who's favored in the gubernatorial race, called Ramos' findings "preposterous" and accused the judge of ignoring evidence favorable to the state.

The defense fund, which is separate from the NAACP, presented testimony and oral arguments in the lower court trial.

“This battle isn’t yet over, said Natasha Korgaonkar, a lawyer for the group’s political arm.

Two years ago, the group and Justice Department joined other organizations in blocking the implementation of a photo-ID law in Texas.

The court had intervened in three other disputes in recent weeks over Republican-inspired restrictions on voting access. In Wisconsin, the justices blocked a voter ID law from being used in November. In North Carolina and Ohio, the justices allowed limits on same-day registration, early voting and provisional ballots to take or remain in effect.

Ginsburg said the Texas case was different from the clashes in North Carolina and Ohio because a federal judge held a full trial on the Texas election procedures and developed "an extensive record" finding the process discriminated against ballot access.

Texas has enforced its tough voter ID in elections since the Supreme Court in June 2013 effectively eliminated the heart of the Voting Rights Act, which had prevented Texas and eight other states with histories of discrimination from changing election laws without permission. Critics of the Texas measure, though, said the new ID requirement has not been used for an election for Congress and the Senate, or a high-turnout statewide election like the race for governor.

Ramos' issued her ruling on October 9. Five days later, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans put her decision on hold and cited a 2006 Supreme Court opinion that warned judges not to change the rules too close to Election Day.

The challengers in Texas said that the last time the Supreme Court allowed a voting law to be used in a subsequent election after it had been found to be unconstitutional was in 1982. That case from Georgia involved an at-large election system that had been in existence since 1911.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Title: Vote fraud Colorado
Post by: G M on October 22, 2014, 02:23:17 PM

http://pjmedia.com/blog/okeefe-video-voter-fraud-ground-zero-in-ghetto-aurora/?singlepage=true

Title: Techno vote fraud in Illinois-- guess to whose benefit , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2014, 05:39:01 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/22/calibration-error-changes-gop-votes-to-dem-in-illinois-county/

Title: Re: Techno vote fraud in Illinois-- guess to whose benefit , , ,
Post by: G M on October 22, 2014, 08:15:59 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2014, 05:39:01 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/10/22/calibration-error-changes-gop-votes-to-dem-in-illinois-county/

Saves them from having to manually stuff the ballot boxes.

Title: Could non-citizens decide the November election?
Post by: ccp on October 24, 2014, 06:10:30 PM

Democrats. If they can't convince enough voters just import them:

*****Could non-citizens decide the November election?

By Jesse Richman and David Earnest October 24 at 3:06 PM

 (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)

Could control of the Senate in 2014 be decided by illegal votes cast by non-citizens? Some argue that incidents of voting by non-citizens are so rare as to be inconsequential, with efforts to block fraud a screen for an agenda to prevent poor and minority voters from exercising the franchise, while others define such incidents as a threat to democracy itself. Both sides depend more heavily on anecdotes than data.

In a forthcoming article in the journal Electoral Studies, we bring real data from big social science survey datasets to bear on the question of whether, to what extent, and for whom non-citizens vote in U.S. elections. Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races.

Our data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Its large number of observations (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010) provide sufficient samples of the non-immigrant sub-population, with 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 CCES, we also attempted to match respondents to voter files so that we could verify whether they actually voted.

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Estimated Voter Turnout by Non-Citizens 
 2008 2010
Self reported and/or verified 38 (11.3%) 13 (3.5%)
Self reported and verified 5 (1.5%) N.A.
Adjusted estimate 21 (6.4%) 8 (2.2%)

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.
Advertisement



We also find that one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted.

An alternative approach to reducing non-citizen turnout might emphasize public information. Unlike other populations, including naturalized citizens, education is not associated with higher participation among non-citizens. In 2008, non-citizens with less than a college degree were significantly more likely to cast a validated vote, and no non-citizens with a college degree or higher cast a validated vote. This hints at a link between non-citizen voting and lack of awareness about legal barriers.

There are obvious limitations to our research, which one should take account of when interpreting the results. Although the CCES sample is large, the non-citizen portion of the sample is modest, with the attendant uncertainty associated with sampling error. We analyze only 828 self-reported non-citizens. Self-reports of citizen status might also be a source of error, although the appendix of our paper shows that the racial, geographic, and attitudinal characteristics of non-citizens (and non-citizen voters) are consistent with their self-reported status.

Another possible limitation is the matching process conducted by Catalyst to verify registration and turnout drops many non-citizen respondents who cannot be matched. Our adjusted estimate assumes the implication of a “registered” or “voted” response among those who Catalyst could not match is the same as for those whom it could. If one questions this assumption, one might focus only on those non-citizens with a reported and validated vote. This is the second line of the table.
Advertisement



Finally, extrapolation to specific state-level or district-level election outcomes is fraught with substantial uncertainty. It is obviously possible that non-citizens in California are more likely to vote than non-citizens in North Carolina, or vice versa. Thus, we are much more confident that non-citizen votes mattered for the Minnesota Senate race (a turnout of little more than one-tenth of our adjusted estimate is all that would be required) than that non-citizen votes changed the outcome in North Carolina.

Our research cannot answer whether the United States should move to legalize some electoral participation by non-citizens as many other countries do, and as some U.S. states did for more than 100 years, or find policies that more effectively restrict it. But this research should move that debate a step closer to a common set of facts.

Jesse Richman is Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies at Old Dominion University, and Director of the ODU Social Science Research Center. David Earnest is Associate Professor of Political Science and International Studies at Old Dominion University, and Associate Dean for Research & Graduate Studies in the College of Arts and Letters.*****

Title: Nelson Mandela supported voter ID
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 29, 2014, 02:07:01 PM

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/11/mandela-t-shirt-get-an-id-register-vote/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 29, 2014, 06:13:27 PM

What a riot!  :-D

He must have been trying to disenfranchise South African whites.  :wink:

Title: Finally!
Post by: ccp on October 30, 2014, 07:54:26 AM

Finally.  Here is the smoking gun we all new had to exist.  Massive fraud either phony jury duty responses or massive voter fraud.  This also shows just how hard it is to prove because without state issued photo IDs that can be traced how can one prove fraud???  This is exactly why we need voter IDs. 

We know almost all if not all are Democrats doing this.

I like the legal argument that each fraudulent vote *cancels out * a legitimate vote as the Constitutional basis for a legal remedy to this.

To think how many elections went the way of the Crats because of this.....

*****Massive Non-Citizen Voting Uncovered in Maryland by
Bryan Preston

October 29, 2014 - 11:45 pmPage 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single PageShare on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services671Email Print Decrease Font Size Increase Font Size An election integrity watchdog group is suing the state of Maryland, alleging that it has discovered massive and ongoing fraudulent voting by non-U.S. citizens in one county. But because of the way that the non-citizens are able to cast votes in elections, the fraud is likely happening in every single county and subdivision across the state. The group believes that the illegal voting has been happening for years.

The group, Virginia Voters Alliance, says that it compared how voters in Frederick County filled out jury duty statements compared with their voting records. The group’s investigation found that thousands of people in Frederick County who stated that they are not U.S. citizens on jury duty forms went on to cast votes in elections. Either they failed to tell the truth when they were summoned for jury duty, or they cast illegal votes. Both are crimes. The same group previously found that about 40,000 people are registered to vote in both Virginia and Maryland.

It is a federal crime to cast votes if you are not legally eligible to vote. Non-citizens, whether in the country legally or not, are prohibited from voting in most local and all state and federal elections. Yet the VVA investigation found that hundreds of non-citizens have been voting in Frederick County, Maryland. One in seven Maryland residents are non-U.S. citizens.

“The lawsuit is the equivalent of the lookout spotting the iceberg ahead of the Titanic,” state Del. Pat McDonough told the Tatler. He added that the group’s investigation found a voter fraud “smoking gun.”

Maryland state law makes it easier for non-citizens, both those present legally and those in the country against the law, to vote. Maryland issues drivers licenses to legal and illegal aliens. Driver’s licenses in turn make it easier under the Motor Voter law to register to vote. Maryland also offers copious taxpayer-funded social programs to non-citizens in the state.

The group filed suit in Baltimore’s U.S. District Court on Friday. They are suing the Frederick County Board of Elections and the Maryland State Board of Elections.

Del. Pat McDonough (R-Baltimore and Harford Counties) detailed the alleged fraud in a Maryland press conference today. He is calling for a special state prosecutor because the fraud may be taking place statewide, with significant impact on Maryland elections. Maryland currently holds 10 electoral votes in presidential elections. McDonough is also proposing legislation including voter ID to close the loopholes that he says non-citizens are using to cast votes.******

Title: Re: Nelson Mandela supported voter ID
Post by: DougMacG on October 30, 2014, 08:31:20 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 29, 2014, 02:07:01 PM

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/11/mandela-t-shirt-get-an-id-register-vote/

That makes a pretty good bumper sticker answer to a difficult question: 

I agree with Nelson Madela on Voter ID.

Voter ID is an obvious way to guarantee honest elections.  Oppression would be if you found a state office somewhere, anywhere that denied or took months or years to issue ID's to blacks or some other group.  Or if the IRS did that granting 501 status to conservative groups.  It would be outrageous, un-American, unconstitutional, prosecutable.  Right?

Title: Is there any way to sue Democrat operatives for voter fraud?
Post by: ccp on October 30, 2014, 09:53:55 AM

Lets see.  I don't suppose one reason the Dems are saturating illegals in many states is to get them registered to vote is it?

October 30, 2014 10:00 AM
Non-Citizens Are Voting
James O’Keefe documents the problem in North Carolina, where the Senate race is close. By John Fund

John Fund  Could non-citizen voting be a problem in next week’s elections, and perhaps even swing some very close elections?

A new study by two Old Dominion University professors, based on survey data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, indicated that 6.4 percent of all non-citizens voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election, and 2.2 percent in the 2010 midterms. Given that 80 percent of non-citizens lean Democratic, they cite Al Franken ’s 312-vote win in the 2008 Minnesota U.S. Senate race as one likely tipped by non-citizen voting. As a senator, Franken cast the 60th vote needed to make Obamacare law.

North Carolina features one of the closest Senate races in the country this year, between Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan and Republican Thom Tillis. So what guerrilla filmmaker James O’Keefe, the man who has uncovered voter irregularities in states ranging from Colorado to New Hampshire, has learned in North Carolina is disturbing. This month, North Carolina officials found at least 145 illegal aliens, still in the country thanks to the Obama administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, registered to vote. Hundreds of other non-citizens may be on the rolls.

A voter-registration card is routinely issued without any identification check, and undocumented workers can use it for many purposes, including obtaining a driver’s license and qualifying for a job. And if a non-citizen has a voter-registration card, there are plenty of campaign operatives who will encourage him or her to vote illegally.

O’Keefe had a Brazilian-born immigrant investigator pose as someone who wanted to vote but was not a citizen. Greg Amick, the campaign manager for the Democrat running for sheriff in Mecklenburg County (Charlotte), was only too happy to help.

Greg Amick: Here’s a couple of things you can do. You do not have to have your driver’s license, but do you have any sort of identification?

Project Veritas investigator: But I do have my driver’s license.

Amick: Oh, you do. Show ’em that and you’re good.

PV: But the only problem, you know, I don’t want to vote if I’m not legal. I think that’s going to be a problem. I’m not sure.

Amick: It won’t be, it shouldn’t be an issue at all.

PV: No?

Amick: As long as you are registered to vote, you’ll be fine.

But North Carolina officials shouldn’t be “fine” with Amick, who appears to be afoul of a state law making it a felony “for any person, knowing that a person is not a citizen of the United States, to instruct or coerce that person to register to vote or to vote.”

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 30, 2014, 11:11:11 AM

There ought to be a law against subverting our electoral process and betraying the principles of our constitutional republic - felony treason I am thinking, punishable by capital punishment with mandatory deportation of the remains if the offender is found to be here illegally.

Alternatively, we could set aside some land for all the people who do not wish to live within the agreed framework of this country.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 31, 2014, 05:12:26 AM

"felony treason I am thinking, punishable by capital punishment with mandatory deportation of the remains if the offender is found to be here illegally."

How about this:  send them to ISIS as hostage meat.  They want to live lawlessly then enjoy your time spent with them.   :wink:

Title: Looks like the Reps are the stinkers here
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2014, 08:40:00 AM

Right is right and wrong is wrong.  This sure looks wrong!

http://samuel-warde.com/2014/10/judge-wont-intervene-lost-voter-registrations-georgia/

But OTOH there is this:

http://www.11alive.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/10/20/missing-voter-applications/17596625/

Title: Massive non-citizen vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2014, 09:08:31 AM

second post

 Latest Reason to Oppose Amnesty? Voter Fraud
Genevieve Wood, Daily Signal, 10/30/14

Are non-citizens potentially voting in Tuesday’s election?

Yes, according to Old Dominion University Professors Jesse Richman and David Earnest, who wrote an article for The Washington Post highlighting their findings:

Most non-citizens do not register, let alone vote. But enough do that their participation can change the outcome of close races. Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 Cooperative Congressional Election Study sample), we find that this participation
was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections.

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.

The professors acknowledge that there are “limitations” to their research and that they are “much more confident” non-citizen votes were a factor in Minnesota than they were in North Carolina. But the overall evidence points to the fact than non-citizens have had an impact on the outcome of some of our elections.

Unfortunately, President Obama seems poised to give amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants through executive order after the election. It’s hard to imagine how giving legal status to millions of people who are here illegally will not make the problem of voter fraud worse.

There are numerous reasons to be both outraged and concerned about Obama’s plan to go around Congress before year’s end, wielding his phone and pen strategy, to give amnesty.

To start, the fact he isn’t taking action until after the election shows that he is isn’t just bypassing lawmakers, but also the American people. Obama well knows the majority of Americans oppose amnesty.

Were he to take action now, voters would have the opportunity to show their opposition by voting against members of his party who are up for election.

But snubbing the Constitution and voters is just the beginning.

According to news reports, a draft proposal from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services indicates the agency is looking for a private vendor that has the capacity to produce 30 million work permits and green cards over the next five years–and they’d like them to be ready to produce 9 million such documents in the first year alone. How much of this “preparation” is needed to fulfill whatever Obama does through an executive order on amnesty is unknown, but we can be fairly sure its part of the calculation.

Such a move is fraught with economic and security concerns. Is the president, who is so concerned about raising the minimum wage, not the least bit concerned about how a flood of low-skill workers would affect the U.S. economy and many of the very American citizens he says he wants to help move up the economic ladder? Is he willing to ignore the huge burden amnesty will place on American taxpayers?

And considering we appear to have very little control over our borders, with tens of thousands of people flooding the southern border earlier this year, and that the Obama administration has trouble even deporting criminals who are here illegally, Americans are right to be concerned about their safety and security.

No wonder Obama doesn’t want to talk about any of this prior to next week’s elections.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 31, 2014, 12:51:32 PM

Seriously.

Why can not a case be built up against the DNC for encouraging voter fraud?

They should be held responsible for a lot of this.

Why cannot they be sued for damages?  We know there people are all over the country pushing fraud - why - because so far they know they can get away with it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2014, 03:07:39 PM

To build up a case of a conspiracy, first the violations on the ground have to be established, then a pattern shown, THEN the connection of the leadership to the pattern.  I suspect this last point will be difficult to prove to a sufficient probablility.

In the meantime, we are still at the ground level of getting convictions on the ground game.

Title: Dem intimidation letter
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2014, 04:12:10 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/31/the-four-paragraph-letter-a-musician-got-in-the-mail-that-he-says-shows-the-democrats-just-threatened-me/

Title: Massive alien vote registration in Maryland
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2014, 09:28:02 PM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/massive-non-citizen-voting-uncovered-in-maryland-illegal-aliens/

Title: Vote fraud in NM
Post by: G M on November 03, 2014, 03:39:16 AM

http://thepunditpress.com/2014/11/02/voter-fraud-in-new-mexico-voter-turned-away-after-illegal-voted-as-him-lack-of-voter-id-law-blamed/

Title: Morris: Using inactive voter names to cover vote fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 12, 2014, 10:23:13 AM

http://www.dickmorris.com/obamas-ghost-army-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: Hmmm , , , this is odd
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2015, 10:30:40 AM

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/01/04/republicans-seem-to-steal-elections/

Title: Re: Hmmm , , , this is odd
Post by: DougMacG on January 05, 2015, 11:59:53 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2015, 10:30:40 AM

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/01/04/republicans-seem-to-steal-elections/

We are a Union of States and the majority of those are Republican by choice.  The Democrat party has amazing loyalty and turnout power in a relatively small number of concentrated areas. 

Rule by majority was contemplated by our founders - only in the context of how to prevent it.

"The problem is that the deck is stacked in favor of small states".

   - That is a feature, not a bug, of the constitution.

Title: The Myth of the 20 million
Post by: DougMacG on January 06, 2015, 11:38:08 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2015, 10:30:40 AM

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/01/04/republicans-seem-to-steal-elections/

Sean Trende of Real Clear Politics shoots this down quite effectively:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/01/05/the_myth_of_democrats_20-million-vote_majority_125145.html

"...add up the total number of votes cast for all Democratic candidates and Republican candidates in the 2010, 2012 and 2014 elections ... [and eliminate the double count of special elections] the margin shrinks to 2.1 points."


Interestingly, the proposal to eliminate the Senate, even by constitutional amendment, is specifically prohibited by Article V of the constitution.  "...no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."

Title: This may not be an accident or a coincidence
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 13, 2015, 09:13:17 PM

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/obama-amnesty-creates-loophole-that-allows-illegals-to-vote-in-elections

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 01, 2015, 11:35:18 AM

ID cards for this is great but ID cards to vote is "disenfranchising".   The left has made us into a laughing stock:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/28/ny-id-cards-a-smash/

Title: Judge Posner dissents againt Voter ID.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2015, 06:41:42 PM

I have tremendous respect for Judge Posner, but I gotta say, this really surprises me.


http://bradblog.com/Docs/JudgePosnerDissent_PhotoID_WI_101014.pdf

Title: The Paradox of American Electoral Reform
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 15, 2015, 08:49:28 AM

 The Paradox of America's Electoral Reform
Geopolitical Weekly
March 10, 2015 | 07:56 GMT
Print
Text Size
Stratfor

By George Friedman

We are now in the early phases of selecting the president of the United States. Vast amounts of money are being raised, plans are being laid, opposition research is underway and the first significant scandal has broken with the discovery that Hillary Clinton used a non-government email account for government business. Ahead of us is an extended series of primaries, followed by an election and perhaps a dispute over some aspect of the election. In the United States, the presidential election process takes about two years, particularly when the sitting president cannot run for re-election.

This election process matters to the world for two reasons. First, the world's only global power will be increasingly self-absorbed, and the sitting president — already weakened by the opposition party controlling both houses of Congress — is increasingly limited in what he can do. This is disturbing in some ways, since all presidential elections contain visions of the apocalypse that will follow the election of an opponent. During the U.S. election season, the world hears a litany of self-denigration and self-loathing that can be frightening emanating from a country that produces nearly a quarter of the world's wealth each year and commands the world's oceans. If Honduras were to engage in this behavior, the world would hardly notice. When the United States does it, the public discourse can convince others that the United States is on the verge of collapse, and that perspective has the potential to shape at least some actions on the global stage.
Tempering the Passions of Politics

The United States sees itself as the City on the Hill, an example to the world. But along with any redemptive sensibility comes its counterpart: the apocalyptic. The other candidate is betraying the promise of America, and therefore destroying it. Extreme messages are hardwired into the vision that created the republic.

The founders understood the inherent immoderation of politics and sought to solve problems by limiting democracy and emphasizing representative democracy. Americans select representatives through various complex courses. They do not directly elect presidents, but members of the Electoral College.

Likely an archaic institution, the Electoral College still represents the founders' fear of the passions of the people — both the intensity of some, and the indifference of others. The founders also distrusted the state while fully understanding its necessity. They had two visions: that representatives would make the law, and that these representatives would not have politics as a profession. Since re-election was not their primary goal, they were freed from democratic pressures to use their own wisdom in crafting laws.

The founders saw civil society — business, farms, churches and so on — as ultimately more important than the state, and they saw excessive political passion as misplaced. First, it took away from the private pursuits they so valued, and it tended to make political life more important than it should be. Second, they feared that ordinary men (women were excluded) might be elected as representatives at various levels. They set property requirements to assure sobriety (or so they thought) in representatives and at least limit the extent to which they were interested in politics. They set age requirements to assure a degree of maturity. They tried to shape representative democracy with standards they considered prudent — paralleling the values of their own social class, where private pursuits predominated and public affairs were a burdensome duty.

It is not that the founders regarded government as unimportant; to the contrary, it was central to civilization. Their concern was excessive passion on the part of the electorate, so they created a republican form of representative government because they feared the passions of the public. They also feared political parties and the factions and emotions they would arouse.

Parties and Party Bosses

Of course it was the founders who created political parties soon after the founding. The property requirements dissolved fairly quickly, the idea that state houses would elect senators went away, and the ideological passions and love of scandal emerged.

Political parties were organized state by state, and within state by counties and cities. These parties emerged with two roles. The first was to generate and offer potential leaders for election at all levels. The second was to serve as a means of mediation between the public — for multiple classes, from the wealthy to the poor — and the state. The political machines that dominated the country served as feeders of the republican system and ombudsmen for citizens.

The party bosses did not have visions of redemption or apocalypse. They were what the founders didn't want: professional politicians, not necessarily holding office themselves but overseeing the selection of those who would. Since these officeholders owed their jobs to the party boss, the boss determined legislation. And the more powerful bosses populated the smoke-filled rooms that selected presidents.

This was a system made for corruption, of course, and it violated the founders' vision, but it also fulfilled that vision in a way. The party bosses' power resided in building coalitions that they could serve. In the large industrial cities where immigrants came to work in the factories, that meant finding people jobs, securing services, maintaining the schools and so on. They didn't do this because they were public-spirited, but because they wanted to hold power. Even if companies that kicked back money to the bosses built the schools or the brother-in-law of a party boss owned the company that paved the streets, the schools got built and the streets got paved. The political machines were very real in rural areas as well.

Every four years, party bosses gathered at the party convention with the goal of selecting a candidate who would win. They would allow the candidate his ideological foibles, so long as they retained the ability to name postmasters and judges and appoint federal contracts in their areas. The system was corrupt, but it produced leaders like Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower, as well as some less illustrious people.
The Boss System Breaks Down

Starting in 1972, following Richard Nixon's presidency, the United States shifted away from a system of political bosses. This was achieved by broadly expanding primaries at all levels. Rather than bosses selecting candidates and controlling them, direct democratic elections were used for candidate selection. Since the bosses didn't select candidates, the candidates were beholden to the voters rather than the bosses. Each election year, the voters would select the candidates and then select the officeholder. Over time, the power of the political machine was broken and replaced by a series of elections. The founders did not want this level of democracy, but neither did they explicitly want the party boss.

This change had two unanticipated consequences. The first was that the importance of money in the political process surged. In the old system, you had to convince bosses to support you. That took time and effort and required that promises be made, but it did not require vast amounts of money. Under the primary system, apart from the national election, primary elections take place in almost all states. Candidates must build their own machines in each state and appeal directly to voters. That means huge expenditures to create a machine and buy advertising in each state.

As the bosses' corruption was curbed but money's centrality soared, the types of corruption endemic to the political system shifted. Corruption moved from favors for bosses to special treatment of fundraisers, but it was still there. Reformers tried to limit the amount of money that could be contributed, but they ignored two facts. First, a primary system for the presidency is fiendishly expensive simply because delivering the message to the public in 50 states costs a fortune. Second, given the stakes, the desire to influence government is difficult to curb. The means will be found to donate money, and in some cases it will be done in the hope and expectation of favors. The reforms changed the shape of corruption but could not eliminate it.

The second unintended consequence was that it institutionalized political polarization. The party boss was not a passionate man. But those who go to the polls in primaries tend to be. Turnout at American elections is always low. The founders set the election for a Tuesday rather than a weekend as in many countries, and it is a work day, with children to be picked up at school, dinner to be cooked and so on. The founders designed politics to be less important than private life, and in the competition on Election Tuesday, private life tends to win, particularly in off-year elections and primaries.

The people who vote in primaries tend to be passionate believers. The center, which holds the largest block of voters in the general election, is not a passionate place. The kids' homework comes first. Passion exists on the wings of both parties. This means that in the primaries, only two types of candidates win. One is the extremely well funded — and the passion of the wings make funding for them even more important. The other is the ideologically committed. The top fundraisers face the most passionate voters, and the contest is whether the center can be turned out with money. Frequently the answer is no. The result is that the wings, although likely a minority in the party, frequently select candidates in the primary who have trouble winning the general election. From their point of view, winning means nothing if you give up principles.

All of this applies equally to elections to the House and Senate. It has been said that there has never been less bipartisanship than there is now. I don't know if that is true, but it is certainly the case that the penalties for collaboration with the other party, or for moving to the center, are extremely high. The only ones who can do it are the ones who can raise sufficient money to draw the center out. And that is hard to do. As a result, everyone must run to the extreme in the primary and run to the center in the general election. The reforms have institutionalized hypocrisy and outsized strength for marginal groups, though they succeeded in breaking the party bosses.

Since 1972, the United States has elected presidents like Ronald Reagan, the two Bushes, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. I will leave it to the reader to determine how this compares to the boss-generated leaders. However, I would argue that the ombudsman system has broken down. Bosses, because they were corrupt, could provide an interface for voters with employers (who wanted contracts) and government. I suspect that the collapse of the boss system made it easier for the Italians, Irish and Jews to integrate into society, and harder for blacks and Hispanics. There are pockets of bosses, but they are not the norm, and they cannot offer as much without going to jail.

This is not meant to romanticize the bosses. We are, on the whole, better off without them, and we can't resurrect them. I am trying to explain why our elections have become so long, why they cost so much money, and why the wings of the parties get to define agendas and legislative and executive behavior.
The Geopolitics of the U.S. Elections

There is a geopolitical side to this as well. The internal political process of the leading global power is always a geopolitical matter. The structure and method whereby leaders are selected shape the kinds of leaders who govern and define, to some extent, the constraints placed on governments. Geopolitics, as Stratfor uses the concept, argues that the wishes and idiosyncrasies of individual leaders make little difference in the long run. This is because leaders are constrained by global realities. It is also because internal political processes define what must be done to take and hold power. Those internal political processes have their own origins in impersonal forces.

There has been a long struggle between the founders' vision of how politics should work and the reality of the process. The party boss was, in a weird way, an implementation of the principle of representative government. He was also a symbol of corruption and anti-democratic behavior. His demise has created the primary system, which carries with it its own corruption. Moreover, it has systematically limited the power of the center and strengthened the power of the most ideological. It has also caused U.S. elections to put the world ill at ease, because what the world hears in the Georgia, Vermont or Texas primaries can be unsettling. The American Republic was invented and it is continually being reinvented on the same basic theme. Each reform creates a new form of corruption and a new challenge for governance. In the end, everyone is trapped by reality, but it is taking longer and longer to enter that trap.

This situation is not unique to the United States, but the pattern differs elsewhere. Over the centuries, the U.S. public has been shaped by immigration, and the U.S. government was consciously constructed out of the theoretical constructs of its founders. It was as if the country were a blank slate. It was in this context that waves of reform took place, all changing the republic, all with unintended consequences.

I have tried to show here the unintended consequences of the post-Watergate reforms to illustrate why the American political system works as it does. But perhaps the most important point is that redrawing the government is endemic to the kind of government the United States has, and that the United States both absorbs change well and is frequently surprised by what change does. In other countries, there is less room to maneuver, and perhaps fewer surprises and standards of success. The political parties emerged against the founders' intentions, because political organization beyond the elite followed from the logic of the government. The rise of political bosses followed from the system, and simultaneously stabilized and corrupted it. The post-Watergate reforms changed the nature of the corruption but also changed the texture of political life. The latter is the issue with which the United States is now struggling.

China, Russia and Europe are all struggling, but in different ways and toward different ends, frequently because of problems endemic to their cultures. The problem endemic in American culture is the will to reform. It is both the virtue and vice of the U.S. government. It has geopolitical consequences. This is another dimension of geopolitics to be considered in the coming weeks and months.

Title: 541,000 new illegal voters
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 15, 2015, 06:49:13 PM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/15/obama-amnesty-granted-more-500k-ssn/

Title: online voting
Post by: ccp on April 17, 2015, 08:31:53 AM

The Democrats and Bush Republicans will not even have to import them from around the world to increase the Democrat voter rolls.   Just let them do it online from other countries.

One can easily predict the fraud this will allow in multiple scenerios.   Our sovereignty is being thrown out the window.   I am not optimistic.   Only a catastrophe will turn this back I fear.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/04/16/263477/as-states-warm-to-online-voting.html

Title: ACORN at it again
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2015, 06:55:54 PM

Under a new name Acorn is up to its old games:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/19/hired-black-lives-matter-protesters-start-cutthech/

Title: Criteria for district size to SCOTUS; support for illegals voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 01, 2015, 10:28:09 AM

http://patriotpost.us/articles/35482

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2015/most_democrats_think_illegal_immigrants_should_vote

Title: WSJ: Constitutional Chumps
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 30, 2015, 09:16:46 AM

e 29, 2015 6:49 p.m. ET
159 COMMENTS

A miserable Supreme Court term got worse on Monday when another 5-4 majority decided to rewrite the Constitution’s Elections Clause to limit legislative redistricting. We’ve deplored legislative gerrymanders as much as anyone, but that doesn’t mean our policy preference should trump the Constitution.

In 2000 Arizona voters approved a ballot measure to amend the state constitution and give a five-member commission the power to draw the map for Congressional districts. The idea was to take redistricting away from politicians who invariably use it for partisan advantage.

Good intention, but the Elections Clause says the “times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof.” And the legislature didn’t sanction the referendum.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg nonetheless writes for the liberals and Anthony Kennedy that when the Framers wrote the word “legislature” they didn’t mean “legislature.” They meant it loosely because “the people themselves are the originating source of all the powers of government.”

The Founders weren’t perfect but they were more precise wordsmiths than the average Supreme Court Justice. For example, when they meant “the people,” they wrote “the people.” So when they wrote “the legislature,” confidence is high that they meant “the legislature.”

The majority’s ruling has “no basis in the text, structure, or history of the Constitution, and it contradicts precedents from both Congress and this Court,” Chief Justice John Roberts writes in withering dissent. The Constitution, he notes, uses the word legislature in 17 instances where it cannot possibly be interpreted to mean “the people,” and Supreme Court precedents have specified that in the Elections Clause the word legislature means “the representative body which ma[kes] the laws of the people.”

When the Constitution was written, state legislatures were given the power to choose the Senators the states sent to Washington, D.C. It took decades, and the Seventeenth Amendment, to give that power directly to voters. “What chumps!” Chief Justice Roberts writes, “Didn’t they realize that all they had to do was interpret the constitutional term ‘the Legislature’ to mean ‘the people’?”

The position of the four liberal Justices isn’t all that surprising because taking redistricting away from legislatures has become fashionable on the left now that Republicans hold the House. But Justice Kennedy’s vote rankles in particular because he has shown good judgment on election law in previous cases including 2008’s Crawford v. Marion County (upholding Indiana’s voter ID requirement), 2013’s Shelby County v. Holder (striking down the Voting Rights Act’s preclearance requirement) and 2010’s Citizens United v. FEC (invalidating a ban on corporate and union independent expenditures).

Partisan gerrymanders deserve criticism, but Justice Ginsburg’s opinion is an act of judicial invention. Like so many other rulings this term, it subordinates the Constitution’s plain language and the Court’s own precedents to a policy agenda. That does more damage to constitutional democracy than any redistricting can.

Title: Other countries require voter ID
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 21, 2015, 08:38:05 AM

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421292/voter-id-other-countries-require

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 12, 2015, 09:28:05 AM

Monty Python and the Rick Perry Campaign
In campaigns past, a lack of funds was a plague that felled many a candidate in primary races. And if Rick Perry was running for president eight years ago, his campaign might have been officially declared dead, as the campaign has stopped paying its employees because it just didn't have enough money in the bank (according to financial disclosures, Perry's campaign had less than $1 million in cash July 15). But in the words of an anonymous villager, he's "not dead yet." Perry's campaign manager, Jeff Miller, says the campaign will have to prioritize time and money to target the key swing states of New Hampshire, South Carolina and Iowa. Perry can continue the race on volunteer time and what amounts to pocket change. John McCain pulled off something similar in the GOP presidential primary of 2007. But this is 2015, the era of Super PACs. According to Austin Barbour, a senior adviser to Perry's Super PACs, the PACs have amassed a $16.8 million war chest for the former Texas governor. Perry's not alone. Carly Fiorina has relied on her Super PAC for most of the heavy campaign lifting, and Mike Huckabee, Bobby Jindal, George Pataki and Rick Santorum also have small campaign budgets. We've reached a weird place in American politics where the fate of many candidates rests not in their own hands but in organizations that are required, by law, not to coordinate with the candidates.

Title: KS seeks to block release of voting machine paper tapes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 27, 2015, 11:40:35 AM

http://ksn.com/2015/08/24/kansas-seeks-to-block-release-of-voting-machine-paper-tapes/

Title: More voters than people
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 28, 2015, 06:41:43 AM

http://freebeacon.com/issues/election-group-141-u-s-counties-have-more-registered-voters-than-people/

Title: I guess this is the source of most donations to '16 coming from a few
Post by: ccp on September 07, 2015, 11:55:41 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/us/small-pool-of-rich-donors-dominates-election-giving.html?_r=0

Title: Accelerating naturalization
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 30, 2015, 09:35:32 AM

I don't care for the way that this piece conflates illegals and speeding up the naturalization of legals, but the latter does seem worth noting.

http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2015/09/30/importing-a-new-electorate-by-the-millions/?subscriber=1

Title: POTH on where the money comes from
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 10, 2015, 12:27:44 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/11/us/politics/2016-presidential-election-super-pac-donors.html?emc=edit_na_20151010&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

Title: George Will: Impeach the IRS Commissioner
Post by: DougMacG on October 12, 2015, 07:55:15 AM

George Will:  Impeach the IRS COmmissioner

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/impeach-the-irs-director/2015/10/07/a3c3b024-6c57-11e5-b31c-d80d62b53e28_story.html

Title: Illegal Aliens to vote in CA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 12, 2015, 08:19:49 AM

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/10/12/gov-jerry-brown-signs-bill-allowing-illegal-aliens-vote/

Title: Vote fraud in Kansas?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 26, 2015, 08:53:08 AM

http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article27951310.html

Title: Impossible voter registration numbers
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 10, 2016, 09:50:11 PM

http://national.suntimes.com/national-world-news/7/72/1740480/141-counties-u-s-registered-voters-living-residents/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc. Minneapolis
Post by: DougMacG on January 29, 2016, 03:53:48 PM

New Minneapolis law, landlords have to provide voter registration package to tenants and tenants have to sign for receiving them, thanks to our local, so called, DFL.

Yet if the tenant does not mow, shovel or put garbage in their can, the landlord is held accountable.  The tenant is presumed to be not competent to be held as a responsible party.

I will give voting information to people who strike me as be well informed on all major issues.  Otherwise, someone else can give it to them.

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/inspections/rental/tenant_notifications

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 29, 2016, 04:38:32 PM

OMG.  Landlords have to provide voting registrations?   :x

How did Minnesota become such a Democ(rat) stronghold?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc. Minneapolis
Post by: G M on January 29, 2016, 05:39:30 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on January 29, 2016, 03:53:48 PM

New Minneapolis law, landlords have to provide voter registration package to tenants and tenants have to sign for receiving them, thanks to our local, so called, DFL.

Yet if the tenant does not mow, shovel or put garbage in their can, the landlord is held accountable.  The tenant is presumed to be not competent to be held as a responsible party.

I will give voting information to people who strike me as be well informed on all major issues.  Otherwise, someone else can give it to them.

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/inspections/rental/tenant_notifications

Are you being compensated for your time and effort? I thought the civil war ended involuntary servitude.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc. Minneapolis
Post by: DougMacG on January 29, 2016, 08:29:09 PM

Good point.  The Obama blockworkers get good money for the same work.

Title: WSJ: 40 years of Buckley v. Valeo
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 31, 2016, 01:27:18 PM

By Bradley Smith
Jan. 29, 2016 5:58 p.m. ET
181 COMMENTS

Hillary Clinton has tons of cash, but she can’t shake off Bernie Sanders. Donald Trump keeps threatening to spend his own money, but he hasn’t had to use much of it. He’s leading the Republican field, feasting on free media coverage, while spending a fraction of what his rivals, and super PACs promoting them, have spent. If his rivals hadn’t been able raise large sums the GOP race would probably be over—Mr. Trump’s celebrity, name recognition and charisma would already have carried the day.

Apparently oblivious to the failure of “big money” to dictate the race, the goo-goos—the good-government crowd—have cranked up the same theme they use every election year. “We must,” they say, “have campaign finance reform.” We must “get money out of politics.” The Supreme Court must reverse its 2010 decision in Citizens United and allow “reasonable” regulation of campaign finance.

But what would “reasonable” regulation actually look like? Well, we have an idea, because once, not that long ago, Congress passed “reasonable” regulation.

Saturday marks the 40th anniversary of one of the most momentous Supreme Court decisions: Buckley v. Valeo. In Buckley, the Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act that threatened core First Amendment freedoms. The 1976 decision is as important to democracy as 1954’s Brown v. Board of Education is to education and civil rights. Its anniversary is a time for reflection on what might lie ahead if “reformers” get their way.

Many Americans vaguely favor “campaign finance reform.” It is only when such reform gets specific that people realize—often too late—that they themselves are the targets of that reform.

Consider the law that Buckley struck down. The Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974 limited spending by candidates, even though there is substantial evidence—including a 2011 study in the Journal of Politics by Chris W. Bonneau and Damon M. Cann—that limits on campaign spending benefit incumbents. Buckley struck down those limits.

The 1974 FECA Amendments also capped citizens’ election spending—just $1,000 on communications (about $4,800 adjusted for inflation) “relative to” a candidate was allowed. This limit applied to political-action committees, to individuals and to groups like the Humane Society and National Rifle Association. Unions and businesses were prohibited from spending money to voice opinions “in connection with” an election.

Another provision limited how much groups could spend or contribute “for the purpose of influencing” elections without first registering with, and reporting the names of their members to, the government.

By the time Buckley was filed in 1975, the Nixon administration had already used the law’s vague language to prosecute a group of citizens who bought an ad in the New York Times calling for Nixon’s impeachment.

Buckley struck down these provisions of the law.

Imagine a world in which citizens are prohibited from spending their own money to voice and distribute their political opinions on issues and candidates separately from those candidates’ own campaigns. A world in which challengers are prohibited from spending enough to inform voters about why incumbents should be voted out of office; and where unions and trade groups are prohibited from spending money to explain how election results might affect members, employees or the economy.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1975 upheld these provisions of the law. In a remarkable opinion, it said that “reforms” should not be rejected merely “because they might have some incidental, not yet defined effect on First Amendment freedoms.” Protecting free speech, the court said, was like Aesop’s famous dog “losing his bone going after its deceptively larger reflection in the water.”

Buckley brought the worst of this madness to a halt. The Supreme Court noted that “the concept that government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First Amendment, which was designed to . . . assure unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people.”

The court struck down the limitations on what citizens and the organizations they belong to could spend to voice political views “relative to” candidates. Had Buckley not been decided as it was, virtually all political information today would have to be filtered through officeholders, politicians and the institutional press, with ordinary citizens as mere bystanders.

Some claim that Buckley held that money is speech—but that’s not quite right. What the court recognized is that by limiting money you can limit an activity. Limit what you may spend on fuel, and your right to travel freely is restricted. Limit what can be spent to express political views, and you limit the reach of those views and the number of people who will hear them.

Unfortunately, the court in Buckley upheld some provisions of the law. Thus the government still demands information on Americans’ political associations when they open their wallets. Contributions to candidates and parties remain subject to low limits that reduce the number of viable challengers, force officeholders to spend more time raising funds, and restrict the ability of citizens to directly support a candidate’s campaign. But absent Buckley’s core holding—that Americans have a right to spend their own money to voice their own opinions—true democracy would be pretty much unimaginable.

Mr. Smith is the chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics. He previously was chairman of the Federal Election Commission.

Title: Des Moines Register calls for audit of Dem Caucuses
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 06, 2016, 06:34:57 AM

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/04/des-moines-register-calls-for-full-audit-of-democrat-caucuses/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 06, 2016, 07:26:27 AM

good luck with that.  "what difference does it make?"   :wink:

Six straight coin toss wins - someone pointed out the odds of that are 64 to 1.

Where did these coins come from - Vegas or Atlantic City?

Title: Just confirms what is already obvious
Post by: ccp on February 22, 2016, 09:02:15 AM

Yet the MSM of course doesn't care:

HOROWITZ: OBAMA MAKING SURE NON-CITIZENS VOTE
By: Daniel Horowitz | February 22, 2016
February 9: Voters fill out their ballots for the 2016 New Hampshire primary in voting booths at Londonderry High School in Londonderry, NH on February 9, 2016. Congressional Quarterly | AP Phot
 

While everyone is focused on the fisticuffs of this acrimonious primary, Obama is trying to build a firewall of illegal voters to ensure Democrat victory during the general election.  Through endless immigration, Democrats have already created a high floor of electoral support that is creeping ever closer to a permanent majority.  Now, they are trying tip the balance by stopping states from blocking non-citizens from voting.
Hans von Spakovsky, a legal scholar at the Heritage Foundation, sounded the alarm over the weekend concerning the latest effort to block voter integrity:
On February 12, these groups filed a lawsuit in D.C. federal court seeking to reverse a recent decision by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC). The Commission’s decision allows Kansas and other states, including Arizona and Georgia, to enforce state laws ensuring that only citizens register to vote when they use a federally designed registration form. An initial hearing in the case is set for Monday afternoon, February 22.
Under federal law, the EAC is responsible for designing the federal voter-registration form required by the National Voter Registration Act, or Motor Voter, as it is commonly called. While states must register voters who use the federal form, states can ask the EAC to include instructions with the federal form about additional state registration requirements. Some states are now requiring satisfactory proof of citizenship to ensure that only citizens register to vote.
Hans goes on to explain how the Obama Justice Department, instead of defending this federal agency, has joined with left wing outside groups to attack the EAC and voter integrity.  In the most egregious and unethical behavior ever from a Justice Department, they are stripping the EAC of its independent power to work with states to protect the franchise.  Just this morning the DOJ consented to the injunction against the EAC.  It is unprecedented for an administration to agree with those suing a federal agency!The hearing before D.C. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon is this afternoon and we will stay on top of the details because this will affect the outcome of our elections.
Once again, we must ask why is the future of our franchise being decided by unelected courts?
Remember, there are over 23 million non-citizens residing in this country on a permanent basis.  In 2014, three prominent political scientists conducted a study of non-citizens voting and found that up to 6.4% of all non-citizens participated in the 2008 elections and roughly 14% are eligible to vote.  This means that over 3 million non-citizens are registered to vote and roughly 1.4 million non-citizens voted in 2008. Over 80% of these illegal votes were cast for Democratic candidates, according to this study.
Professors Richman, Chattha, and Earnest concluded that non-citizens voting was enough to deliver North Carolina to Obama.  More importantly, “non-citizen votes have also led to Democratic victories in congressional races including a critical 2008 Senate race that delivered for Democrats a 60-vote filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.”  That race, of course, was the Minnesota Senate seat “won” by Al Franken by a margin of 312 votes.  This report estimates that at least 3,000 votes cast in Minnesota were from non-citizens.  There were also a number of other Senate races decided by a margin of one or two percentage points over the past few cycles.


Hence, Obamacare was passed illegitimately.
As Teddy Roosevelt once said, “[T]here is no enemy of free government more dangerous and none so insidious as the corruption of the electorate.”
Once again, we must ask why is the future of our franchise being decided by unelected courts?  Where is Congress in upholding the integrity of the elections that allow them to represent the sovereign citizen?   
- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/02/obama-making-sure-non-citizens-vote#sthash.pkSyQfne.dpuf

Title: Pacs - scams?
Post by: ccp on February 23, 2016, 07:33:38 AM

What a business.  Former Romeny (3 time loser) forms PAC gets tons of money to spend getting Trump and only God knows how much for herself.  Folks I am in the wrong business.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/23/former-romney-staffer-frustrated-circulates-three-page-memo-against-donald-trump/

Title: DOJ seeking to enable non-citizen voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 02, 2016, 06:04:12 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/432182/noncitizen-voting-lawsuit-justice-department

Title: Online voting will lead to hackers voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2016, 07:15:38 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/elias-online-voting-are-the-doomsayers-right/

Title: Re: Online voting will lead to hackers voting
Post by: DougMacG on March 07, 2016, 08:24:03 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2016, 07:15:38 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/elias-online-voting-are-the-doomsayers-right/

Why wouldn't you make it easier to vote?

This is one reason why easier to vote isn't better.

Another case where the liberal view needs answering or else the young and impressionable fall prey to the other side.  Explaining these things once every four years isn't how how you compete either when the other side has total control K-12, the colleges and the media.

You vote in private, but you may have to come out in front of your neighbors and show your ID to do so.

Early voting is turning into a bad thing too.  It used to be that you needed a reason to vote absentee.

Title: We must legally prevent the oblivious from voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 08, 2016, 10:13:14 PM

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/in-order-to-save-america-we-must-legally-prevent-oblivious-people-from-voting/

Title: Is Democrat voting a vast conspiracy?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2016, 05:09:26 PM

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/is_democrat_voting_a_vast_criminal_conspiracy.html 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 11, 2016, 06:03:52 PM

Well wouldn't Democrat Party scabs say this,

'See we told you that forcing people to have voter IDs will suppress votes and disenfranchise people!'

Having done work at the nursing homes and seeing so many patients who are totally unaware of elections and many who have no visitors has made me wonder if it is not a frequent event for people to vote in their name.  And I have little doubt Republicans would be so inclined to do this.

Did anyone notice how the vote number spread in Michigan between Clinton and Sanders seemed to get narrower and narrower.  Gee, coincidence?

Title: Computer programmer rigged elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 18, 2016, 03:25:17 PM

https://www.facebook.com/anonews.co/videos/1186027391408818/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, big money influencing elections
Post by: DougMacG on March 22, 2016, 10:49:01 AM

In response to all the complaints about big money in politics, i.e. free speech, less than we spend promoting laundry soap, it needs to be noted that $500 million plus has already been wasted on candidates that are no longer running while the frontrunners get all kinds of attention without spending that kind of money.
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://time.com/4266176/campaign-finance-republican-donors-congress/
So far, donors have funneled more than $520 million collectively into campaigns and outside groups supporting Republican presidential candidates who have now dropped out — and the primaries are far from over.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2016, 03:28:38 PM

 :-D :-D :-D

Title: CA allows illegal aliens to vote so POTUS ballot should be disqualified
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 26, 2016, 10:01:36 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/california-allows-illegal-aliens-to-vote-so-each-potus-ballot-should-be-disqualified/

Title: CA allows illegal aliens to vote so POTUS ballot should be disqualified 2.0
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 29, 2016, 09:31:09 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/10/12/gov-jerry-brown-signs-bill-allowing-illegal-aliens-vote/

Title: Re: CA allows illegal aliens to vote so POTUS ballot should be disqualified 2.0
Post by: DDF on March 29, 2016, 09:45:44 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 29, 2016, 09:31:09 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2015/10/12/gov-jerry-brown-signs-bill-allowing-illegal-aliens-vote/

 :x :x :x :x :x

Title: Obama brings Fed govt into the plot
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 30, 2016, 06:42:25 AM

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/28/obama-admin-funds-blitz-to-naturalize-anti-trump-voters/

Title: sore loser laws
Post by: ccp on March 31, 2016, 01:15:14 PM

Hat tip to Mark Levin's Conservative Review.  About 35 % of the electoral votes are from states that would not allow Trump to run (in those states) due to "sore loser" laws.  That is to prevent someone who ran in the primary from running in a third party.  I never knew this.  So Trump could go 3rd party but only in states that would total about 65% of the electoral college:

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/03/trump-independent-bid-all-but-impossible

Title: How to hack an election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 02, 2016, 06:26:12 PM

http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-how-to-hack-an-election/

Title: Evenwel v. Abbott
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 05, 2016, 12:16:53 PM

Supreme Court Brings Back To Three-Fifths Slavery Formula
By DICK MORRIS
Published on DickMorris.com on April 5, 2016
The Supreme Court decision in Evenwel v. Abbott, harkens back to how our original Constitution enshrined slavery in power until the Civil War.

The Evenwel decision holds that states may apportion districts -- and presumably Congress can apportion Congressional representation -- based on total population rather than based on those actually eligible to vote.  So now illegal immigrants, who cannot vote, are counted equally with voters in allocating legislative representation.

There is a terrible analogy between the Evenwel decision and the infamous three-fifths rule that was adopted to determine slave representation in the House of Representatives.

At the original Constitutional Convention, the northern and southern states wrangled over how to count slaves -- who could not vote -- in allocating congressional districts to the states.  The South wanted its voting power enhanced so slave states could come closer to a majority in the House of Representatives and have more electoral votes in choosing a president (electoral votes are allocated by adding the number of senators and congressmen from each state).

The northern states relented and agreed to count each slave as three-fifths of a person in apportioning legislative seats.  The South and the slave interest benefited enormously from the compromise.

So, as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in Evenwel, illegal immigrants are to be the modern equivalent of slaves in proportioning representation in Congress.  Like slaves, these illegal immigrants cannot vote.  But they are now to be counted in determining how many seats in Congress each state gets.  These phantom voters have no more right to influence the composition of our Congress than the slaves did -- unless and until they can vote.

As Gary Willis explains in his book Negro President: Jefferson and the Slave Power (2003), the distortions caused by the three-fifths rule permitted the slave power to remain in ascendency.  The Southern slave states had 47 House members in 1793 -- under the three-fifths rule -- while they should have had only 33.  By 1812, they had 76 but should have been entitled to only 59.  By 1833, they had 98 as opposed to the 73 they should have had. 

Willis calls Jefferson the "Negro President" because it was the extra electoral votes that came from the three-fifths rule that let Jefferson eek past President John Adams in the electoral college in the election of 1800. In that contest, Jefferson won with 73 electoral votes to Adams' 65.  But had the Electoral College votes only reflected vote eligible citizens, and excluded the three-fifths rule, Adams would have won.

This odious comparison illustrates the injustice of using illegal immigrants to apportion power but not giving them a voice in how it is used.  Either make them citizens and count their votes or leave them out of apportionment.

Title: felons and voting.
Post by: ccp on April 16, 2016, 10:18:21 AM

http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/felons-voting-rights-history/2015/04/16/id/638889/

Title: Re: felons and voting.
Post by: G M on April 17, 2016, 07:03:20 AM

Quote from: ccp on April 16, 2016, 10:18:21 AM

http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/felons-voting-rights-history/2015/04/16/id/638889/

Name the party that pushes felons to vote.

Title: NyC: Nothing to see here, keep moving along
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 20, 2016, 07:18:21 AM

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/19/474896027/after-more-than-100-000-voters-dropped-in-brooklyn-city-officials-call-for-actio

Title: Complain to the DNC???
Post by: ccp on April 20, 2016, 08:32:53 AM

Is Bernie stupid or what?  Does he really think complaining to the DNC is going to get a legitimate response?  And what a gigantic blunder for him to let Clinton off the hook with the emails.  May not have made a difference but it might have.  Definitely a shmoe, and I think shmegegi fits too.  Who the hell would want this fool negotiating for the United States?  What a dope.

This fits Bernie:  "Shmo(e) - Naive person, easy to deceive; a goof (Americanism)"
"Shmegegi - Buffoon, idiot, fool"

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/04/19/judge-napolitano-bernie-sanders-accuses-hillary-clinton-violating-finance-laws

Title: Re: Complain to the DNC???
Post by: DougMacG on April 20, 2016, 09:48:17 AM

ccp:  "Is Bernie stupid or what? 

   - To be an American socialist in 2016, yes, stupid, ignorant or dishonest.  I suspect all three.  Might add hypocrite to that.

"What a gigantic blunder for him to let Clinton off the hook with the emails."

   - Isn't that the truth!  His strategic concern for himself and the careful positioning of his pretend challenge to her then was bigger than any real security concern for the country that her blunder created.  Now it turns out that being honest might have been better, even for a Democrat. Who knew?

Title: Terry McAuliffe
Post by: ccp on April 22, 2016, 12:52:09 PM

Returning the Clinton gang into power.  Sad Virginia , because of the Northern part turned liberal (the DC crowd) and that sleaze is now governor.  Some sleaze balls never go away:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/virginia-governor-restores-voting-rights-200k-felons-154622727.html?nhp=1

Title: Get out of jail
Post by: ccp on May 07, 2016, 04:57:55 AM

"Get out of jail free" cards being issued by Democrat party.  Well not exactly but they are trying to free them all, and give them voting cards

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/06/report-leftist-groups-registered-two-thousand-virginia-felons-to-vote-in-two-weeks/

Title: Re: Get out of jail
Post by: G M on May 07, 2016, 05:10:02 AM

Quote from: ccp on May 07, 2016, 04:57:55 AM

"Get out of jail free" cards being issued by Democrat party.  Well not exactly but they are trying to free them all, and give them voting cards

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/06/report-leftist-groups-registered-two-thousand-virginia-felons-to-vote-in-two-weeks/

Dems will dominate the felon, illegal alien and deceased voting blocs.

Title: Baltimore vote decertified
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 13, 2016, 09:26:45 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/maryland-decertifies-baltimore-election-results-investigates-irregularities/2016/05/12/fca6e128-1861-11e6-9e16-2e5a123aac62_story.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 13, 2016, 10:23:43 AM

Anyone see a pattern where such voter fraud always seems to turn up? :wink:

Title: California Zomibe Voter Apocalypse
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 08, 2016, 11:43:01 AM

 
The Zombie Voter Apocalypse: California Refuses to Admit Its Voter Fraud Problem
Hans von Spakovsky / Jana Minich / May 26, 2016

Hollywood has always loved making films about the walking dead, but in Southern California it appears they have a real life problem with “zombie” voters.
An investigation by CBSLA2 and KCAL9 found that hundreds of deceased persons are still on voter registration rolls in the area, and that many of these names have been voting for years in Los Angeles.

For example, John Cenkner died in 2003, according to Social Security Administration records, yet he voted in the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, and 2010 elections. His daughter told the station that she was “astounded” and couldn’t “understand how anybody” could get away with this.

Another voter, Julita Abutin, died in 2006 but voted in 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014. According to CBS, the county confirmed they have “signed vote-by-mail envelopes” from Abutin since she passed away. So either someone has been forging her signature or her ghost has quite an earthly presence.
The investigation revealed that 265 deceased persons voted in Southern California, 215 of them in Los Angeles County. Thirty-two were repeat voters, with eight posthumously-cast ballots each. One woman who died in 1988 has been voting for 26 years, including in the 2014 election.

This report comes 20 years after the contested election of Rep. Loretta Sanchez, D-Calif., from this same area. An investigation by a U.S. House committee found that hundreds of illegal ballots were cast by noncitizens and improper absentee ballots.

In that 1996 election, when she defeated incumbent Bob Dornan, a winning margin of 979 votes was whittled down to only 35 votes or fewer when that voter fraud was factored in. In cases like these, where elections are decided by only a small number of votes, the harmful effects of voter fraud are most obvious.

Yet here, two decades later, California has still not taken the necessary steps to ensure the reliability of its electoral system.

As a result of the investigation, Los Angeles County supervisors called for an investigation into the findings. Even if these particular zombie voters did not change the outcome of an election, each fraudulently cast ballot stole and diluted the vote of a legitimate voter.

Cases like these and many others show that voter fraud is a real phenomenon and a potential threat to the integrity of the election process.

The Los Angeles County Registrar pointed to the 1200 to 2000 voter registrations removed every month to update records and told reporters, “There’s really no way to connect a person whose death is recorded with a person who is registered to vote unless we get some kind of notification from the family.”
But that is plain nonsense. Other states do frequent comparisons between their voter registration lists and the death databases maintained by the Social Security Administration, and other state agencies consult vital records departments in order to remove voters who have died.

The CBS investigation shows both that voter fraud exists and that this type of fraudulent voting is detectable through proper investigation.

CBS reports that California is the only state that does not comply with the Help America Vote Act of 2002, something the Obama administration has basically ignored.

The Help America Vote Act establishes mandatory minimum standards of accuracy for state voter registration lists and requires states to engage in regular maintenance and updates to remove ineligible voters who die or move away.

California is obviously not complying with these requirements.

Title: Judicial Watch sues to block Mcauliffes felon vote order
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 15, 2016, 07:55:34 PM

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/14/judicial-watch-sues-to-block-mcauliffes-order-granting-felons-voting-rights/

Title: British vote today
Post by: ccp on June 23, 2016, 01:48:55 PM

"The real question is whether that same wealthy minority which is influencing bookie odds will also be able to manipulate the final Referendum outcome in less than 24 hours."

Yup.  We will never know.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/something-strange-emerges-when-looking-behind-brexit-bookie-odds

Title: Re: British vote today
Post by: G M on June 23, 2016, 01:54:10 PM

Quote from: ccp on June 23, 2016, 01:48:55 PM

"The real question is whether that same wealthy minority which is influencing bookie odds will also be able to manipulate the final Referendum outcome in less than 24 hours."

Yup.  We will never know.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-22/something-strange-emerges-when-looking-behind-brexit-bookie-odds

Remember what Stalin said about voting.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 23, 2016, 03:11:36 PM

What did he say about voting?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 23, 2016, 03:24:56 PM

It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.-Joseph Stalin


Read more at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/josephstal109571.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 23, 2016, 03:44:52 PM

Late surge for remain.  Like with all of Hillary's close votes against sanders.  She miraculously always came out on top.

Looks like globalists will "win" again - damn!

Title: DWS served class action suit for rigging primaries
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 10, 2016, 11:44:41 PM

http://observer.com/2016/06/debbie-wasserman-schultz-served-class-action-lawsuit-for-rigging-primaries/

Title: Should felons vote - once they "paid" their debt to society
Post by: ccp on July 27, 2016, 04:58:52 PM

Pros and cons:

http://felonvoting.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=1319

Title: Global Guerillas: The American Autumn-- Russian Meddling
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 29, 2016, 06:22:09 AM

The American Autumn
Posted: 28 Jul 2016 03:49 PM PDT

Some thinking you might find useful.  It might sound wild and remote, but we are in a wild and out of control year.  ANYTHING can happen.
A treasure trove of e-mail and voicemail messages from the Democratic National Committee has been leaked.  Here's what happened.

   The first installment of the leaked e-mails was released by Wikileaks at the start of the DNC convention.  More leaks have and will follow.

   The contents of the leak show a brazen attempt by the DNC to help Hillary win the primary.  It also shows Dem campaign staffers to have acted inappropriately and in a prejudiced manner.

   Based on forensic analysis of the leak, it appears that the Russian government is involved
The effects of the leak have been immediate and intense.

   The leak provided the confirmation to Sanders supporters that the primary was rigged against them.  This has led to intense protests both within and outside the convention.  This suggests that the Clinton campaign lost a large number of Bernie supporters forever.

   The media and the US government reaction to the leak has been aggressive.  They claim that the release is a brazen attempt by Putin to influence the US election by helping Trump win. There have been attempts by the media to tie Trump to Putin but those lack evidence of any connection.

   Further, now that the Russian have interfered in our election, it's possible that they will do again.  This could be done through more leaks or as Bruce Schneier has pointed out: a hack of poorly secured voting machines on election day.  
Where could this end up?  This is the interesting part.  This election isn't a normal election.  It is also a good demonstration of something the great scholar of warfare, Martin van Creveld said ~ if you fight barbarians long enough, you become a barbarian too.

   The Trumpification of the Establishment >>  Trump isn't running a campaign, he's running an open source insurgency (see my earlier article on this) that makes him nearly immune to personal attack, and it is working.  He has secured a whopping 7 points (47 to 40) lead over Clinton in a recent national poll by the LA Times/USC -- despite the fact that nearly EVERYONE in the media, academic, government, and political establishment is working against him.  This loss of control has infuriated the establishment, leading to increasing levels of paranoia, hyperbole, and anger (particularly in the media).  In short, the establishment is starting to act increasingly like Trump does -- exaggerating and amplifying everything.

   Intentional Electoral Disruption.   The potential threat of Russian hacking (voting machines, etc.) fits the scenario I outlined in my freakishly popular US Civil War article from earlier this year.  With the tension between the divisions in the country increasing rapidly as both sides amplify and exaggerate every event, any overt attempt to rig (through disruption or hacking) the outcome of the election could result in widespread violence and/or a national fracture.

   The Administrative 'Coup'.  Here's something that I didn't think possible until this week.  The Trumpified establishment might have found an avenue for disqualifying Trump as President:  Trump's rhetorical suggestion that Russian hackers should find Hillary's deleted e-mails.  This has led many people in the establishment to contend that Trump committed 'treason and is now a clear and present danger to the security of the US.'  This national security angle -- the overt interference by Russia in US governance -- could make it possible to block Trump as a candidate on national security grounds.
 

Title: More on Russian Meddling
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 29, 2016, 06:39:45 AM

second post

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/7/26/1552616/-Russian-Hackers-Altered-Emails-Before-Release-to-Wikileaks

Title: Federal Appeals court strikes down voter ID law in NC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 29, 2016, 10:57:29 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/us/federal-appeals-court-strikes-down-north-carolina-voter-id-provision.html?emc=edit_na_20160729&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 29, 2016, 01:27:35 PM

The 3 judges involved in the decision if I read the link correctly:

Motz  is a Clinton appointee 1994
Wynn and Floyd are Obama appointees  2010 and 2011 respectively.

Take from this additional information what you will.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fourth_Circuit#Current_composition_of_the_court

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 29, 2016, 06:57:25 PM

Quelle surprise , , ,

Title: FBI warned EDC of Russki cyber attack in March; also
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 29, 2016, 07:15:42 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-hillary-clinton-cyber-attack-000000269.html?nhp=1


Separately:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/us/politics/clinton-campaign-hacked-russians.html

Title: Reuters changes poll methodology
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 29, 2016, 07:27:26 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/07/29/reuters-ipsos-poll-change-methodology/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 08, 2016, 07:20:29 AM

Seems like minorities are the only ones who cannot get to a DMV and get a license:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438754/james-okeefe-voter-fraud-videos-prove-voter-ID-laws-needed

Title: India's poor somehow manage to have voter ID
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 11, 2016, 02:16:17 AM

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/india-destroys-liberal-argument-that-voter-id-is-racist

Title: Re: India's poor somehow manage to have voter ID
Post by: DDF on August 11, 2016, 08:51:14 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 11, 2016, 02:16:17 AM

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/india-destroys-liberal-argument-that-voter-id-is-racist

Mexico does too. You're not voting here without your IFE (an ID from the Instituto Federal Electoral that EVERY Mexican is required to have specifically to combat voter fraud).

I'll add, that if you're a foreigner here, and so much as speak about Mexican politics, they can and will remove you from the country. That's why you never see any flags other than Mexican ones being flown here.

Title: Prager U. on the Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 13, 2016, 10:53:53 PM

https://www.facebook.com/prageru/videos/883270108382513/

Title: The Death Vote in NC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 15, 2016, 01:39:38 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2012/10/23/no-car-finds-2-214-registered-voters-110-years-of-age-older/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 15, 2016, 01:46:32 PM

One can only imagine the fertile ground for fraud in nursing homes where there are many residents who are demented or are not otherwise engaged.  I bet many of these vote.  If it is a relative who is voting for them in a way they know they would have voted that is probably ok.   But what about those who don't get visitors or visitors who help them vote? 

I wonder how many absentee ballots come in from nursing home residents.  I wonder how many are frauds.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on August 15, 2016, 07:07:37 PM

Quote from: ccp on August 15, 2016, 01:46:32 PM

One can only imagine the fertile ground for fraud in nursing homes where there are many residents who are demented or are not otherwise engaged.  I bet many of these vote.  If it is a relative who is voting for them in a way they know they would have voted that is probably ok.   But what about those who don't get visitors or visitors who help them vote? 

I wonder how many absentee ballots come in from nursing home residents.  I wonder how many are frauds.

I have seen profoundly mentally ill people taken to vote by their gov't employee minders. Gee, I wonder how many voted for Obama the last few times?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 15, 2016, 07:23:17 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 16, 2016, 07:24:53 PM

Why would anyone think electronic voting is a good idea.  For God's sake if the NSA can be hacked into there is no hope of security with voting.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/291534-can-the-2016-election-be-rigged-you-bet

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on August 17, 2016, 06:40:28 AM

Quote from: ccp on August 16, 2016, 07:24:53 PM

Why would anyone think electronic voting is a good idea.  For God's sake if the NSA can be hacked into there is no hope of security with voting.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/291534-can-the-2016-election-be-rigged-you-bet

Seems obvious to me but needs to be pointed out at every opportunity.

Liberals/Dems want to bring as many new people here as possible and they want to register as many new people as possible.  Legal or illegal, they can't even use the words.  Why do we want it to be easier to vote?  Most who vote already have no clue - on both sides.

And which side is racist?  The side who wants voters to show easily obtainable ID when they vote or the side that thinks some races and groups can't do that?

For some reason they require ID at DNC events (and built a wall around the house in Chappaqua).  Explain that.

Voting doesn't need to be a month either; it is a shared experience on a day we call election day.  You used to need a reason to vote absentee.   The neighbors would like to see your smiling face, not a vote from a hack room in Moscow.

How about we prosecute those who subvert our election process - for treason.

Title: Morris: Hillary's plan to encourage illegal voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 17, 2016, 11:06:21 AM

http://www.dickmorris.com/hillarys-audacious-plan-encourage-illegal-voting-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 17, 2016, 11:27:17 AM

"How about we prosecute those who subvert our election process - for treason."

Good point.  Those pricks at CNN seem to have no  problem with the Clintons bringing in illegals and rushing them to voting status or using them for that.

All they say is "where is the evidence"?

Yet 24 x 7 trashing Trump at every turn and trying to label him for treason for joking for Russia to release hillary's emails.

Title: 6/16/16 Stanford U. cries "Fraud!"
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 17, 2016, 02:48:26 PM

http://yournewswire.com/stanford-university-confirm-democratic-election-fraud/

Title: ABC News: Yes it is possible to hack the election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 23, 2016, 04:00:27 AM

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hack-election/story?id=41489017

Title: Yes elections can be and are being stolen
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 23, 2016, 06:08:17 AM

https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/videos/10154544020206336/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

Title: Well what does anyone with half a brain expect?
Post by: ccp on August 31, 2016, 12:46:52 PM

Of course the integrity of voting is not going to be absolute or even close.   People should just have to show up for voting and provide proof of who they are just like it always has been. 

electronic voting is never going to be secure anymore than any electronic means of doing anything else - period.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fbi-says-foreign-hackers-penetrated-000000175.html

Title: digitalize voting and we have risk of massive fraud not less fraud
Post by: ccp on September 08, 2016, 02:45:52 PM

Gee who could have guessed that digitalizing voting would allow/put fraud on steroids or add rocket boosters to fraud and the  net result would be unlimited fraud and confusion:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/jeh-johnson-says-dhs-effort-is-not-a-federal-takeover-of-elections/

Title: Re: digitalize voting and we have risk of massive fraud not less fraud
Post by: G M on September 08, 2016, 04:48:29 PM

I note that vote fraud is now only a issue because the dems fear it hurting them.

Quote from: ccp on September 08, 2016, 02:45:52 PM

Gee who could have guessed that digitalizing voting would allow put fraud on steroids or add rocket boosters to fraud and the risk of unlimited fraud and confusion:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/jeh-johnson-says-dhs-effort-is-not-a-federal-takeover-of-elections/

Title: Re: digitalize voting and we have risk of massive fraud not less fraud
Post by: DDF on September 08, 2016, 09:33:44 PM

Quote from: G M on September 08, 2016, 04:48:29 PM

I note that vote fraud is now only a issue because the dems fear it hurting them.

Quote from: ccp on September 08, 2016, 02:45:52 PM

Gee who could have guessed that digitalizing voting would allow put fraud on steroids or add rocket boosters to fraud and the risk of unlimited fraud and confusion:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/jeh-johnson-says-dhs-effort-is-not-a-federal-takeover-of-elections/

Painfully correct.

Title: Conservative Review: VA Dems blocking truth
Post by: ccp on September 09, 2016, 01:15:58 PM

Voter fraud?  What voter fraud?  No proof .  Not one shred of evidence.  Well don't expect anything from a state that has a Democratic mobster as its' boss:

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/09/virginia-dems-blocking-the-truth-about-100s-of-no-citizens-engaged-in-voter-fraud

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 16, 2016, 10:58:12 AM

voting started in some states.

On average over 1000 votes cast between now and what is supposed to be the Constitutional designated election day will turn out to be cast by North Carolinians who will die between now and then.

What fraud?  Not one shred of evidence.  Why is it always the DEms who do every thing possible to prevent any protocals in place to reduce risk of fraud.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440097/early-voting-north-carolina-voters-tempt-fate

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on September 16, 2016, 02:13:45 PM

Quote from: ccp on September 16, 2016, 10:58:12 AM

voting started in some states.

On average over 1000 votes cast between now and what is supposed to be the Constitutional designated election day will turn out to be cast by North Carolinians who will die between now and then.

What fraud?  Not one shred of evidence.  Why is it always the DEms who do every thing possible to prevent any protocals in place to reduce risk of fraud.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440097/early-voting-north-carolina-voters-tempt-fate

Thank you for connecting early voting with fraud.  Remember when we used to have "election day" as a nation and you needed a reason to vote "absentee"?

Title: "datamandering"
Post by: ccp on September 19, 2016, 06:14:26 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/how-technology-is-harming-american-democracy-213021407.html

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: DDF on September 19, 2016, 08:22:53 PM

Quote from: G M on October 14, 2008, 04:18:02 PM

You don't get them to the polls, you fill out absentee ballots. Just like how all the dead people in Chicago always vote.  Absentee and democrat.

This is supremely true here in Mexico currently. They have a Facebook page dedicated to it in fact, where they expressly ask you to register yourself and anyone else you may know, in order to keep Trump from winning.

As of posting this, just one post on the Avaaz page has some 106,000 shares https://secure.avaaz.org/en/globalvote_loc/ and they aren't the only page looking for voters. The fact that they ask you to register others is troubling. I am reading his entire thread, because in the end, to me, it is more important "who" counts the votes, but this should be noted. People are asking for people's names and addresses here in Mexico, in order to fill absentee ballots with their names.

https://www.facebook.com/Avaaz/?hc_ref=SEARCH&fref=nf

It is a fact, that many of these voters cannot be identified or vetted thoroughly.

Title: Diebold, Premier Election Solutions, & Election Systems and Software
Post by: DDF on September 19, 2016, 11:32:22 PM

Diebold, Premier Election Solutions, & Election Systems and Software

Who are these companies, what are they attached to, and why are they counting 80% of your vote, with little to no proof of who or what was actually voted for?

Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems, Inc), now currently Dominion Voting Systems based in Toronto Canada, is a company with heavy ties to the banking industry. Premier Election Solutions is headquartered in North Canton, Ohio, formerly run by Bob Urosevich and his brother, Todd Urosevich. Premier Election Solutions, Inc. is currently run by David Byrd as stated by wikipedia, which is odd because wikipedia claims the company was sold to Dominion. The company has changed its name and been sold, which muddies the waters quickly, but noteworthy, is the fact that after the company changed its name to "Premier Election Solutions," the company was then acquired by Election Systems and Software, who was started by Robert J. Urosevich. It needs to be noted, that there have been several controversies and even attempts by California and Maryland, to remove their machines and revert to paper ballots, but invariably, these attempts have failed, in the case of Maryland, by having the funding for the paper ballots rejected in July of 2008. There have been SEVERAL controversies with Diebold, including internal memos that were posted and forced to be removed with a cease and desist order.

If you feel confused, don't feel bad. It gets confusing quickly. Basically - Diebold = Premier - is then sold to ES&S, which then sells ES&S assets to Dominion, but states that Premier is currently operated by David Byrd (even though the company has been "sold" to a Canadian company) due to an anti trust lawsuit against ES&S. Why they would be allowed to hold sway in an American Anti-trust lawsuit is beyond me, as is the how and why any foreign company would be allowed to count American votes, both important points.

There have also been Sherman Anti-trust lawsuit(s) filed (one successful challenge), but none of those matter because of this:

Election Systems and Software has its headquarters in Omaha, Nebraska and was started by Robert J. Urosevich (the same "Bob Urosevich" listed above), with the help of his brother Todd (who was formerly working for IBM). Like Diebold Election Systems, ES&S has gone through several name changes, has had various acquisitions, controversies, and Anti-trust suits filed against it. ES&S was one of the top four providers of voting equipment used in the November 2004 election. The other three were Diebold Election Systems, Sequoia Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic. Four companies counting all of the votes in the United States for a presidential election? This is listed under note 15 http://criminalbrief.com/?p=1892 in Wikipedia's article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_Systems_%26_Software#cite_note-CB1-15 . While I don't like the source Wikipedia uses for its article, it does cite facts that I have come across from other sites. It also again references that the Secretaries of State are the ones responsible for deciding which machines to use, in the event that the State Congress declines to legislate against it or provide a budget for paper ballots. Moving on...

There has been much written about the Urosevich Brothers and black box voting. I had vaguely paid attention to it, until today, when I came across an article on them, that had several of the hyperlink references removed and returning 404 error messages, links from long established newspapers. What is odd, is that even though there are people paying attention to this, not enough are, and certainly not the federal government. Why would I say that?

Today, I came across a few astounding facts:

1. That the Urosevich Brothers (or the companies they founded) are counting 80% of the American vote.

2. That there is no public oversight of the voting (and even if their was, the brothers have been caught with faulty software being installed into their machines).

3. That the companies have had convicted felons as managers.

4. That the companies allow live streaming of the results to third parties and proclaim victories before all the votes have been tallied.

5. That the companies' machines can and do have their contents attacked and modified with memory cards, and it's been proven.

We discuss ballot stuffing and voter fraud (and rightfully so), but we discuss it as though it is something that happens solely before the counting has taken place, often, never questioning what happens with all of the votes after the fact. It bears mentioning, that even as recently as Obama, there have been recounts in states like Florida, in what was a hotly contested election, "President Obama was declared the winner of Florida's 29 electoral votes Saturday, ending a four-day count with a razor-thin margin that narrowly avoided an automatic recount that would have brought back memories of the 2000 election." http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/11/10/florida-vote-count-obama-romney/1696343/ , but it goes on to say that Obama had 332 electoral votes. Who and what counted the  votes from the other states? Who SPECIFICALLY was watching? Were you? I wasn't. I took their word for it, or even if I suspected voter rigging, what was I going to do about it?

We start by finding all of their dirty, little secrets and bringing them here.

Being that I have made four principle claims that need to be supported by evidence, let me start with that task:

1. That the Urosevich Brothers (or the companies they founded) are counting 80% of the American vote.

Thus far, I have found that four major companies have counted votes in the past elections. Many of these articles are dated, and since, there have been anti-trust suits that have spread assets and companies around. The first thing we need to do, is prove that it is possible for two people to have utter control over the vote counting process, and that even if articles are dated, see how it happened, and who is counting the votes now.

This article http://www.rense.com/general52/bros.htm , makes the claim that "Voters can run, but they can't hide from these guys. Meet the Urosevich brothers, Bob and Todd. Their respective companies, Diebold and ES&S, will count (using BOTH computerized ballot scanners and touchscreen machines) about 80% of all votes cast in the upcoming U.S. presidential election." They cite Bev Harris' book, "Black Box Voting."

Digging into it further, with the search query, "count 80 percent of the votes" Google will initially return six results. The search engine Dogpile also returns six results, but different sources, so I went back to Google and had the omitted results added and got 218 results. When I type in "count 80% of the votes," i get (2) hard matches from Google. The point being, people are writing books and saying that two people wield such control over the American Voting System, a system I might add, that people have died over, in the recognition of their right to freedom, and no one is talking about it. If you Google "uber" you will automatically get 189 million ways to get to where you're going, but give someone the keys to the kingdom, and no one says a peep. That is odd.

Quora mentions this. "80% of the US will vote using privately owned electronic voting machines. How do we prevent election fraud, if a hardcopy recount isn't possible?" https://www.quora.com/80-of-the-US-will-vote-using-privately-owned-electronic-voting-machines-How-do-we-prevent-election-fraud-if-a-hardcopy-recount-isnt-possible
Someone answers wisely, "For openers, we destroy and remove ALL electronic voting machines throughout the United States and its territories, and revert to paper ballots ONLY."

In regard to Harris' claim that they do indeed count 80% of the votes (not getting into the fact that their machines "drop" votes, and a plethora of other problems), there are others that cite the claim; "Chuck Hegel of Nebraska, a CEO of one of the four major voting machine corporations, resigned his position to run for public office. He then won the vote, counted by his own machine. He had a $5 million ownership in the company that counted 80 per cent of the votes. Chuck Hegel’s opponent paid for a recount on the same machines that Hegel had built." http://discourseanddisclosure.com/frontPage/pushButton.htm

and "Beverley Harris, at Black Box Voting, (her book can be downloaded for free here: http://blackboxvoting.org/black-box-voting-book/ ), said that she went into the computer, by-passed the password and changed the vote in less than 10 minutes. In three different electoral counts in three different states, each candidate who won, did so by exactly the same number of votes!
A CEO of one of the four major voting machine corporations, resigned his position to run for public office. He then won the vote, counted by his own machine. He had a $5 million ownership in the company that counted 80 per cent of the votes." http://dablogfodder.blogspot.mx/2012/03/winning-elections-in-21st-century.html

and It needs to be mentioned, that when I'm looking fo a major news outlet to cite as a source, the only one that I can come across, from this link http://www.wanttoknow.info/votingproblems which leads to this link from http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/elections/sfl-pn.pre.7a4oct30,0,4018585.story, coming back as dead, amongst others, which specifically made the 80% claim. I wonder if that has anything to do with Diebold also having their internal memos removed from the public eye?

Granted, the CBS link from the wanttoknow link works and puts the number in "Diebold's" hands as well as Sequio's (another manufacturer) at just 30%, they do admit that 30% of the voting populous (30 million +/- voters), a huge number of people with no paper trail. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/e-voting-is-the-fix-in/
This also doesn't include the counting machines from the same companies, that will optically scan ballots, many times "dropping votes" and prone to error, so based on that Bev Harris' claim of 80% isn't so far fetched. In fact, Harris doesn't allow her book to be replicated in any form without specific permission, but I can paraphrase. On page 28 of her book, she discusses ES&S counting 56% of the votes in the United States. She also discusses Hugo Chavez using the machines in other areas of her book, further discusses error rates of up to 100% in Orange County, California, and cites her sources, primarily, ES&S themselves, on their own website admit to counting 56% of the vote themselves. They don't even hide it.



2. That there is no public oversight of the voting (and even if their was, the brothers have been caught with faulty software being installed into their machines).

It isn't really necessary to drive this point home, because the fact is, if you're reading this, in all likelihood, you have never seen any votes counted other than in school, have you? I know I haven't. Keenly, MSNBC has also made this claim. Also, they put the number at 50 million (even more than the claim made by CBS above).
"Although up to 50 million Americans are expected to vote on touchscreen machines on Nov. 2, federal regulators have virtually no oversight over testing of the technology. The certification process, in part because the voting machine companies pay for it, is described as obsolete by those charged with overseeing it..." http://www.nbcnews.com/id/5762054/from/RL.4#.V-DTMa0hPtQ

In regard to faulty software, why do that when you can rig the software outright, as testified by Clinton Eugene “Clint” Curtis, before members of U.S. House Judiciary Members in Ohio. http://www.activistpost.com/2016/03/watch-computer-programmer-testifies-under-oath-he-coded-computers-to-rig-elections.html
The fact that these companies operate at all, much less, in secrecy, is something that should no longer be tolerated at all, in any election, at any level.

3. That the companies have had convicted felons as managers.

This is a matter of fact and matter of public record for anyone that wishes to look.

"The Director of Operations under Diebold had been imprisoned for computer fraud and five other felons were identified in the company. "
http://discourseanddisclosure.com/frontPage/pushButton.htm

Jeffrey Dean - programmer for Diebold, case no. 89-1-04034-1, had access to the entire voting system in King County, and 24 hour access.

"“Defendant’s thefts occurred over a 2 1/2 year period of time, there were
multiple incidents, more than the standard range can account for, the ac
tual monetary loss was substantially greater than typical for the offense,
the crimes and their cover-up involved a high degree of sophistication and
planning in the use and alteration of records in the computerized account
ing system that defendant maintained for the victim, and the defendant used
his position of trust and fiduciary responsibility as a computer systems and
accounting consultant for the victim to facilitate the commission of the offenses.”


4. That the companies allow live streaming of the results to third parties and proclaim victories before all the votes have been tallied.

"Clearly the subject of AP having direct data feed from the mainframe computer was something Burnham did not want me to discuss."
http://www.votefraud.org/how_a_private_company_counts_our_votes.htm


5. That the companies' machines can and do have their contents attacked and modified with memory cards, and it's been proven.

"A report commissioned by Ohio’s top elections official on December 15, 2007 has found that all five voting systems used in Ohio (made by Elections Systems and Software; Premier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems); and Hart InterCivic) have critical flaws that could undermine the integrity of the 2008 general election."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/us/15ohio.html?_r=2&oref=slogin
In the article, Chris Riggall, a Premier spokesman, said hardware and software problems had been corrected in his company’s new products, which will be available for installation in 2008, but goes on to state that "It is important to note,” he said, “that there has not been a single documented case of a successful attack against an electronic voting system, in Ohio or anywhere in the United States," but acknowledges that there was indeed the need to remedy hardware issues and upgrade software. The part that he leaves out, is that who from the public was there to verify that the vote count was accurate? Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner claims that "two elections workers on charges of rigging recounts" led to convictions, so there has indeed been voter rigging. I'm certain if I look more, I will find more cases of it, because where it's happened once, it will happen again.

Quoting others here, this isn't something new, but this quote mentions something important:

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 27, 2006, 12:51:47 PM

Quote of the Day II

"Diebold, one of the biggest manufacturers of computerized voting machines was until recently headed by a CEO who happened to be a vocal supporter of President Bush. Writing in the New York Times in 2003, Paul Krugman sought to blow the lid off: 'You don't have to believe in a central conspiracy to worry that partisans will take advantage of an insecure, unverifiable voting system to manipulate election results... The credibility of U.S. democracy may be at stake.' That theme was rolled out again this election season on left-wing blogs and in the print media. There was even an HBO documentary, 'Hacking Democracy,' which emphasized the danger of Diebold disenfranchisement. But then, just as the paranoia reached its peak, a funny thing happened: The Democrats won on Election Day. As suddenly as they had blared to life, the alarm bells fell silent. The critics paused for a moment, then burst out in a new refrain: The people have spoken! The realignment is here! Democracy works! And so the Diebold villain has retreated to the shadows for the next two years, at least" -- from an editorial in National Review.

It is important to mention that it is likely that most of us have our own political views. There has been much stated about Goldman Sach's laundry list of former employees receiving government positions after leaving the banking giant and everything else wrong with the banking industry that is "too big to fail,", or of Bill and Hillary Clinton's "pay to play" foundation, or even of Trump's issues.

Independently of what flavor of politics you choose, shouldn't you be the one allowed to make that choice? Shouldn't it be respected? I think it should, and I might not even necessarily agree with you or even like you, in fact, I probably don't. That doesn't mean that our voices shouldn't be heard and listened to by those we charge with governance.

We need to all call our state secretaries, governors, and congressman and insist on paper ballots, that can be counted physically, repeatedly, and with hard proof. We discuss dead people and foreigners voting, as well as absentee ballot fraud, but never question the hand that counts the ballots, do not even know who they are and there is a problem with that.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: G M on September 20, 2016, 07:05:49 AM

You really need to screen cap the below FB page and forward this to the Trump campaign, maybe drudgereport.com

Quote from: DDF on September 19, 2016, 08:22:53 PM

Quote from: G M on October 14, 2008, 04:18:02 PM

You don't get them to the polls, you fill out absentee ballots. Just like how all the dead people in Chicago always vote.  Absentee and democrat.

This is supremely true here in Mexico currently. They have a Facebook page dedicated to it in fact, where they expressly ask you to register yourself and anyone else you may know, in order to keep Trump from winning.

As of posting this, just one post on the Avaaz page has some 106,000 shares https://secure.avaaz.org/en/globalvote_loc/ and they aren't the only page looking for voters. The fact that they ask you to register others is troubling. I am reading his entire thread, because in the end, to me, it is more important "who" counts the votes, but this should be noted. People are asking for people's names and addresses here in Mexico, in order to fill absentee ballots with their names.

https://www.facebook.com/Avaaz/?hc_ref=SEARCH&fref=nf

It is a fact, that many of these voters cannot be identified or vetted thoroughly.

Title: Re: ACORN
Post by: DDF on September 20, 2016, 07:12:27 AM

Quote from: G M on September 20, 2016, 07:05:49 AM

You really need to screen cap the below FB page and forward this to the Trump campaign, maybe drudgereport.com

Quote from: DDF on September 19, 2016, 08:22:53 PM

Quote from: G M on October 14, 2008, 04:18:02 PM

You don't get them to the polls, you fill out absentee ballots. Just like how all the dead people in Chicago always vote.  Absentee and democrat.

This is supremely true here in Mexico currently. They have a Facebook page dedicated to it in fact, where they expressly ask you to register yourself and anyone else you may know, in order to keep Trump from winning.

As of posting this, just one post on the Avaaz page has some 106,000 shares https://secure.avaaz.org/en/globalvote_loc/ and they aren't the only page looking for voters. The fact that they ask you to register others is troubling. I am reading his entire thread, because in the end, to me, it is more important "who" counts the votes, but this should be noted. People are asking for people's names and addresses here in Mexico, in order to fill absentee ballots with their names.

https://www.facebook.com/Avaaz/?hc_ref=SEARCH&fref=nf

It is a fact, that many of these voters cannot be identified or vetted thoroughly.

I have screen captured it and will do so right now. I'm still sifting through Harris' book and the amount of problems with the machines, the problems with the Election Assistance Commission. It's bad and I feel stupid. I've never really looked into it. I'll send this to Trump and Drudge right now. I'm not even counting other things I have seen in the news here.

What's most troubling to me about AVAAZ, is that they are asking you for other people's emails and names, stating that they will safeguard your information, but what's to stop them from registering those names themselves and voting against anyone? Nothing.

Edit: Done deal on both accounts. I also sent it to Breitbart, called Trump Campaign, etc.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 20, 2016, 08:07:57 AM

WWWOOOFFF!!!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 20, 2016, 09:05:04 AM

Great post DDF.   I hope Trump and Drudge pick it up.

The *propaganda* that digital voting is not extremely high risk for fraud  seems just as ridiculous to me as when in the early 2000's Purdue used to send there attractive blond female drug around to our offices claiming that if you treat legitimate pain with narcotics patients do not get addicted.

You just know it ain't true.

We are so screwed.

Title: Manipulating elections
Post by: G M on September 20, 2016, 03:52:22 PM

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2016/09/19/manipulating-american-elections-the-lefts-ten-wishes-to-transform-america/?singlepage=true

Fundamental transformation.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 20, 2016, 05:43:41 PM

Yup.  The Democrat party does everything in its' power to increase the risk for fraud and the likelihood that nothing can be done about it.

If what GM posted is not enough now this comes up on Drudge:

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/296840-changing-who-controls-icann-jeopardizes-our-presidential

Title: Strong clip on electoral fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 21, 2016, 11:26:54 AM

https://www.facebook.com/nationalreview/videos/10157410268980093/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

Title: Re: Strong clip on electoral fraud
Post by: DDF on September 21, 2016, 01:16:01 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 21, 2016, 11:26:54 AM

https://www.facebook.com/nationalreview/videos/10157410268980093/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

The idea that this can go on, and in those types of quantities, is just insane. Anyone want to bet that the moment Democrats get control of the Supreme court and have an established numerical superiority, they implement mandatory voter ID?

Title: Globalists registering Americans abroad , , ,
Post by: DDF on September 26, 2016, 12:36:56 AM

Looks like at least Breitbart and Reuters picked it up.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/21/surprise-that-will-end-trump-globalists-registering-8-million/

"While illegal for registered U.S. charities to work with or for presidential candidates, a spokeswoman for Avaaz denied any connection to the Hillary campaign when quizzed. Campaigners with Avaaz however, were recorded shouting, “Vote for Hillary!” during the demonstration."

"They claim to be “independent and accountable” and “wholly member-funded”. Yet, they were formed by the merger of several establishment groups including MoveOn.org – a group that received $1.46 million from George Soros during the 2004 election cycle – and Res Publica, which has received grants totalling $250,000 from the liberal billionaire’s Open Society group.

Furthermore, Avaaz co-founder Ricken Patel has worked for – either directly or as a consultant – numerous globalist foundations and corporations such as the Rockefeller Foundation and the Gates Foundation."

Title: Fraud very rare......1 in a million ....... no evidence....
Post by: ccp on September 29, 2016, 07:59:21 AM

lie lie lie.

Mall shooter illegally voted.  Anyone care to guess which party he voted for?  :-P

Like we posted for years.  If we cannot adequately ID people then how can we know if someone is voting illegally?   How does someone get on the voting roles to start with?  If you are so and so and listed as living at an address?  Anyone can walk in and vote if they have an address?  If a house full of illegals walk into a voting site and show something with their name and address how do they get stopped?

If they use a phony SSN #?  The crats know all the scams.   

http://www.king5.com/news/local/investigators-may-probe-cascade-mall-suspects-citizenship-status-voting-record/327490798

Title: second post
Post by: ccp on September 29, 2016, 08:05:07 AM

Quoting Gomer Pyle and Doug ,  "surprise surprise surprise"

Murderer nominated Eva Braun AND Hillary to be on $10 bill.

Two of the most evil women in history:

http://heavy.com/news/2016/09/arcan-cetin-hillary-clinton-liberal-conservative-democrat-trump-muslim-islam-turkey-isis-hispanic-cascade-mall-shooter-gunman-shooting-twitter-facebook/

Title: 3rd post
Post by: ccp on September 29, 2016, 08:12:35 AM

It says on the registration form you need an "ID" number but then states if you do not have a drivers license or SSN number , a number "will be assigned to you".

So a house full of illegals can simply lie and state they are US citizens and get an ID number assigned, and they can vote.  Period.  And if Democrats are overseeing the voting in a district they will simply not even question anything.  And if Republicans do they probably can't do much or else they get accused of disenfranchisement or racism or bigotry.  So there you have it.  It is a joke:

https://vote.gov/files/federal-voter-registration_1-25-16_english.pdf

Title: Felons to vote in CA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 30, 2016, 06:44:32 PM

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-felons-in-jails-to-be-allowed-to-vote-1475094969-htmlstory.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 01, 2016, 06:28:33 AM

"http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-felons-in-jails-to-be-allowed-to-vote-1475094969-htmlstory.html"

There still in jail!   :x

Those bastard dirty  democrats.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 03, 2016, 07:10:31 PM

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-30/meet-young-virginia-democrat-registered-19-dead-people-vote-virginia

Title: now that voter fraud is debunked thanks to politicos "fact" check
Post by: ccp on October 06, 2016, 09:06:37 AM

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/10/strangers-in-our-own-land-the-non-citizen-voter-fraud-disaster

And people wonder why half the country is mad?  And no it is not racism xenophobia or any other ism or phobia

Title: Re: now that voter fraud is debunked thanks to politicos "fact" check
Post by: DDF on October 06, 2016, 09:33:28 AM

Quote from: ccp on October 06, 2016, 09:06:37 AM

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/10/strangers-in-our-own-land-the-non-citizen-voter-fraud-disaster

And people wonder why half the country is mad?  And no it is not racism xenophobia or any other ism or phobia

I know where this all ends.... history has shown us time and time again.

Title: Nnother Federal Judge appointed by Obama
Post by: ccp on October 10, 2016, 07:56:40 PM

Favors the Democrats.

Overrules Gov Scott in Florida:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/10/politics/federal-judge-extends-florida-voter-registration-deadline/index.html

Title: Vote fraud admitted in NYC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 11, 2016, 05:44:59 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/11/wow-nyc-election-official-claims-voter-fraud-minority-neighborhoods-new-james-okeefe-video/

Title: Podesta email shows Team Clinton believed Obama engaged in voter fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 11, 2016, 10:32:36 PM

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/leaked-podesta-emails-show-coordinated-voter-fraud-likely-in-colorado

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 17, 2016, 03:00:35 PM

We have had lots of evidence of voter fraud over the years and anyone would know this is the tip of the ice berg. 
We have little verifictation of who is voting or if they are who they say they are or even if they legally able to vote.

We have many examples of illegals with ID s and addresses who go and vote multiple times.  We know it is very hard to even track this.  We have massive increase in risk of voter fraud with digital voting and not written documentation to even use as back up.

Yet we have Republicans running around saying voter fraud is "impossible'.  And they wonder why we don't trust them and resent them:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-ramps-voter-fraud-claim-digs-against-women-153826808.html

Title: Proof of citizenship disallowed
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 18, 2016, 10:32:09 AM

http://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/appeals-court-nixes-proof-citizenship-for-voting-georgia/wq0WTs7FtiqWeQQNHldaPP/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, rigged
Post by: DougMacG on October 18, 2016, 10:45:19 AM

ccp:  "Will makes the case that Trump "has a point".   And we all know he is famous for being against Trump.   Yet Paul Ryan,  RNC lawyers, and the never Trumpers do nothing but undermine him.   They sing the tune of the LEFT undermining the most of the members of the Republican party for the umpteenth time.  Why couldn't Ryan have said something like this?:

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/10/18/george-will-trump-has-a-point-on-rigged-elections/ "


Trump could point to 3 things that happened in Obama's reelection to evidence the rig:

1.  IRS Targeting - 700 conservative groups were prevented from raising money and participating (against Obama's reelection and policies) by action / inaction of the federal bureaucracy, while the IRS commissioner was visiting the White House 500 times more often than his predecessor.

2. Two against one debates, ex parte media and playing field, Candy Crowtley, case in point.  It wasn't just that she jumped into the debate or that she was wrong, it was that the move was quite obviously planned, prearranged and coordinated between the campaign and the questioner.  Is Chris Wallace preparing for this week's debate by planning it with one side?

3. Benghazi Lie - and again the coordination with the media (see point 2) - The narrative was that al Qaida was in retreat and that 'smart diplomacy' was working and the act of war against our unprotected compound was a perfect refutation of all of it.  Obama, Clinton, Susan Rice and the top levels of some of the agencies conspired with the state-run media to ride their false story through to the election.

Is 'media conspiring with the campaign' too strong a charge?  No, it's documented in the emails.  It's also on display all around us.  Watch the latest buzzword montage, Trump is "dangerous".  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ4juxYA41o
These examples are planted by the campaign and repeated to the point of reaching every voter by the media.  

Title: Is Vote Fraud One Directional?
Post by: DougMacG on October 18, 2016, 10:56:23 AM

I was watching the debate with a 'liberal' or at least a centrist, when Trump said "voter fraud", I heard the retort, "both ways".

But is it?  Are conservative Republican precincts committing electoral crimes of the types or on the scale we have seen in urban, leftist centers?  Are the dead, the felons, the illegals coming out equally or similarly for both sides.  I say no, but what is the evidence of that?

Maybe they refer to voting machine manufacturers being owned by corporations, or something like that...

Even if voter fraud went both ways, wouldn't that be even more reason to crack down and tolerate none of it?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on October 18, 2016, 12:10:48 PM

The Clinton underlings explain in detail, how they intend to commit and get away with voter fraud.

[youtube]hDc8PVCvfKs[/youtube]

Title: George Will makes a point that Trump has a point
Post by: ccp on October 18, 2016, 12:20:31 PM

Will makes the case that Trump "has a point".   And we all know he is famous for being against Trump.   Yet Paul Ryan,  RNC lawyers, and the never Trumpers do nothing but undermine him.   They sing the tune of the LEFT undermining the most of the members of the Republican party for the umpteenth time.  Why couldn't Ryan have said something like this?:

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/10/18/george-will-trump-has-a-point-on-rigged-elections/

Title: Podesta says it is OK for illegals to vote withd rivers license
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 19, 2016, 03:14:26 PM

http://eheadlines.com/podesta-says-its-ok-for-illegals-to-vote-with-drivers-license/

Title: Podesta says it is OK for illegals to vote with rivers license
Post by: ccp on October 19, 2016, 05:01:52 PM

"http://eheadlines.com/podesta-says-its-ok-for-illegals-to-vote-with-drivers-license/"

And we know what the slimy Clintonesque response is:

Deny it and the information was tampered with.  

And the media will post those claims and agree nothing there and lets move along folks.   Now back to Trump and Gloria Allred.

Title: Some very good points
Post by: ccp on October 22, 2016, 04:18:37 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/10/22/stolen-elections-happened-can-happen/


" In thousands of apartment buildings and nursing homes, millions of mailed ballots await pick-up by their owners– or by a  ballot harvester who will gladly vote the ballot or offer assistance in filling out the ballot and then delivering it to a polling place."

I brought up the likelihood of Nursing Home residents who are demented voting.  If it a family member voting the way they think the person would vote I am ok with it.  But what about patients or residents who have no visitors.  Does anyone think that someone there could not register them to vote and "help" them out?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2016, 05:13:00 PM

https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/14691022_570168849845785_3064106336822598176_n.jpg?oh=396614a4aff3cb44a501e2f63fade66a&oe=58A7548C

Title: Hillary's early voting location violation North Carolina
Post by: ccp on October 23, 2016, 05:42:56 PM

Bill did the EXACT same thing in the primary vote against Bernie Sanders.

Now Hillary continues to break the law.  Nothing here folks move along:

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/hillary-campaigns-early-voting-location-violation-nc-law/

Title: Law Class Discussion Regarding High Levels of Corruption.
Post by: DDF on October 23, 2016, 07:41:54 PM

Quote from: ccp on October 23, 2016, 05:42:56 PM

Now Hillary continues to break the law.  Nothing here folks move along:

I brought this up yesterday in one of my law classes.

Turns out, the only ones who can really punish Obama, Clinton, Comey, etc., when they have that much power and Congress refuses to prosecute, is the National Secretary of Defense or a General. We all obviously know where that would go, but when the entire snake is corrupt (and it is), that is one of only two remaining options.

I just thought I would bring that up.

Title: Re: Law Class Discussion Regarding High Levels of Corruption.
Post by: DougMacG on October 24, 2016, 08:17:54 AM

Quote from: DDF on October 23, 2016, 07:41:54 PM

Quote from: ccp on October 23, 2016, 05:42:56 PM

Now Hillary continues to break the law.  Nothing here folks move along:

I brought this up yesterday in one of my law classes.

Turns out, the only ones who can really punish Obama, Clinton, Comey, etc., when they have that much power and Congress refuses to prosecute, is the National Secretary of Defense or a General. We all obviously know where that would go, but when the entire snake is corrupt (and it is), that is one of only two remaining options.

I just thought I would bring that up.

DDF, right.  When the corruption is that high up, the only remedy is political. More than 50% think Clinton should be prosecuted yet she still leads slightly overall in the polls, but always at less than 50%.  Clinton could be impeached if she were still Secretary, but she isn't.  The IRS chief, former Attorney General, current Attorney General, Treasury Secretary and President and VP should be impeached, but that is a political matter.  Because of super-majorities required, it only happens when their own party turns against them.  Instead the opposition is divided and the party in power is poised to win on a campaign promising that corruption in Washington will get worse.  We are screwed, unless the drain the swamp message suddenly takes the day at the ballot box but the voting has already begun.  No real time left.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 24, 2016, 09:12:44 AM

 "but always at less than 50%. "

Bill won both elections under 50% as well.  Yet the 50+ who vote against them will be forced to 16 years of the grifters and their mob.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 28, 2016, 11:47:56 AM

This should throw cold water on the faces of the DC elite, never Trumpers, liberals and the rest who acted so high and mighty to suggest Trump was a disgrace to suggest the system is rigged or at least could be.  Here she is right on tape suggesting an election should have been rigged:


http://observer.com/2016/10/2006-audio-emerges-of-hillary-clinton-proposing-rigging-palestine-election/

Title: Schlafly on voter fraud
Post by: ccp on October 31, 2016, 06:46:57 PM

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/column/is-the-election-rigged.html

Title: Re: Schlafly on voter fraud
Post by: G M on October 31, 2016, 07:06:53 PM

Quote from: ccp on October 31, 2016, 06:46:57 PM

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/column/is-the-election-rigged.html

This will be a record year for the deceased, illegal aliens and imaginary people voting. 100% will go dem.

Title: Re: Schlafly on voter fraud
Post by: DougMacG on October 31, 2016, 09:56:14 PM

Quote from: ccp on October 31, 2016, 06:46:57 PM

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/column/is-the-election-rigged.html

Nice to see Phyllis Schlafly's sons carrying on her good work.

Title: Re: Schlafly on voter fraud
Post by: DDF on October 31, 2016, 10:03:36 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on October 31, 2016, 09:56:14 PM

Quote from: ccp on October 31, 2016, 06:46:57 PM

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/column/is-the-election-rigged.html

Nice to see Phyllis Schlafly's sons carrying on her good work.

I agree with everything except the felons not being able to vote. They're citizens, they're taxed, and they're expected to abide by the law... and if they don't have the right to vote in their own country, once they're law abiding, you don't have a right to expect them to not shoot you (just as was done by the colonists to the English).

I don't like democrats either, but the idea that they're expected to behave and pay taxes, and when they do so, not have a political voice, I don't agree with that at all.

Edit: The laws to regain one's rights are far too restrictive and cumbersome. They need to be made automatic after a certain period of time lapses, and until they are (a full restoration of rights), people have no right to expect them to participate in a system that will punish them eternally.

How many people speed, get a ticket, but they aren't kept from driving forever. People hold felons to a standard worse than they hold their own marriages to, which are supposed to be forever, but in felon's cases, "forever," is forever. I'm surprised more of them don't go full tilt. It isn't as though they're ever accepted again, even when they do everything correctly.

Title: Touch screen voting
Post by: ccp on November 01, 2016, 07:36:28 AM

At least with chads one could look at the four corners............. :oops:

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/11/use-a-touch-screen-to-vote-your-civil-rights-are-being-violated

Title: WaPo compares US elections to the other western democracies
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2016, 10:18:10 PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/29/u-s-elections-ranked-worst-among-western-democracies-heres-why/?utm_term=.71395e3b1d9b

Title: DDF's post #579 Part Two
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2016, 10:54:39 PM

This is over my head, , , but sounds really scary.  Can someone break this down for me?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-04/hacker-guccifer-20-warns-he-has-info-inside-fec-democrats-may-rig-elections

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fob-AGgZn44

short version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ezmpqwVEnM

Title: Re: DDF's post #579 Part Two
Post by: DougMacG on November 05, 2016, 12:30:53 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2016, 10:54:39 PM

This is over my head, , , but sounds really scary.  Can someone break this down for me?
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-04/hacker-guccifer-20-warns-he-has-info-inside-fec-democrats-may-rig-elections
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fob-AGgZn44
short version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ezmpqwVEnM

Hard to follow the details but they are saying that in a day when everything is getting hacked, from Home Depot and Target to the Secretary of State and President, our electronic voting system can be hacked.

We learned in the Chavez recall that you can observe all the local polling places and still completely miss centralized tampering.  It wasn't long ago that it was Democrats suspecting Republicans of owning voting machine companies and controlling their mis-use.  As far as I know, all the large scale cheating is on the Dem side, the MN/Al Franken/60th Senator race is a case in point.  Illegal votes were greater than the margin of victory, allowing for Obamacare's passage and other havoc.

People on our side (both sides) need to volunteer to be poll watchers, election judges and observers.  Conservatives watching conservative districts is not enough.  The larger cheating IMHO happens in the larger Dem polling places.  The most obvious infractions include allowing votes from those not eligible, people who are illegals, felons, dead or already voted perhaps somewhere else.

Less visible is the centralized hack.  Preventing that requires central scrutiny by well-placed and well-trained observers and investigators with the right access.  I doubt that is happening.  Instead our chief of federal law enforcement denies there is any problem and calls anyone who believes otherwise "dangerous".

We need enforcement and penalties that are scary.  To me, undermining our electoral system in any way is akin to treason.  If not the death penalty, we need punishment that is truly not worth risking and enforcement mechanism that makes each potential cheater believe they will be caught.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on November 05, 2016, 05:16:14 PM

I don't know if people picked up on it, but the information and system can be accessed through wifi/hardline, which automatically means that it can be controlled remotely, by the intended recipient, or anyone else.

Title: The rigging of the election is on!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2016, 08:36:17 PM

https://ihavethetruth.com/2016/11/05/florida-massive-voter-fraud/

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-04/apple-offering-anti-trump-app-allowing-voters-trade-votes-across-state-lines

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/josephstal109571.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on November 07, 2016, 10:12:00 PM

The only really important question...

Has their been anything at all, that has given you (as an American), distrust in the American electoral process, or made you suspicious of fraud?

If that answer is "yes," how can you, as an American, trust that you are governing yourself, and not being lorded over?

You can't.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 08, 2016, 04:23:02 AM

"If that answer is "yes," how can you, as an American, trust that you are governing yourself, and not being lorded over?"

We can't.  And worse, with a dishonest corrupt media there is no stopping it. 
Now maybe  people can understand what we faced in the music business.   The only people who could possibly do anything about it - won't.  Law enforcement, media, government officials.  Forget it.

Title: FL harvesting nursing home residents
Post by: ccp on November 08, 2016, 03:52:06 PM

Recall I noted that almost certainly there would be voter fraud among nursing home residents who are not capable of voting:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/08/reports-mentally-ill-voters-used-pawns-florida/

Title: 13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote
Post by: DougMacG on November 09, 2016, 07:14:32 PM

13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

The Daily Signal logo
SEARCH
CONNECT
MENU
Must Reads
INTERNATIONALCOMMENTARYIranian women pass next to an anti-U.S. mural on their way to the former U.S. Embassy in Tehran.(Photo: Abedin Taherkenareh/EPA/Newscom)
Iran Is Wrong: Trump Can Absolutely Overturn the Nuclear Deal

HEALTH CARE NEWSWith Donald Trump's election to the presidency, it's become more likely that Republicans will be able to successfully repeal Obamacare. (Photo: Nate Chute/Reuters/Newscom)
How Republicans Can Start to Dismantle Obamacare With a Trump Presidency

SOCIETYCOMMENTARYDonald Trump should commit to protecting the free exercise of religion for all Americans of all faiths. (Photo: Jeff Malet Photography/Newscom)
Make Religious Freedom Great Again

LAWCOMMENTARY
Poll Shows Noncitizens Can Shape Elections
Hans von Spakovsky   / @HvonSpakovsky / June 02, 2015 / comments

(iStockphoto)

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Hans von Spakovsky
Hans von Spakovsky
@HvonSpakovsky
Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research.
A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.

In our 2012 book on voter fraud, John Fund and I noted numerous cases of noncitizen registration and voting all over the country. Only a month ago, the Board of Immigration Appeals of the Executive Office for Immigration Review at the Justice Department held that a Peruvian citizen who illegally registered and voted in the 2006 congressional election could be deported for violating federal law. The only reason she was caught is because she applied for naturalization in 2007 and admitted in the INS interview that she had voted in an American election.

In 2014, a study released by three professors at Old Dominion University and George Mason University, based on survey data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, estimated 6.4 percent of noncitizens voted illegally in the 2008 presidential election and 2.2 percent voted in the 2010 midterm congressional elections.

Since 80 percent of noncitizens vote Democratic, according to the study, noncitizen participation could have “been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes [in North Carolina in 2008], and Congressional elections” such as the 2008 race in Minnesota in which Al Franken was elected to the U.S. Senate, giving “Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote” to pass Obamacare. The Old Dominion/George Mason study was sharply attacked by progressive critics, but the mounting evidence makes clear this is a real problem.

In 2013, McLaughlin, a Republican pollster, conducted an extensive “National Hispanic Survey” to determine the attitudes of Hispanic Americans on immigration issues. McLaughlin went to a great deal of trouble to try to make this survey as accurate as possible, including conducting 60 percent of the interviews in Spanish. In results that run counter to what the mainstream media seems to think about the attitudes of Hispanics, the results showed strong support for everything from increased border security and tougher enforcement of immigration laws to “stopping undocumented immigrants who are already here from getting food stamps, welfare, Medicaid and Obamacare benefits.”

But buried in the back of the survey on page 68 is a “Voter Profile” that reveals that 13 percent of noncitizen respondents admitted they were registered to vote (a violation of state and federal law), which matches closely the Old Dominion/George Mason study finding that 14.8 percent of noncitizens admitted they were registered to vote in 2008 and 15.6 percent of noncitizens admitted they were registered in 2010.

When these numbers were adjusted to take into account various factors, such as noncitizens “who said they were not [registered but] were actually registered,” the Old Dominion/George Mason study’s authors concluded that the true percentage was probably closer to 25 percent.

There is no doubt the registration rate of noncitizens varies depending on the jurisdiction, and the percentage of those voting is likely smaller. But whether the registration rate is 13 percent as McLaughlin found or 25 percent as the Old Dominion/George Mason study estimated, there seems little doubt that there are enough noncitizens registering and voting to potentially make the difference in close elections.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 09, 2016, 07:30:53 PM

"13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote"

That would certainly be more than enough to explain Trump's popular vote loss.

No rigging folks.  Move along.   Keep order here.

Title: Re: 13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote
Post by: DDF on November 09, 2016, 07:31:45 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on November 09, 2016, 07:14:32 PM

13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote

Just based off of Hillary's voters in California, where they get driver's licences, that translates to 712,681 votes (if we count 13% of the populace, the figure grows substantially).

It more than underscores the fact that the Democrats are giving the United States away to people that will vote for them.

Time to send Dreamers home and fix the 14th amendment (IF one still cares about having a country).

Quote from: ccp on November 09, 2016, 07:30:53 PM

"13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote"

That would certainly be more than enough to explain Trump's popular vote loss.

No rigging folks.  Move along.   Keep order here.

Exactly my appraisal, bearing in mind, those are just the ones that admit to a crime.

Title: Re: 13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote
Post by: G M on November 09, 2016, 07:38:28 PM

Trump bought us time, but the cancer is far from remission.

Quote from: DDF on November 09, 2016, 07:31:45 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on November 09, 2016, 07:14:32 PM

13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote

Just based off of Hillary's voters in California, where they get driver's licences, that translates to 712,681 votes (at 13% of the populace).

It more than underscores the fact that the Democrats are giving the United States away to people that will vote for them.

Time to send Dreamers home and fix the 14th amendment (IF one still cares about having a country).

Quote from: ccp on November 09, 2016, 07:30:53 PM

"13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote"

That would certainly be more than enough to explain Trump's popular vote loss.

No rigging folks.  Move along.   Keep order here.

Exactly my appraisal, bearing in mind, those are just the ones that admit to a crime.

Title: The Mexican Constitution says
Post by: DDF on November 09, 2016, 07:58:17 PM

Exactly my point. I think I've proven what I would give for Mexican people, and I only point that out because of the tribe (or elseI wouldn't even mention it and just be called "racist" because it doesn't phase me), but there comes a point when a country's inhabitants need to decide whether they want to keep it or not.

It's obvious, due to proximity, that many Mexicans have relatives in the US and others that have lived in the States for generations, without papers and have had anchor babies.

The anchor babies almost always vote Democratically, because the Democrats are the only ones promising to give the US away to whoever will support their political power.

I'm of the thought that the 14th needs to have the slave loophole fixed, and every single person in the country AND any children they've had, deported immediately.

Just to remind everyone of Mexico's policy on the matter, which is written RIGHT into the National Constitution:


"Artículo 33. Son personas extranjeras las que no posean las calidades determinadas en el artículo 30 constitucional y gozarán de los derechos humanos y garantías que reconoce esta Constitución.
Párrafo reformado DOF 10-06-2011
 
El Ejecutivo de la Unión, previa audiencia, podrá expulsar del territorio nacional a personas extranjeras con fundamento en la ley, la cual regulará el procedimiento administrativo, así como el lugar y tiempo que dure la detención.
Párrafo adicionado DOF 10-06-2011
 
Los extranjeros no podrán de ninguna manera inmiscuirse en los asuntos políticos del país."

Article 33. Foreigners are those who do not possess the qualifications set forth in Article
30. They are entitled to the guarantees granted by Chapter I, Title I, of the present Constitution; but the Federal Executive shall have the exclusive power to compel any foreigner whose remaining he may deem inexpedient to abandon the national territory immediately and without the necessity of previous legal action.

Foreigners may not in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.


Mexico CLEARLY knows this presents a danger to their country and will not stand for it.

The United States shouldn't either.

Quote from: G M on November 09, 2016, 07:38:28 PM

Trump bought us time, but the cancer is far from remission.

Title: Non Citizens Voting
Post by: DDF on November 10, 2016, 08:49:45 AM

Rachel Maddow states that Donald Trump talked about rounding up and deporting more than 10,000,000 people at the 23:20 mark in her/MSNBC's election night coverage here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzC7x2Yq2rQ


Which means, that by democratic admission on total numbers of illegals in the country (because she didn't dispute the number, and in fact used it as a quote against Trump), that the article posted by Doug yesterday, having 13-25% (per the article) of noncitizens casting votes (noting that at times, they are only discovered by their own admission during Customs interviews):

Quote from: DougMacG on November 09, 2016, 07:14:32 PM

13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

This translates into untold numbers of fraudulent votes. Those are only the ones that admit to it. The number could be as high as 10,000,000. If there is no penalty, no danger of being discovered, and huge rewards awaiting, people who are prohibited from voting, could consider themselves foolish not to vote, especially when Barack Obama himself mentions it, if not encouraging it, (and I'm purposely citing SNOPES because of their liberal slant, in order to take away any defense of the matter):

http://www.snopes.com/obama-encouraged-illegal-aliens-to-vote/

Snopes: "The claim originates from an interview with Obama published on 3 November 2016, in which millennial actress Gina Rodriguez asked the president about a number of issues facing young Latinos. Many of the outrage posts were written around a video in which the majority of the president's response was edited out to give the misleading impression that Obama was urging undocumented immigrants to vote illegally.

In the full interview, it's clear Obama is urging Latino citizens to vote in order to give voice to members of their community who are precluded from doing so by lack of citizenship, not urging non-citizens to vote illegally. Rodriguez's question seems to be addressing a fear that voting will result in scrutiny on one's family which could result in deportation of undocumented relatives." End.

It is clear who Obama is addressing, per Snope's own admission.

The interview transcript:

RODRIGUEZ: Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens -- and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country -- are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?

OBAMA: Not true. And the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential in terms of who you voted for. If you have a family member who maybe is undocumented, then you have an even greater reason to vote.

RODRIGUEZ: This has been a huge fear presented especially during this election.

OBAMA: And the reason that fear is promoted is because they don't want people voting. People are discouraged from voting and part of what is important for Latino citizens is to make your voice heard, because you're not just speaking for yourself. You're speaking for family members, friends, classmates of yours in school...

RODRIGUEZ: Your entire community.

OBAMA: ... who may not have a voice. Who can't legally vote. But they're counting on you to make sure that you have the courage to make your voice heard.


Analysis:

Obama could not have possibly been referring to a citizen having "fear" to vote, because it is clearly established by law that any citizen can vote, and he clearly states that:

"there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera."

Obama made it a point, to make that portion clear, when he didn't have to, because there is no legal reprobation for claiming a legal right available to any citizen. The only reason he could make an issue of investigatory practices, is solely to inform people that are legally prohibited from voting.

Summation:

1.) It is clear that Obama encourages the practice from his own words:

2.) Non-citizens by their own admission and through existing authorities have both admitted to voting and have been caught doing so.

3.) There are at least 10,000,000 non-citizens in the country. Other sources claim it to be as high as 13.7% of the total population of which:

     a.)The term "foreign-born" includes naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, visa holders and undocumented immigrants.

     b.) Making it clear, that it isn't just "undocumented" people that can vote illegally.

          http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/09/28/us-foreign-born-population-nears-high/72814674/

     c.) USCIS themselves state that in the last decade, 6.6 million naturalized citizens were admitted and that roughly .6 million are admitted annually.

          https://www.uscis.gov/archive/archive-news/naturalization-fact-sheet - (curiously, in 2008, a key election year, more than a million were admitted - bottom of page)

4.) Based on USCIS statistics, US Census figures (Table 1.1 of the following link) and the article quoted above, there are 21,707,000 people pending citizenship (6.8% of the current US population of 318.9 million) as of 2005 http://www.census.gov/data/tables/2005/demo/foreign-born/cps-2005.html , plus, an additional 10-15 million people that are not documented (4.7% at 15 million), comprising a full 11.5% of the total population (36,673,500 people).

5.) Total voter turnout in 2016 was 130,840,000, with 231,556,622 being eligible to vote (56.5% of eligible voters, voted) http://www.electproject.org/2016g , which means that of eligible voters, the numbers from #4.) now represent 16.59% of documented aliens that don't have citizenship in regard to votes actually cast, and undocumented people in the country represent 11.464%, combining to make a total of 28.054% if total population of the US were counted as "cast ballots," and of which 28.054%, 13-25% admit to voting illegally, comprising  4,771,734 to 9,335,434 illegal votes cast,

NOTING: that though the percentages from USCIS constitute the total documented population number regardless of age, that owing to lack of voter registration laws, there is nothing stopping them from casting a ballot for everyone in their household.

ALSO NOTING: that the above numbers only reference people that admit to the practice of voting illegally, based on percentages.

ALSO NOTING: that many "Dreamer" children lean liberally, are very politically active, and are the children of people not permitted. It bears mentioning, that the children of immigrants who are naturalized citizens, ALSO vote Democratically.


SOLUTION:

1.) There is no inherent right to immigrate to the US, and the idea that there is, perpetuated largely by the Left, needs to be rectified.

2.) Voter ID laws need to be in place.

3.) ALL electronic voting machines need to be removed immediately, and replaced with paper ballots.

4.) ALL polling sites need to be monitored by both CAMERA and multiple, non-serving, citizen representatives from each party represented on the ballot.

5.) STIFF voter and electoral fraud prison sentences of 10 years or more need to be in place.

6.) Voter and electoral fraud investigative units cannot be made up of any politicians, lawyers, nor any businessman and must have civilian oversight.

7.) ALL undocumented individuals need to be deported without judicial representation, to their point of entry into the States, including any children born to them on US soil, and the 14th amendment rectified, to avoid people from cheating existing immigration laws that other legal immigrants sacrifice much in order to obey.

Title: Re: Non Citizens Voting
Post by: G M on November 10, 2016, 09:41:21 AM

Very good work, DDF.

Quote from: DDF on November 10, 2016, 08:49:45 AM

Rachel Maddow states that Donald Trump talked about rounding up and deporting more than 10,000,000 people at the 23:20 mark in her/MSNBC's election night coverage here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzC7x2Yq2rQ


Which means, that by democratic admission on total numbers of illegals in the country (because she didn't dispute the number, and in fact used it as a quote against Trump), that the article posted by Doug yesterday, having 13-25% (per the article) of noncitizens casting votes (noting that at times, they are only discovered by their own admission during Customs interviews):

Quote from: DougMacG on November 09, 2016, 07:14:32 PM

13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

This translates into untold numbers of fraudulent votes. Those are only the ones that admit to it. The number could be as high as 10,000,000. If there is no penalty, no danger of being discovered, and huge rewards awaiting, people who are prohibited from voting, could consider themselves foolish not to vote, especially when Barack Obama himself mentions it, if not encouraging it, (and I'm purposely citing SNOPES because of their liberal slant, in order to take away any defense of the matter):

http://www.snopes.com/obama-encouraged-illegal-aliens-to-vote/

Snopes: "The claim originates from an interview with Obama published on 3 November 2016, in which millennial actress Gina Rodriguez asked the president about a number of issues facing young Latinos. Many of the outrage posts were written around a video in which the majority of the president's response was edited out to give the misleading impression that Obama was urging undocumented immigrants to vote illegally.

In the full interview, it's clear Obama is urging Latino citizens to vote in order to give voice to members of their community who are precluded from doing so by lack of citizenship, not urging non-citizens to vote illegally. Rodriguez's question seems to be addressing a fear that voting will result in scrutiny on one's family which could result in deportation of undocumented relatives." End.

It is clear who Obama is addressing, per Snope's own admission.

The interview transcript:

RODRIGUEZ: Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens -- and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country -- are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?

OBAMA: Not true. And the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential in terms of who you voted for. If you have a family member who maybe is undocumented, then you have an even greater reason to vote.

RODRIGUEZ: This has been a huge fear presented especially during this election.

OBAMA: And the reason that fear is promoted is because they don't want people voting. People are discouraged from voting and part of what is important for Latino citizens is to make your voice heard, because you're not just speaking for yourself. You're speaking for family members, friends, classmates of yours in school...

RODRIGUEZ: Your entire community.

OBAMA: ... who may not have a voice. Who can't legally vote. But they're counting on you to make sure that you have the courage to make your voice heard.


Analysis:

Obama could not have possibly been referring to a citizen having "fear" to vote, because it is clearly established by law that any citizen can vote, and he clearly states that:

"there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera."

Obama made it a point, to make that portion clear, when he didn't have to, because there is no legal reprobation for claiming a legal right available to any citizen. The only reason he could make an issue of investigatory practices, is solely to inform people that are legally prohibited from voting.

Summation:

1.) It is clear that Obama encourages the practice from his own words:

2.) Non-citizens by their own admission and through existing authorities have both admitted to voting and been caught doing so.

3.) There are at least 10,000,000 non-citizens in the country. Other sources claim it to be as high as 13.7% of the total population of which:

     a.)The term "foreign-born" includes naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, visa holders and undocumented immigrants.

     b.) Making it clear, that it isn't just "undocumented" people that can vote illegally.

          http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/09/28/us-foreign-born-population-nears-high/72814674/

     c.) USCIS themselves state that in the last decade, 6.6 million naturalized citizens were admitted and that roughly .6 million are admitted annually.

          https://www.uscis.gov/archive/archive-news/naturalization-fact-sheet - (curiously, in 2008, a key election year, more than a million were admitted - bottom of page)

4.) Based on USCIS statistics, US Census figures (Table 1.1 of the following link) and the article quoted above, there are 21,707,000 people pending citizenship (6.8% of the current US population of 318.9 million) as of 2005 http://www.census.gov/data/tables/2005/demo/foreign-born/cps-2005.html , plus, an additional 10-15 million people that are not documented (4.7% at 15 million), making a full 11.5% of the total population (36,673,500 people).

5.) Total voter turnout in 2016 was 130,840,000, with 231,556,622 being eligible to vote (56.5% of eligible voters, voted) http://www.electproject.org/2016g , which means that of eligible voters, the numbers from #4.) now represent 16.59% of documented aliens that don't have citizenship in regard to votes actually cast, and undocumented people in the country represent 11.464%, combining to make a total of 28.054% if total population of the US were counted as "cast ballots, and of which 28.054%, 13-25% admit to voting illegally, comprising  4,771,734 to 9,335,434 illegal votes cast,

NOTING: that though the percentages from USCIC constitute the total documented population number regardless of age, that owing to lack of voter registration laws, there is nothing stopping them from casting a ballot for everyone in their household.

ALSO NOTING: that the above numbers only reference people that admit to the practice of voting illegally, based on percentages.

ALSO NOTING: That many "Dreamer" children ln liberally, are very politically active, and are the children of people not permitted. It bears mentioning, that the children of immigrants who are naturalized citizens, ALSO vote Democratically.


SOLUTION:

1.) There is no inherent right to immigrate to the US, and the idea that there is, perpetuated largely by the Left, needs to be rectified.

2.) Voter ID laws need to be in place.

3.) ALL electronic voting machines need to be removed immediately, and replaced with paper ballots.

4.) ALL polling sites need to be monitored by both CAMERA and multiple, non-serving, citizen representatives from each party represented on the ballot.

5.) STIFF voter and electoral fraud prison sentences of 10 years or more need to be in place.

6.) Voter and electoral fraud investigative units cannot be made up of any politicians, lawyers, nor any businessman and must have civilian oversight.

7.) ALL undocumented individuals need to be deported without judicial representation, to their point of entry into the States, including any children born to them on US soil, and the 14th amendment rectified, to avoid people from cheating existing immigration laws that other legal immigrants sacrifice much in order to obey.

Title: Re: Non Citizens Voting
Post by: DDF on November 10, 2016, 09:42:26 AM

Thank you sir.

Quote from: G M on November 10, 2016, 09:41:21 AM

Very good work, DDF.

Title: Re: Non Citizens Voting
Post by: DougMacG on November 10, 2016, 11:09:51 AM

Quote from: G M on November 10, 2016, 09:41:21 AM

Very good work, DDF.

Quote from: DDF on November 10, 2016, 08:49:45 AM

Rachel Maddow states that Donald Trump talked about rounding up and deporting more than 10,000,000 people at the 23:20 mark in her/MSNBC's election night coverage here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzC7x2Yq2rQ


Which means, that by democratic admission on total numbers of illegals in the country (because she didn't dispute the number, and in fact used it as a quote against Trump), that the article posted by Doug yesterday, having 13-25% (per the article) of noncitizens casting votes (noting that at times, they are only discovered by their own admission during Customs interviews):

Quote from: DougMacG on November 09, 2016, 07:14:32 PM

13% of Illegal Aliens Admit They Vote
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A poll by John McLaughlin confirms again we may have a significant problem with noncitizens participating illegally in our elections. Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.
http://dailysignal.com/2015/06/02/poll-shows-noncitizens-can-shape-elections/

This translates into untold numbers of fraudulent votes. Those are only the ones that admit to it. The number could be as high as 10,000,000. If there is no penalty, no danger of being discovered, and huge rewards awaiting, people who are prohibited from voting, could consider themselves foolish not to vote, especially when Barack Obama himself mentions it, if not encouraging it, (and I'm purposely citing SNOPES because of their liberal slant, in order to take away any defense of the matter):

http://www.snopes.com/obama-encouraged-illegal-aliens-to-vote/

Snopes: "The claim originates from an interview with Obama published on 3 November 2016, in which millennial actress Gina Rodriguez asked the president about a number of issues facing young Latinos. Many of the outrage posts were written around a video in which the majority of the president's response was edited out to give the misleading impression that Obama was urging undocumented immigrants to vote illegally.

In the full interview, it's clear Obama is urging Latino citizens to vote in order to give voice to members of their community who are precluded from doing so by lack of citizenship, not urging non-citizens to vote illegally. Rodriguez's question seems to be addressing a fear that voting will result in scrutiny on one's family which could result in deportation of undocumented relatives." End.

It is clear who Obama is addressing, per Snope's own admission.

The interview transcript:

RODRIGUEZ: Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens -- and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country -- are fearful of voting. So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?

OBAMA: Not true. And the reason is, first of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself. And there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential in terms of who you voted for. If you have a family member who maybe is undocumented, then you have an even greater reason to vote.

RODRIGUEZ: This has been a huge fear presented especially during this election.

OBAMA: And the reason that fear is promoted is because they don't want people voting. People are discouraged from voting and part of what is important for Latino citizens is to make your voice heard, because you're not just speaking for yourself. You're speaking for family members, friends, classmates of yours in school...

RODRIGUEZ: Your entire community.

OBAMA: ... who may not have a voice. Who can't legally vote. But they're counting on you to make sure that you have the courage to make your voice heard.


Analysis:

Obama could not have possibly been referring to a citizen having "fear" to vote, because it is clearly established by law that any citizen can vote, and he clearly states that:

"there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera."

Obama made it a point, to make that portion clear, when he didn't have to, because there is no legal reprobation for claiming a legal right available to any citizen. The only reason he could make an issue of investigatory practices, is solely to inform people that are legally prohibited from voting.

Summation:

1.) It is clear that Obama encourages the practice from his own words:

2.) Non-citizens by their own admission and through existing authorities have both admitted to voting and been caught doing so.

3.) There are at least 10,000,000 non-citizens in the country. Other sources claim it to be as high as 13.7% of the total population of which:

     a.)The term "foreign-born" includes naturalized citizens, legal permanent residents, visa holders and undocumented immigrants.

     b.) Making it clear, that it isn't just "undocumented" people that can vote illegally.

          http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/09/28/us-foreign-born-population-nears-high/72814674/

     c.) USCIS themselves state that in the last decade, 6.6 million naturalized citizens were admitted and that roughly .6 million are admitted annually.

          https://www.uscis.gov/archive/archive-news/naturalization-fact-sheet - (curiously, in 2008, a key election year, more than a million were admitted - bottom of page)

4.) Based on USCIS statistics, US Census figures (Table 1.1 of the following link) and the article quoted above, there are 21,707,000 people pending citizenship (6.8% of the current US population of 318.9 million) as of 2005 http://www.census.gov/data/tables/2005/demo/foreign-born/cps-2005.html , plus, an additional 10-15 million people that are not documented (4.7% at 15 million), making a full 11.5% of the total population (36,673,500 people).

5.) Total voter turnout in 2016 was 130,840,000, with 231,556,622 being eligible to vote (56.5% of eligible voters, voted) http://www.electproject.org/2016g , which means that of eligible voters, the numbers from #4.) now represent 16.59% of documented aliens that don't have citizenship in regard to votes actually cast, and undocumented people in the country represent 11.464%, combining to make a total of 28.054% if total population of the US were counted as "cast ballots, and of which 28.054%, 13-25% admit to voting illegally, comprising  4,771,734 to 9,335,434 illegal votes cast,

NOTING: that though the percentages from USCIC constitute the total documented population number regardless of age, that owing to lack of voter registration laws, there is nothing stopping them from casting a ballot for everyone in their household.

ALSO NOTING: that the above numbers only reference people that admit to the practice of voting illegally, based on percentages.

ALSO NOTING: That many "Dreamer" children ln liberally, are very politically active, and are the children of people not permitted. It bears mentioning, that the children of immigrants who are naturalized citizens, ALSO vote Democratically.


SOLUTION:

1.) There is no inherent right to immigrate to the US, and the idea that there is, perpetuated largely by the Left, needs to be rectified.

2.) Voter ID laws need to be in place.

3.) ALL electronic voting machines need to be removed immediately, and replaced with paper ballots.

4.) ALL polling sites need to be monitored by both CAMERA and multiple, non-serving, citizen representatives from each party represented on the ballot.

5.) STIFF voter and electoral fraud prison sentences of 10 years or more need to be in place.

6.) Voter and electoral fraud investigative units cannot be made up of any politicians, lawyers, nor any businessman and must have civilian oversight.

7.) ALL undocumented individuals need to be deported without judicial representation, to their point of entry into the States, including any children born to them on US soil, and the 14th amendment rectified, to avoid people from cheating existing immigration laws that other legal immigrants sacrifice much in order to obey.

Even though I posted it, I'm not finding the 13℅ figure accurate or reliable, it could be higher.  But for whoever did vote illegally, they risked that Trump would win and these crimes would be investigated and prosecuted. Illegal voting should come with a lifetime ban on future citizenship and legal voting.   Maybe that will slow it down.

Title: Re: Non Citizens Voting
Post by: DDF on November 10, 2016, 11:39:55 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on November 10, 2016, 11:09:51 AM

Even though I posted it, I'm not finding the 13℅ figure accurate or reliable, it could be higher.  But for whoever did vote illegally, they risked that Trump would win and these crimes would be investigated and prosecuted. Illegal voting should come with a lifetime ban on future citizenship and legal voting.   Maybe that will slow it down.

Several people from the Left and the media have insisted that voter fraud hardly even exists.

"While voter fraud is rare — one study found just 31 credible claims of fraud amid more than a 1 billion ballots cast since 2000 —  a few instances of voter fraud and voting irregularities have been found ahead of the election." http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-voting-irregularities-snap-story.html

https://votingwars.news21.com/voter-fraud-is-not-a-persistent-problem/

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2016/10/the_gop_created_the_rigged_vote_myth.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/08/politics/viral-video-shows-voter-fraud-take-a-closer-look/

(CNN pointing out that the man didn't explicitly claim that it was voter fraud, instead, "it was just weird how it happened)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/09/01/voter-fraud-is-not-a-persistent-problem/


But claim it IS a problem when it comes to Republicans:

https://news.vice.com/story/trump-supporters-keep-committing-voter-fraud

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/10/29/trump-supporter-charged-with-voting-twice-in-iowa/


So which is it?

The numbers stated here, along with Obama's remarks, show that it is at a minimum, a threat to the Republic.

Also not mentioned, but noteworthy, is the vote swapping application "#NeverTrump," allowing people to exchange votes from consistent states, to contested states. The political affiliation of the app's creator is clear.

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/vote-swapping-app-helps-voters-trade-votes-swing-43379078

Interestingly, the idea was hatched by Maryland State Senator Jamie Raskin (D) in 2000, in a bid to help Ralph Nader without impacting Gore. The moment Conservatives started doing it, they were threatened by "Republican" state secretaries and attorney generals immediately per Raskin.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 10, 2016, 11:41:17 AM

"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections." —John Adams (1797)

Carry on with the excellent work gents!

Title: Finding last minute votes in Democrat Bastions
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2016, 06:38:14 PM

some how they keep finding votes in "Democratic Bastions" 4 days after the election.

very  very strange:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-popular-vote-victory_us_5827a2c5e4b02d21bbc91bbc

Will votes in Mi Wis Oh and Pa suddenly appear ? too.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on November 12, 2016, 07:32:19 PM

Quote from: ccp on November 12, 2016, 06:38:14 PM

some how they keep finding votes in "Democratic Bastions" 4 days after the election.

very  very strange:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-popular-vote-victory_us_5827a2c5e4b02d21bbc91bbc

Will votes in Mi Wis Oh and Pa suddenly appear ? too.

They probably called the states too early, not having counted the full 120% of the votes.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 13, 2016, 02:30:24 PM

 "full 120% of the votes"   :-D

Maybe the buses were late coming up from Mexico

Title: I would be surprised if untrue: Illegal alien vote?
Post by: ccp on November 14, 2016, 09:39:18 AM

but not if true
How does anyone think Harry Reid keeps getting re elected in Nevada?  All the illegal "union" hotel workers I say:

http://www.infowars.com/report-three-million-votes-in-presidential-election-cast-by-illegal-aliens/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 14, 2016, 09:55:15 AM

The source here is "Infowars", which in my opinion is a scurrilous website, even if sometimes it gets things right.  Note that this very thinly sourced article is alongside one claiming that Trump called Alex Jones to thank him.  Somehow I really doubt that.

As a general rule, I'd like to ask that Infowars not be used as a source.  If there is particular reason for a particular piece, then OK, but please note that it is infowars, and as such is in great need of confirmation elsewhere.

Title: Soros Money
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 15, 2016, 10:24:50 PM

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2016/11/07/leaked-documents-reveal-expansive-soros-funding-to-manipulate-federal-elections/?singlepage=true

Title: Trying to get the Dowager Empress to challenge the results
Post by: ccp on November 23, 2016, 07:48:39 AM

I learned from reviewing medical journals how easy it can be to make data say almost anything one wants.  Here are the LEFTIST "computer scientists and election lawyer" and other supposed "academics" playing with the numbers to make it sound as though Billary actually won the battle grounds:


Naturally picked up by the Huffington COMpost:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-challenge-election-results_us_5834e3a6e4b000af95ed3a34

Title: Why can't we just have voter IDs?
Post by: ccp on November 27, 2016, 07:28:09 PM

Wouldn't solve everything but would sure help.

http://www.newsmax.com/US/voting-system-sloppy-massive/2016/11/27/id/760801/

Title: we are reading about threats to electors
Post by: ccp on November 29, 2016, 03:28:13 PM

So why are we also not reading this:

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/11/threatening-electors-violates-federal-law-so-why-isnt-loretta-lynch-doing-anything-about-it

Title: How can the validity of voting by computer be verified?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 01, 2016, 10:37:42 PM

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/mc-lehigh-vote-recanvassingrecovered-wed-nov-30-161059-2016--20161130-story.html

A FB poster comments:

"In other words: the Green Party wanted a copy of the county's election software so its computer experts could be sure the system had not been manipulated with virus-borne malware that could alter voters' intended choices." The Gr$$n party wanted a COPY OF THE SOFTWARE USED IN VOTING MACHINES?!?! Is this normal? I have been told time and time again by liberals there is no such thing as voter fraud, and now they want the software to check for evidence that doesn't exist? The democrats look more and more awesome by the day, can't wait for the bloodbath that will be their huge senate losses in 2018."

Is this a fair point? 

HOW CAN THE VALIDITY OF VOTING BY COMPUTER BE VERIFIED?

Title: Rather odd from a man who said the system was rigged
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2016, 11:36:42 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/02/us/trump-recounts-wisconsin-michigan-pennsylvania.html?emc=edit_na_20161202&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

Title: Re: How can the validity of voting by computer be verified?
Post by: DDF on December 02, 2016, 06:21:38 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 01, 2016, 10:37:42 PM

http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/mc-lehigh-vote-recanvassingrecovered-wed-nov-30-161059-2016--20161130-story.html

A FB poster comments:

"In other words: the Green Party wanted a copy of the county's election software so its computer experts could be sure the system had not been manipulated with virus-borne malware that could alter voters' intended choices." The Gr$$n party wanted a COPY OF THE SOFTWARE USED IN VOTING MACHINES?!?! Is this normal? I have been told time and time again by liberals there is no such thing as voter fraud, and now they want the software to check for evidence that doesn't exist? The democrats look more and more awesome by the day, can't wait for the bloodbath that will be their huge senate losses in 2018."

Is this a fair point?  

HOW CAN THE VALIDITY OF VOTING BY COMPUTER BE VERIFIED?

I've touched on this before.

Computer experts that work in the industry have testified before Congress, admitting that it can be rigged... easily.

There have been reliable instances where this has happened and the machines have switched votes.

People have asked for the software, but the companies will NOT release it.

Democrats have done everything they can to prevent voter ID and the voting machine companies are owned by primarily liberals and backed by Soros himself, so any mishaps have ALWAYS benefitted them, which is why they fight voter reform vehemently, labeling it as "voter discrimination" in spite of the fact that poorer countries have implemented 100% voter ID and paper ballots specifically to prevent the problems going on.

None of this is news. The Democrats depend on it, and while they claim that Clinton won the popular vote, they can't count paper ballots or prove that non citizens DIDN'T vote, both of which should be something that people can prove. A computer on the other hand, will tell you anything you want it to, at any given point in time.... if you know how to manipulate it.

Edit: I forgot to add.... it gets worse. Liberals talk about Russia hacking the elections and Clinton's emails, while COMPLETELY leaving alone the fact that voting machines used in US elections aren't even made by companies in the States, but instead in liberal countries like Spain and Canada, who WILL NOT release their software.

The US is being stolen.

36 million non citizens in the US and NO ONE can prove that they didn't all vote, when they have so much to gain. I defy anyone to prove they did not vote. Makes me so mad I could f ing spit.

Title: WI: 5 machines with broken seals?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 03, 2016, 02:25:05 PM

Highly unreliable site, but worth keeping an eye out for this.

http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/12/03/wisconsin-recount-officials-just-found-five-counting-machines-tampered-seals/

Title: Michigan House passes voter ID law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 08, 2016, 10:24:23 PM

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/08/thanks-jill-michigan-house-passes-voter-id-bill-after-vote-fraud-hyperbole/

Title: Fraud caught in Michigan
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 08, 2016, 11:02:33 PM

http://alexanderhiggins.com/vote-fraud-12-michigan-hillary-vote-disqualified-recount/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 09, 2016, 05:55:32 AM

I think it was Rush who pointed out that for about 90 minutes on election night the mainstream media went completely SILENT on the voting counts .  Rush stated he spoke to a pollster who noticed the same thing (he did not mention who the pollster was but I suspect it was Pat Caddell - but i am just guessing).  The pollster stated they stopped reporting when Trump was clearly ahead  because the Democrat machine went into high gear actively "looking" for votes for Hillary.  Remember that night when John King would keep saying that Hillary's only chance was to "find " enough big city (urban) votes to counter the more suburban rural Trump votes?

It seemed obvious to me that the DEms were hustling as many votes as much as they can .   Funny how the elections always come down to those same urban areas that are usually the last to report.

Will be hear this on MSM?  

No;  fraud ? what fraud?  or this one I love ,"voter fraud is exceedingly rare".

Title: Re: Fraud caught in Michigan
Post by: DDF on December 09, 2016, 06:47:02 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 08, 2016, 11:02:33 PM

http://alexanderhiggins.com/vote-fraud-12-michigan-hillary-vote-disqualified-recount/

I'm shocked.

Title: Fraud? what election fraud?
Post by: ccp on December 09, 2016, 01:00:04 PM

This guy is a community organizer till the last breath.  What a self serving sicko:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-orders-full-review-of-2016-election-hacking-171014046.html

Title: 2nd post today
Post by: ccp on December 09, 2016, 02:00:05 PM

from sparta news :

AFter the Jill Stein re count in Michigan found fraud in Detroit the Michigan house passed voter ID legislation.  Let see if the MSM picks THIS up.   :roll:

https://www.spartareport.com/2016/12/thanks-stein-strict-voter-id-bill-passes-michigan-house-heads-michigan-senate/

Title: Re: 2nd post today
Post by: DDF on December 09, 2016, 05:16:54 PM

Quote from: ccp on December 09, 2016, 02:00:05 PM

from sparta news :

AFter the Jill Stein re count in Michigan found fraud in Detroit the Michigan house passed voter ID legislation.  Let see if the MSM picks THIS up.   :roll:

https://www.spartareport.com/2016/12/thanks-stein-strict-voter-id-bill-passes-michigan-house-heads-michigan-senate/

I'll bet you taco dinner that they don't.

Title: DHS hacks Georgia voter rolls?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2016, 09:58:37 PM

Looking for a quality citation for this , , ,

Title: Intel folks lining up behind idea Putin backed Trump
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2016, 11:43:46 PM

second post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-orders-review-of-russian-hacking-during-presidential-campaign/2016/12/09/31d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html?utm_term=.8f4a9aba0759&wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation

Title: some thoughts about this
Post by: ccp on December 10, 2016, 10:34:37 AM

I have no doubt this theme, "the vast Russian conspiracy" will re energize the Clinton mob to keep in the game.  I don't know if she could win a 2020 nomination but there is zero doubt the door will be open for them to try and keep that on the slow burn.

The DOJ should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Clintons.  They will not go away quietly.

If this intell claim is true , and I am dubious , especially coming out while Brock is still in,  it is cause for concern.  But the way I see it the release of hacked info was of info that was all TRUE and not reported or investigated by a purposely negligent LEFT wing MSM.

When we look at the totality of the information that came out from all sources the wikileaks stuff merely partially balanced out the slander from the LEFT.
And again it was all true.  Russia if it did do so, did the US public a service by exposing proof of the LEFTS corruption suspected by all of us all along.

The community organizer will play this up to protect his legacy.

Title: Hasn't the fat lady already sung?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 10, 2016, 06:45:24 PM

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/12/10/founding-fathers-russia-election-interference-means-electoral-college-reject-trump.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 10, 2016, 07:33:27 PM

Question?

Should Trump stay magnanimous and concentrate on simply reversing Brock and his vindictive team or should he fight back?

They are doing every thing they can to delegitimize him.

Not sure the answer.   The best thing for him to succeed is to "make America great" .  Then those who are too young to know anything other then the Brock will learn he was not such a big deal after all.

OTOH by then the LEFT amy well devastate Trump even before he is out of the gate.

Title: Eh tu, US?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 11, 2016, 06:57:02 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/10/13/the-long-history-of-the-u-s-interfering-with-elections-elsewhere/?utm_term=.8c9382b722e2

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 11, 2016, 11:46:44 AM

Well what are these allegations?  That Putin hacked in to both DNC and RNC and only released DNC stuff?
What about the Clinton emails?

I have not heard any thing alleged that disputes the information released was not true though I few Dems are of course making such suggestions.

The concept that Russia may have selectively released information that exposes real corruption is one to ponder.  Because if any of this is true then that basically is what they did.

They did the job our media refuses to do. 

Would it have been ok if they just release information revealing corruption on both sides?  Would it not be ok and allow the corruption to go silent?

Just wondering.

Maybe we should just do the same to Putin.  Can we?  Just release the truth.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on December 11, 2016, 05:02:10 PM

Quote from: ccp on December 11, 2016, 11:46:44 AM

Well what are these allegations?  That Putin hacked in to both DNC and RNC and only released DNC stuff?
What about the Clinton emails?

I have not heard any thing alleged that disputes the information released was not true though I few Dems are of course making such suggestions.

The concept that Russia may have selectively released information that exposes real corruption is one to ponder.  Because if any of this is true then that basically is what they did.

They did the job our media refuses to do. 

Would it have been ok if they just release information revealing corruption on both sides?  Would it not be ok and allow the corruption to go silent?

Just wondering.

Maybe we should just do the same to Putin.  Can we?  Just release the truth.

Exactly. The media could care less about the content of what was released, other than it damages the politicians they support. AFAIC, if true, Russia dd nothing different than the US has done countless times. I care more about Clinton and other Americans trashing the law, thinking they're the ruling "elite." NO love for them at all.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 12, 2016, 08:42:52 AM

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/251544/
To the extent that it was a Russian hack, it was mostly due to Hillary and other Democrats’ exercising criminal negligence in matters of security. That’s hardly an argument that she should have been President.
-------------

The cheating uncovered involved debate moderators giving questions in advance to one candidate, Hillary Clinton.  Also debate moderator Megyn Kelly admittedly trying to take out one candidate in the first question of a debate.

What are the penalties for these violations of the process?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 13, 2016, 02:50:34 PM

 “Yesterday I learned that releasing hacked — but true — emails is a threat to democracy, but suborning electors to reverse an election is not.”

 https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/

Title: Putin, you magnificent bastard!
Post by: G M on December 13, 2016, 07:02:47 PM

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/12/records-many-votes-detroits-precincts/95363314/

Records: Too many votes in 37% of Detroit’s precincts
Joel Kurth and Jonathan Oosting , The Detroit News 1:31 p.m. EST December 13, 2016


State Elections Director Chris Thomas explains a state audit of 20 precincts in Detroit where ballot boxes contained fewer votes than counted in the election poll book. Chad Livengood, The Detroit News



Voting machines in more than one-third of all Detroit precincts registered more votes than they should have during last month’s presidential election, according to Wayne County records prepared at the request of The Detroit News.

Detailed reports from the office of Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett show optical scanners at 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, or 37 percent, tabulated more ballots than the number of voters tallied by workers in the poll books. Voting irregularities in Detroit have spurred plans for an audit by Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson’s office, Elections Director Chris Thomas said Monday.

Title: POTH: How an Overseas Putin Fan pushed pro-Trump propaganda to Americans
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2016, 02:22:51 PM

Obviously in that this is Pravda on the Hudson, caveat lector

How a Putin Fan Overseas Pushed Pro-Trump Propaganda to Americans

By MIKE McINTIREDEC. 17, 2016
Dowson, a far-right political activist, ran a constellation of websites out of the United Kingdom. Credit Rex Features, via Associated Press

The Patriot News Agency website popped up in July, soon after it became clear that Donald J. Trump would win the Republican presidential nomination, bearing a logo of a red, white and blue eagle and the motto “Built by patriots, for patriots.”

Tucked away on a corner of the site, next to links for Twitter and YouTube, is a link to another social media platform that most Americans have never heard of: VKontakte, the Russian equivalent of Facebook. It is a clue that Patriot News, like many sites that appeared out of nowhere and pumped out pro-Trump hoaxes tying his opponent Hillary Clinton to Satanism, pedophilia and other conspiracies, is actually run by foreigners based overseas.

But while most of those others seem be the work of young, apolitical opportunists cashing in on a conservative appetite for viral nonsense, operators of Patriot News had an explicitly partisan motivation: getting Mr. Trump elected.

Patriot News — whose postings were viewed and shared tens of thousands of times in the United States — is among a constellation of websites run out of the United Kingdom that are linked to James Dowson, a far-right political activist who advocated Britain’s exit from the European Union and is a fan of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. A vocal proponent of Christian nationalist, anti-immigrant movements in Europe, Mr. Dowson, 52, has spoken at a conference of far-right leaders in Russia and makes no secret of his hope that Mr. Trump will usher in an era of rapprochement with Mr. Putin.

===================================
Recent Comments
Bill Casey 17 hours ago

My mother, who is 72 years old and grew up in a time when you could trust what you read, joined Facebook this year. She was hesitant to vote...
Boston Comments 19 hours ago

Gawd, I can barely grasp at words after reading this superb piece of reportage. I'm old enough to remember the McCarthy era -- and although...
J T 19 hours ago

Why am I not surprised this former "church minister in Northern Ireland," whose religious justifications for his actions are repeatedly...
=========================


His dabbling in the American presidential election adds an ideological element that has been largely missing from the still-emerging landscape of websites and Facebook pages that bombarded American voters with misinformation and propaganda. Far from the much-reported Macedonian teenagers running fake news factories solely for profit, Mr. Dowson made it his mission, according to messages posted on one of his sites, to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites into sections of the population too disillusioned with politics to have taken any notice of conventional campaigning.”
Photo
An image from one of Mr. Dowson’s websites. He said his mission was to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites.”

“Together, people like us helped change the course of history,” one message said, adding in another: “Every single one of you who forwarded even just one of our posts on social media contributed to the stunning victory for Trump, America and God.”

In a recent email interview from Belgrade, where he has met with Serbian nationalists, Mr. Dowson explained how his decision to establish an American social media presence was similar to the move into European markets by Breitbart News, the conservative provocateur media operation run by Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist.

“Simple truth is that after 40 years of the right having no voice because the media was owned by the enemy, we were FORCED to become incredibly good at alternative media in a way the left simply can’t grasp or handle,” Mr. Dowson said. “Bottom line is: BREXIT, TRUMP and much more to follow.”

While it is easy to overstate the influence of fringe elements whose overall numbers remain very small, the explosion of fake news and propaganda sites and their possible impact on the presidential election have ignited alarm across the American political spectrum. A recent study found that most people who read fabricated stories on Facebook — such as a widely circulated hoax about Pope Francis endorsing Mr. Trump — were inclined to believe them.

Then there is the added element of Russian meddling. The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that Moscow put its thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump through the release of hacked Democratic emails, which provided fodder for many of the most pernicious false attacks on Mrs. Clinton on social media.

Some of those attacks found a home on Russian websites such as the one for Katehon, a right-wing Christian think tank aligned with Mr. Putin. Katehon recirculated anti-Clinton conspiracies under headlines like “Bloody Hillary: 5 Mysterious Murders Linked to Clinton.”

Another Russian site that urged support for Mr. Trump, called “Just Trump It,” is linked to the International Russian Conservative Forum, an annual gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg that has featured Mr. Dowson, among others, as a speaker. The site, which seems mostly aimed at selling Trump T-shirts, was registered to an individual at a Russian company that trademarked a logo used to certify that merchandise was not made with migrant labor.

Some analysts see danger signs in the nexus of Russian interests and far-right agitators in Europe and the United States. Social media can amplify even the most obscure voices, giving them a stage from which to broadcast a distorted message to credulous audiences.

“These messages seep into the mainstream,” said Alina Polyakova, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a nonpartisan international affairs institute in Washington. “They may have been extreme or fringe at one point in time, but they have been incredibly influential in shaping people’s views about key geopolitical events in a very specific direction.”

Russia is particularly adept at playing this game, Ms. Polyakova said. “Moscow specifically encourages and facilitates” the spreading of propaganda through proxies, she said, as well as through events like the Russian conservative forum, which showcases views and narratives favored by the Putin government.

At the inaugural forum in March 2015, Mr. Dowson praised Mr. Putin as a strong defender of traditional values, while belittling President Obama and the United States itself as “feminized men.” In the email interview, Mr. Dowson said he was not supported by Russia in any way, and he accused critics of trying to tar conservatives as dupes of Moscow.
Photo
Mr. Dowson spoke in 2015 at the International Russian Conservative Forum, a gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg. Credit Ruslan Shamukov/TASS, via Newscom

“I look on this rebirth of McCarthy-type anti-Russian hysteria by the LEFT as a hilarious reaction born out of the left’s inability to realize THEY elected Trump, not me, not the Russians, not even the right,” he said via email.

A colorful if somewhat enigmatic figure in Britain — The Times of London recently described him as “the invisible man of Britain’s far right” — Mr. Dowson, at first blush, would not be an obvious mouthpiece for Russia.

Formerly a church minister in Northern Ireland and the father of nine, he became involved in anti-abortion campaigns, joined the British National Party in the mid-2000s and, later, founded Britain First, a stridently anti-immigrant group opposed to what it called a creeping Islamic threat to traditional British values. He publicly split with the group in 2014 after some of its leaders started invading mosques and threatening Muslims, which he criticized as un-Christian and counterproductive.

While involved with Britain First, Mr. Dowson made deft use of social media and websites to promote its work and convey the impression of a mass following. A British watchdog group called Hope Not Hate, which has tracked Mr. Dowson’s online activities, concluded that he has “a rather canny knack for building up protest groups and movements on the basis that it was your Christian duty to follow his work.”

Mr. Dowson claims to have reached millions of Americans across all of his online platforms in the run-up to the November presidential election, a number that could not be verified, in part, because he would not confirm all of his sites. Online visits to Patriot News did not come close to that, although when combined with several other sites that appear to be connected to Mr. Dowson, the total number edges above a million; most viewers were in Britain.
Got a confidential news tip?

The New York Times would like to hear from readers who want to share messages and materials with our journalists.

Whatever the precise numbers, there is little question that postings on the sites and Facebook pages linked to him were viewed and shared hundreds of thousands of times. Many of the postings appear to be lifted from other conspiracy websites, repackaged and launched back into the social media maelstrom. Another site that trafficked heavily in pro-Trump news was run by Knights Templar International, a militant religious group that Mr. Dowson is involved in, which has recently supported anti-immigrant militias patrolling border areas in Bulgaria and Hungary.

For Mr. Dowson, such activities are in keeping with his philosophy that traditional Christian values are under siege because of feckless leadership by America and European powers. The success of Mr. Trump, he said, is the logical result of voters’ rejection of the weakness of global elites.

Mr. Dowson has long been optimistic about the effectiveness of social media. During the 2015 conservative forum in Russia, he spoke presciently about the looming online battle for the attention of American voters.

“We have the ability to take a video from today and put it in half of every single household in the United States of America, where these people can for the first time learn the truth, because their own media tell lies, they tell lies about Russia,” Mr. Dowson said then.

“We have to use popular culture to reach into the living rooms of the youth of America, of Britain, France, Germany, and bring them in,” he said. “Then we can get them the message.”

Follow Mike McIntire on Twitter.

Title: The Electdoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2016, 02:34:55 PM

Let's review our Constitutional theory a bit:

We are NOT a democracy. We are a constitutional republic. Our Founding Fathers were quite clear and quite articulate about the dangers of simple democracy and quite purposeful in constructing something to protect us from them.

We are the UNITED STATES of America, with each state being sovereign in areas which have not been delegated to the Feds. This is the Tenth Amendment. Somewhat confusingly labelled, this is known as "Federalism" as in "Federation"-- as versus a "confederacy"-- which by the way is what we were before the Constitution was passed.

((Trivia: The phrase in the preamble of our Constitution "In order to form a more perfect union" is a reference to the union created by this confederacy. Very much worth noting is that the union was declared in the formation of the confederacy to be permanent. Proper statutory construction here incorporates this into our Constitution, thus deny the claims to the right to secession asserted by the Southern States in the Civil War, but I digress))

Thus, the electoral college can be analogized to the World Series. The winner is not determined by the net numbers of runs scored by each team, but by who wins four games first (or 270 electoral college votes).

Title: Re: POTH: How an Overseas Putin Fan pushed pro-Trump propaganda to Americans
Post by: G M on December 19, 2016, 06:00:41 PM

Yes, it was the Russian's propaganda, not the wikileaks emails confirming the DNC-MSM collusion for all to see and Grannie Corruption McNeuropathology as a candidate that lost the election to Trump. Damn you, Putin!!  :roll:

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2016, 02:22:51 PM

Obviously in that this is Pravda on the Hudson, caveat lector

How a Putin Fan Overseas Pushed Pro-Trump Propaganda to Americans

By MIKE McINTIREDEC. 17, 2016
Dowson, a far-right political activist, ran a constellation of websites out of the United Kingdom. Credit Rex Features, via Associated Press

The Patriot News Agency website popped up in July, soon after it became clear that Donald J. Trump would win the Republican presidential nomination, bearing a logo of a red, white and blue eagle and the motto “Built by patriots, for patriots.”

Tucked away on a corner of the site, next to links for Twitter and YouTube, is a link to another social media platform that most Americans have never heard of: VKontakte, the Russian equivalent of Facebook. It is a clue that Patriot News, like many sites that appeared out of nowhere and pumped out pro-Trump hoaxes tying his opponent Hillary Clinton to Satanism, pedophilia and other conspiracies, is actually run by foreigners based overseas.

But while most of those others seem be the work of young, apolitical opportunists cashing in on a conservative appetite for viral nonsense, operators of Patriot News had an explicitly partisan motivation: getting Mr. Trump elected.

Patriot News — whose postings were viewed and shared tens of thousands of times in the United States — is among a constellation of websites run out of the United Kingdom that are linked to James Dowson, a far-right political activist who advocated Britain’s exit from the European Union and is a fan of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. A vocal proponent of Christian nationalist, anti-immigrant movements in Europe, Mr. Dowson, 52, has spoken at a conference of far-right leaders in Russia and makes no secret of his hope that Mr. Trump will usher in an era of rapprochement with Mr. Putin.

===================================
Recent Comments
Bill Casey 17 hours ago

My mother, who is 72 years old and grew up in a time when you could trust what you read, joined Facebook this year. She was hesitant to vote...
Boston Comments 19 hours ago

Gawd, I can barely grasp at words after reading this superb piece of reportage. I'm old enough to remember the McCarthy era -- and although...
J T 19 hours ago

Why am I not surprised this former "church minister in Northern Ireland," whose religious justifications for his actions are repeatedly...
=========================


His dabbling in the American presidential election adds an ideological element that has been largely missing from the still-emerging landscape of websites and Facebook pages that bombarded American voters with misinformation and propaganda. Far from the much-reported Macedonian teenagers running fake news factories solely for profit, Mr. Dowson made it his mission, according to messages posted on one of his sites, to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites into sections of the population too disillusioned with politics to have taken any notice of conventional campaigning.”
Photo
An image from one of Mr. Dowson’s websites. He said his mission was to “spread devastating anti-Clinton, pro-Trump memes and sound bites.”

“Together, people like us helped change the course of history,” one message said, adding in another: “Every single one of you who forwarded even just one of our posts on social media contributed to the stunning victory for Trump, America and God.”

In a recent email interview from Belgrade, where he has met with Serbian nationalists, Mr. Dowson explained how his decision to establish an American social media presence was similar to the move into European markets by Breitbart News, the conservative provocateur media operation run by Stephen K. Bannon, Mr. Trump’s chief strategist.

“Simple truth is that after 40 years of the right having no voice because the media was owned by the enemy, we were FORCED to become incredibly good at alternative media in a way the left simply can’t grasp or handle,” Mr. Dowson said. “Bottom line is: BREXIT, TRUMP and much more to follow.”

While it is easy to overstate the influence of fringe elements whose overall numbers remain very small, the explosion of fake news and propaganda sites and their possible impact on the presidential election have ignited alarm across the American political spectrum. A recent study found that most people who read fabricated stories on Facebook — such as a widely circulated hoax about Pope Francis endorsing Mr. Trump — were inclined to believe them.

Then there is the added element of Russian meddling. The Central Intelligence Agency has concluded that Moscow put its thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump through the release of hacked Democratic emails, which provided fodder for many of the most pernicious false attacks on Mrs. Clinton on social media.

Some of those attacks found a home on Russian websites such as the one for Katehon, a right-wing Christian think tank aligned with Mr. Putin. Katehon recirculated anti-Clinton conspiracies under headlines like “Bloody Hillary: 5 Mysterious Murders Linked to Clinton.”

Another Russian site that urged support for Mr. Trump, called “Just Trump It,” is linked to the International Russian Conservative Forum, an annual gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg that has featured Mr. Dowson, among others, as a speaker. The site, which seems mostly aimed at selling Trump T-shirts, was registered to an individual at a Russian company that trademarked a logo used to certify that merchandise was not made with migrant labor.

Some analysts see danger signs in the nexus of Russian interests and far-right agitators in Europe and the United States. Social media can amplify even the most obscure voices, giving them a stage from which to broadcast a distorted message to credulous audiences.

“These messages seep into the mainstream,” said Alina Polyakova, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a nonpartisan international affairs institute in Washington. “They may have been extreme or fringe at one point in time, but they have been incredibly influential in shaping people’s views about key geopolitical events in a very specific direction.”

Russia is particularly adept at playing this game, Ms. Polyakova said. “Moscow specifically encourages and facilitates” the spreading of propaganda through proxies, she said, as well as through events like the Russian conservative forum, which showcases views and narratives favored by the Putin government.

At the inaugural forum in March 2015, Mr. Dowson praised Mr. Putin as a strong defender of traditional values, while belittling President Obama and the United States itself as “feminized men.” In the email interview, Mr. Dowson said he was not supported by Russia in any way, and he accused critics of trying to tar conservatives as dupes of Moscow.
Photo
Mr. Dowson spoke in 2015 at the International Russian Conservative Forum, a gathering of far-right leaders in St. Petersburg. Credit Ruslan Shamukov/TASS, via Newscom

“I look on this rebirth of McCarthy-type anti-Russian hysteria by the LEFT as a hilarious reaction born out of the left’s inability to realize THEY elected Trump, not me, not the Russians, not even the right,” he said via email.

A colorful if somewhat enigmatic figure in Britain — The Times of London recently described him as “the invisible man of Britain’s far right” — Mr. Dowson, at first blush, would not be an obvious mouthpiece for Russia.

Formerly a church minister in Northern Ireland and the father of nine, he became involved in anti-abortion campaigns, joined the British National Party in the mid-2000s and, later, founded Britain First, a stridently anti-immigrant group opposed to what it called a creeping Islamic threat to traditional British values. He publicly split with the group in 2014 after some of its leaders started invading mosques and threatening Muslims, which he criticized as un-Christian and counterproductive.

While involved with Britain First, Mr. Dowson made deft use of social media and websites to promote its work and convey the impression of a mass following. A British watchdog group called Hope Not Hate, which has tracked Mr. Dowson’s online activities, concluded that he has “a rather canny knack for building up protest groups and movements on the basis that it was your Christian duty to follow his work.”

Mr. Dowson claims to have reached millions of Americans across all of his online platforms in the run-up to the November presidential election, a number that could not be verified, in part, because he would not confirm all of his sites. Online visits to Patriot News did not come close to that, although when combined with several other sites that appear to be connected to Mr. Dowson, the total number edges above a million; most viewers were in Britain.
Got a confidential news tip?

The New York Times would like to hear from readers who want to share messages and materials with our journalists.

Whatever the precise numbers, there is little question that postings on the sites and Facebook pages linked to him were viewed and shared hundreds of thousands of times. Many of the postings appear to be lifted from other conspiracy websites, repackaged and launched back into the social media maelstrom. Another site that trafficked heavily in pro-Trump news was run by Knights Templar International, a militant religious group that Mr. Dowson is involved in, which has recently supported anti-immigrant militias patrolling border areas in Bulgaria and Hungary.

For Mr. Dowson, such activities are in keeping with his philosophy that traditional Christian values are under siege because of feckless leadership by America and European powers. The success of Mr. Trump, he said, is the logical result of voters’ rejection of the weakness of global elites.

Mr. Dowson has long been optimistic about the effectiveness of social media. During the 2015 conservative forum in Russia, he spoke presciently about the looming online battle for the attention of American voters.

“We have the ability to take a video from today and put it in half of every single household in the United States of America, where these people can for the first time learn the truth, because their own media tell lies, they tell lies about Russia,” Mr. Dowson said then.

“We have to use popular culture to reach into the living rooms of the youth of America, of Britain, France, Germany, and bring them in,” he said. “Then we can get them the message.”

Follow Mike McIntire on Twitter.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2016, 08:59:35 PM

All true, but I'd like to suggest that we here need to keep our eye on the elephant in the room.  

It seems likely the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and maybe the Norks have penetrated our water, electric, transport grids to greater or lesser extents, and to extents unknown have penetrated our government.  

Now the Russkis, using techniques they (including the KGB) have honed for decades, are now cyber-penetrating our domestic conversation and are spreading plausible sounding lies to their purpose.  They are now confident enough to have brought this to bear on our electoral process itself.  

No, it did not change the results THIS time, but it certainly plants the seeds for doubt NEXT time which will be turbocharged by the fact many Americans wonder about how close our new president envisions us working in alliance with them.

This is serious excrement, but even this is not complete.  We are being cyber-penetrated in our elections, our government, our grids, our technology, and our private lives (think the Chinese snatch of the security clearance applications of millions of American government workers!) and more!  The wall along the border with Mexico is challenge enough; is there a wall that can be built for this?

edited

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 19, 2016, 09:04:46 PM

If you are worried about enemies of the US gaining access to political power in the US, I would refer you to the last 8 years.

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2016, 08:59:35 PM

All true, but I'd like to suggest that we here need to keep our eye on the elephant in the room. 

It seems likely the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, and maybe the Norks have penetrated our water, electric, transport grids to greater or lesser extents, and to extents unknown have penetrated our government. 

Now the Russkis, using techniques they (including the KGB) have honed for decades, are now cyber-penetrating our domestic conversation and are spreading plausible sounding lies to their purpose.  They are now confident enough to have brought this to bear on our electoral process itself. 

No, it did not change the results THIS time, but it certainly plants the seeds for doubt NEXT time which will be turbocharged by the fact many Americans wonder about how close our new president envisions us working in alliance with them.

This is serious excrement.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2016, 09:24:36 PM

Sorry, but as true as that rejoinder is, it still misses the bigger point.  We are being penetrated. In a new and fundamental way.  What are we going to do about it?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 19, 2016, 09:39:20 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2016, 09:24:36 PM

Sorry, but as true as that rejoinder is, it still misses the bigger point.  We are being penetrated. In a new and fundamental way.  What are we going to do about it?

What will we do and what should we do are two separate questions. We should take cyberwar very seriously. But, we won't. Then, when a state or non-state actor toasts the grid, then sh@t will get real.

Title: NY Times argues for abolishing Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2016, 10:44:02 AM

We need to know the arguments-- e.g. the slave holder argument and how to counter it.
===========================

By overwhelming majorities, Americans would prefer to elect the president by direct popular vote, not filtered through the antiquated mechanism of the Electoral College. They understand, on a gut level, the basic fairness of awarding the nation’s highest office on the same basis as every other elected office — to the person who gets the most votes.

But for now, the presidency is still decided by 538 electors. And on Monday, despite much talk in recent weeks about urging those electors to block Donald Trump from the White House, a majority did as expected and cast their ballots for him — a result Congress will ratify next month.

And so for the second time in 16 years, the candidate who lost the popular vote has won the presidency. Unlike 2000, it wasn’t even close. Hillary Clinton beat Mr. Trump by more than 2.8 million votes, or 2.1 percent of the electorate. That’s a wider margin than 10 winning candidates enjoyed and the biggest deficit for an incoming president since the 19th century.

Yes, Mr. Trump won under the rules, but the rules should change so that a presidential election reflects the will of Americans and promotes a more participatory democracy.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    See Sample Manage Email Preferences Privacy Policy

The Electoral College, which is written into the Constitution, is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America’s original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes.

Today the college, which allocates electors based on each state’s representation in Congress, tips the scales in favor of smaller states; a Wyoming resident’s vote counts 3.6 times as much as a Californian’s. And because almost all states use a winner-take-all system, the election ends up being fought in just a dozen or so “battleground” states, leaving tens of millions of Americans on the sidelines.

There is an elegant solution: The Constitution establishes the existence of electors, but leaves it up to states to tell them how to vote. Eleven states and the District of Columbia, representing 165 electoral votes, have already passed legislation to have their electors vote for the winner of the national popular vote. The agreement, known as the National Popular Vote interstate compact, would take effect once states representing a majority of electoral votes, currently 270, signed on. This would ensure that the national popular-vote winner would become president.

Conservative opponents of a direct vote say it would give an unfair edge to large, heavily Democratic cities and states. But why should the votes of Americans in California or New York count for less than those in Idaho or Texas? A direct popular vote would treat all Americans equally, no matter where they live — including, by the way, Republicans in San Francisco and Democrats in Corpus Christi, whose votes are currently worthless. The system as it now operates does a terrible job of representing the nation’s demographic and geographic diversity. Almost 138 million Americans went to the polls this year, but Mr. Trump secured his Electoral College victory thanks to fewer than 80,000 votes across three states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

This page opposed the Electoral College in 1936, and in more recent years as well. In 2004, President George W. Bush won the popular vote by more than three million, but he could have lost the Electoral College with a switch of fewer than 60,000 votes in Ohio.

Many Republicans have endorsed doing away with the Electoral College, including Mr. Trump himself, in 2012. Maybe that’s why he keeps claiming falsely that he won the popular vote, or why more than half of Republicans now seem to believe he did. For most reasonable people, it’s hard to understand why the loser of the popular vote should wind up running the country.

Title: Surprise! Detroit numbers not adding up.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2016, 03:17:26 PM

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2016/12/18/detroit-ballots-vote-recount-election-stein/95570866/

Title: Re: Surprise! Detroit numbers not adding up.
Post by: G M on December 20, 2016, 05:26:29 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2016, 03:17:26 PM

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2016/12/18/detroit-ballots-vote-recount-election-stein/95570866/

Strange. I'm sure an investigation of other democrat dominated cities would show that this is just an isolated incident, and not indicative of a larger trend.

We'd better check, just to be sure.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2016, 05:44:32 PM

Snarkmaster!  :lol:

Title: Re: NY Times argues for abolishing Electoral College
Post by: G M on December 21, 2016, 07:52:10 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2016, 10:44:02 AM

We need to know the arguments-- e.g. the slave holder argument and how to counter it.
===========================

By overwhelming majorities, Americans would prefer to elect the president by direct popular vote, not filtered through the antiquated mechanism of the Electoral College. They understand, on a gut level, the basic fairness of awarding the nation’s highest office on the same basis as every other elected office — to the person who gets the most votes.

But for now, the presidency is still decided by 538 electors. And on Monday, despite much talk in recent weeks about urging those electors to block Donald Trump from the White House, a majority did as expected and cast their ballots for him — a result Congress will ratify next month.

And so for the second time in 16 years, the candidate who lost the popular vote has won the presidency. Unlike 2000, it wasn’t even close. Hillary Clinton beat Mr. Trump by more than 2.8 million votes, or 2.1 percent of the electorate. That’s a wider margin than 10 winning candidates enjoyed and the biggest deficit for an incoming president since the 19th century.

Yes, Mr. Trump won under the rules, but the rules should change so that a presidential election reflects the will of Americans and promotes a more participatory democracy.
Sign Up for the Opinion Today Newsletter

Every weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, the Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    See Sample Manage Email Preferences Privacy Policy

The Electoral College, which is written into the Constitution, is more than just a vestige of the founding era; it is a living symbol of America’s original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes.

Today the college, which allocates electors based on each state’s representation in Congress, tips the scales in favor of smaller states; a Wyoming resident’s vote counts 3.6 times as much as a Californian’s. And because almost all states use a winner-take-all system, the election ends up being fought in just a dozen or so “battleground” states, leaving tens of millions of Americans on the sidelines.

There is an elegant solution: The Constitution establishes the existence of electors, but leaves it up to states to tell them how to vote. Eleven states and the District of Columbia, representing 165 electoral votes, have already passed legislation to have their electors vote for the winner of the national popular vote. The agreement, known as the National Popular Vote interstate compact, would take effect once states representing a majority of electoral votes, currently 270, signed on. This would ensure that the national popular-vote winner would become president.

Conservative opponents of a direct vote say it would give an unfair edge to large, heavily Democratic cities and states. But why should the votes of Americans in California or New York count for less than those in Idaho or Texas? A direct popular vote would treat all Americans equally, no matter where they live — including, by the way, Republicans in San Francisco and Democrats in Corpus Christi, whose votes are currently worthless. The system as it now operates does a terrible job of representing the nation’s demographic and geographic diversity. Almost 138 million Americans went to the polls this year, but Mr. Trump secured his Electoral College victory thanks to fewer than 80,000 votes across three states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

This page opposed the Electoral College in 1936, and in more recent years as well. In 2004, President George W. Bush won the popular vote by more than three million, but he could have lost the Electoral College with a switch of fewer than 60,000 votes in Ohio.

Many Republicans have endorsed doing away with the Electoral College, including Mr. Trump himself, in 2012. Maybe that’s why he keeps claiming falsely that he won the popular vote, or why more than half of Republicans now seem to believe he did. For most reasonable people, it’s hard to understand why the loser of the popular vote should wind up running the country.

(http://www.michaelpramirez.com/uploads/3/4/9/8/34985326/mrz111916-color_orig.jpg)

http://www.michaelpramirez.com/uploads/3/4/9/8/34985326/mrz111916-color_orig.jpg

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 21, 2016, 08:27:04 AM

The Democrat Party cannot win on ideas with people here legally.  So just open up the borders to the world and viola.  They have millions more votes.

Title: Electoral College
Post by: DougMacG on December 21, 2016, 09:30:53 AM

"We need to know the arguments [against the electoral college] -- e.g. the slave holder argument and how to counter it."

And likewise, the people should be taught the reasons FOR the electoral college.  Three places you're not likely to learn them, the mainstream media, the public schools and liberal-run private schools.  In other words, you might have to visit the right wing blogosphere, or this forum!


"The Electoral College ... is a living symbol of America’s original sin. When slavery was the law of the land, a direct popular vote would have disadvantaged the Southern states, with their large disenfranchised populations. Counting those men and women as three-fifths of a white person, as the Constitution originally did, gave the slave states more electoral votes."


Oh good grief!  Does the NY Times know math any better than that?  How does adding two Senators to the House total for ALL states give you the southern slave count?  If slave compensation was the reason, the math would count a slave as one person or multiply the slave number by 5/3rds.  The biggest colony, Virginia, was a slave state and some of the smallest, Rhode Island Delaware for example, were not.   https://web.viu.ca/davies/h320/population.colonies.htm  
Slavery was not the central point of the constitution, contrary to what is taught in our schools and newspapers.

There were good reasons then and there are good reasons now for the electoral college and as far as I know, they are the same.  Before delving into them, I would ask opponents what other parts of the constitution don't you like?  Article 5 perhaps, amending the constitution?  Note that their elegant solution goes around amending the constitution.  We hear polling on the popularity of the electoral college of randomly or systematically chosen Americans without hearing whether a majority favor abandoning it - in 3/4ths of the state legislatures, the vote that matters!  How does the electoral polling look in the 38 smallest states?  I wonder how Iowa and New Hampshire feel?  And Wyoming, Alaska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, West Virginia, Nevada, Mississippi, Utah, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Alabama, Indiana.  Do they want to be ruled by California?  I don't.  It only takes 13 states opposed to defeat repeal of the constitutional electoral college - if constitutional process mattered.

What do we say about liberals who were enthralled with the electoral college as recently as Nov. 6?  Did anyone hear about the big Blue Wall?  Hillary or any Democrat has 242 electoral votes before the vote count begins:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_wall_(politics)  
States falling behind this blue wall generally included those the Democrats had carried since the 1992 presidential election,[5][6] and included (in order of decreasing population and followed by number of electoral votes): California (55), New York (29), Illinois (20), New Jersey (14), Washington (12), Massachusetts (11), Maryland (10), Minnesota (10), Oregon (7), Connecticut (7), Hawaii (4), Maine (4), Rhode Island (4), Delaware (3), and Vermont (3).  That Donald Trump had a narrow path to victory, narrow path to victory, narrow path to victory, narrow path to victory,  http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trumps-path-to-victory-is-narrow-1478480114   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ7lYRnF1F8

Reasons to keep the electoral college:

1. Requires the winning candidate to have significant trans-regional appeal.  

2. The entire constitution is a protection against tyranny by the majority.  Without it we could just have a popular vote on everything.

3. Certainty if outcome.  Challenges and recounts tend to be limited to a limited number of states, rarely wffecting the outcome.

4. Avoidance of a runoff.  Liberals can say Hillary won the popular vote in an electoral vote contest, but by no count did she win 50% plus one vote as the constitution also requires.  Hillary Clinton received 48% of the popular vote.  So then this goes to the Republican majority House of Representatives or do we change that rule too when it hurts Democrats?  Eliminate that rule and then even more minor party candidates run as spoilers and power brokers instead of the current system that mostly forces two major parties to reach to the middle.  Or should we have purality elections with run-off caused by the Gary Johnsons, Jill Steins and Ralph Naders of the spectrum?  In a runoff election without Ross Perot and more time to consider the consequences while the economy was already coming out of a recession, would incumbent President George H.W. Bush have lost to the Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton, who never did get 50% of the vote?  Maybe, maybe not.

5. Swing States.  The nature of the swing state contest is to force both major candidates toward the middle and toward being seen as more reasonable by the middle view of the country in a range of regions and states, from Nevada to New Hampshire in this most recent case.  Neither side can just throw out red meat to their side and win, in theory.

6.  Big states still have big clout.  California at 55 votes, still has more than one fifth of what is needed to win.

7.  The argument against the electoral college works as an argument against having the Senate, also not proportionally representative.  It is an argument against the House too.  Why are House districts winner take all instead of proportional representation?  Why not abandon Article 1 while were at it, and maybe all of the constitution.  Why protect rights or limit government if majority rule is better by definition?

8. If the first 7 don't persuade you, please consider that the Founding Fathers were much smarter and wiser than you - even if you call yourself "All the News That's Fit to Print”.  A constitution-less country would not have survived this long or prospered this well.  These protections have served their purpose well and the constitution has been sufficiently amendable when needed, proven 27 times over.  Who really believes otherwise?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 21, 2016, 10:01:28 AM

Good points Doug.

Additional new re writing of history through the eyes of those who today make EVERYTHING racist.
Now the electoral college is an invention by evil white privileged men to keep the Black man down.

How can there be compromise with this stuff?  There simply is not compromise with these people .  None.  The angry racialists have merged with the globalists to seize power in the USA for them and around the world for the elite globalists as I see it.

We can only hope that through Trump's success in among America stronger and more thriving that enough of those in the middle will wake up and help us control (defeat is never going to happen) the liberal onslaught .  We have to keep giving the chemo to keep down the cancer.

I don't see any other way around this.  Unfortunately we are divided less by geography then during the original civil war.

Yesterday I picked up my monthly National Geographic to find the entire issue is about leftist gender political dogma.  I just renewed my subscription too!  I notice another one of my mag subscriptions to Smithsonian is also increasingly packed with liberal dogma. 
For God's sake I can't even read these magazines without being barraged with white man privilege hatred!

Title: Electoral College is Awesome
Post by: DougMacG on December 21, 2016, 08:59:49 PM

Some similar points here:

http://theweek.com/articles/668508/electoral-college-actually-awesome
The Electoral College is actually awesome

Edward Morrissey
December 21, 2016

...The Times' editorial also highlighted the supposed unfairness of not "using the same basis as every other elected office." The reason for this is that the presidency is not at all "like every other national office" — and it never has been.

Unlike governors, whose state governments have total sovereignty within their borders, the presidency governs over states with their own sovereignty under the Constitution. The role of the presidency is at least somewhat limited to foreign policy and questions that are at least loosely connected to interstate issues and enforcement of other provisions of the Constitution. For that reason, the framers of the Constitution wanted to ensure that the president would have the greatest consensus among the sovereign states themselves, while still including representation based on population.

That is why each state gets the same number of electors as they have seats in the House and the Senate. It reduces the advantage that larger states have, but hardly eliminates it entirely; California has 55 electors while Wyoming has only three, to use the Times' comparison. Rather than being an "antiquated system," as they write, it's an elegant system that helps balance power between sovereign states with national popular intent, and it forces presidential contenders to appeal to a broader range of populations.

The editorial points out that Republican votes in San Francisco are "worthless" under the current system. But that has more to do with the way the states choose to allocate electors than it does the Electoral College. California and 47 other states allocate electors on a winner-take-all basis, which gives their states much more power in presidential elections. States could choose other allocation schemes if they want to prioritize "democracy" and proportional representation over influence, but none of the high-population states do so.

In this case, the nature of the popular-vote lead is instructive on why smaller states won't go along with the Times' demand to end the Electoral College. Clinton won the overall popular vote by nearly 3 million, but won California by 4.3 million and New York by 1.7 million. Donald Trump won 30 of the 50 states. Relying on the popular vote would have voters in the largest states determine the outcome and lock out the majority of the states, as it would have in 2016.

A popular-vote system would change the entire dynamic of presidential campaigns. Rather than spending time in states with smaller populations, candidates would spend their time trying to fight it out in the most populous locations. That might be good news for California, New York, and Texas, but it's bad news for most of the South and Midwest. Had a popular-vote system been in place in 2016, the Trump campaign would have oriented itself toward it and might have competed more in coastal Democratic strongholds, wasting less effort in other states.

Instead, the Electoral College system worked exactly as intended. The candidate who built the best consensus among the states through their popular votes won the presidency. The problem for the Times and others opposed to the outcome is that their candidate didn't beat the winner.

Title: Re: The electoral process, NYT Electoral College continued
Post by: DougMacG on December 22, 2016, 05:53:09 PM

NYT:  "This page opposed the Electoral College in 1936, and in more recent years as well."

Whoops.  They were against it, before they were for it, before they were against it:

NYT Correction: December 20, 2016
An earlier version of this editorial incorrectly stated that the editorial board has been opposed to the Electoral College going back 80 years. It failed to note an exception: in 2000, the board defended the college after the election of George W. Bush.

The 2000 editorial was titled, “The Case for the Electoral College” and the editors argued that, “The Electoral College was first and foremost a compact among states, large and small, designed to ensure that one state or one region did not dominate the others.”  [Isn't that about what I said?]   )

The Times ended the editorial with:
The system has survived earlier instances in which the winner of the popular vote was denied the presidency. Wise voters and legislators will want to make sure that it survives this one as well.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/12/19/opinion/the-case-for-the-electoral-college.html

Title: Re: The electoral college ended slavery
Post by: DougMacG on December 28, 2016, 08:39:49 PM

Stick this in the NYT editorial pipe and smoke it.   )

it was the electoral college that made it possible to end slavery, since Abraham Lincoln earned only 39 percent of the popular vote in the election of 1860, but won a crushing victory in the electoral college.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/15/in-defense-of-the-electoral-college/?utm_term=.195822a37f30

Title: President Obama OK'd illegals voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 24, 2017, 07:35:53 AM

http://www.statenation.co/jge4.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 24, 2017, 07:55:31 AM

did you take the poll at the bottom of the screen asking if you think Brock interfered with the election?
50 ish people of course said no.   
typical lying libs

Title: amazing
Post by: ccp on January 24, 2017, 11:04:39 AM

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2017/01/scotus-declines-to-protect-texas-from-tyrannical-lower-court-injunction-on-voter-id-law

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on January 24, 2017, 08:31:15 PM

Another prediction.... Dems don't know it yet, but they've just slammed their hand in the door on voter ID, by accusing Russia of interfering in the elections. There will be legislation passed before 2020, that the Dems will want, that will only be passed by allowing the Conservatives to write in voter ID laws.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 24, 2017, 09:02:06 PM

Quote from: DDF on January 24, 2017, 08:31:15 PM

Another prediction.... Dems don't know it yet, but they've just slammed their hand in the door on voter ID, by accusing Russia of interfering in the elections. There will be legislation passed before 2020, that the Dems will want, that will only be passed by allowing the Conservatives to write in voter ID laws.

I hope you are correct. Usually the republicans never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on January 25, 2017, 06:57:48 AM

Quote from: G M on January 24, 2017, 09:02:06 PM

Quote from: DDF on January 24, 2017, 08:31:15 PM

Another prediction.... Dems don't know it yet, but they've just slammed their hand in the door on voter ID, by accusing Russia of interfering in the elections. There will be legislation passed before 2020, that the Dems will want, that will only be passed by allowing the Conservatives to write in voter ID laws.

I hope you are correct. Usually the republicans never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

Trump just tweeted a major investigation into the subject from the angle of illegals voting, and others voting more than once, at 07:10 EST today.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 25, 2017, 07:16:23 AM

DDF welcome back.
too busy partying after Trump win?   :-D

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 25, 2017, 07:25:16 AM

Typical liberal 30 something little creep stating Trump's claim is "debunked". 
The LEFT has done everything they can to keep from being able to track who IS voting with denying voter IDs etc and then turns around and claims there is no fraud and no proof of it.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-calls-for-major-investigation-into-debunked-claim-of-widespread-voter-fraud-134317994.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on January 25, 2017, 07:26:51 AM

Quote from: ccp on January 25, 2017, 07:16:23 AM

DDF welcome back.
too busy partying after Trump win?   :-D

Thanks CCP.... yep...getting crazy with non alcoholic, apple cider and finshing a degree in law. ;)

By the way, I was mistaken.... evidently, Trump announced it at 04:10 EST.... I have my comp set to Queensland time, and I missed it by an hour. The link is here.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/824227824903090176?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw


CCP.... hope we are partying for the next decade and a half.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on January 25, 2017, 07:28:52 AM

Quote from: ccp on January 25, 2017, 07:25:16 AM

Typical liberal 30 something little creep stating Trump's claim is "debunked". 
The LEFT has done everything they can to keep from being able to track who IS voting with denying voter IDs etc and then turns around and claims there is no fraud and no proof of it.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-calls-for-major-investigation-into-debunked-claim-of-widespread-voter-fraud-134317994.html

I left them a nice comment on that article. They know that voter ID will be the death rattle of their party, which is why they fight it so hard. Poorer countries do it, including Mexico... their only reason to fight it, is the loss of power that will result from it, and they know it. Unfortunately, they've left themselves nowhere to go, by accusing Russia of hacking elections.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, illegals voting, poll
Post by: DougMacG on January 25, 2017, 08:28:46 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/

Based on a sample survey of 800 Hispanics in 2013, McLaughlin found that of foreign-born respondents who were registered voters, 13 percent admitted they were not United States citizens.

80℅ Dem.  We need voter ID.

Title: Vote fraud? Let's find out.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 26, 2017, 11:00:43 AM

https://patriotpost.us/posts/47113

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 26, 2017, 11:55:42 AM

If just one out of one thousand votes are from illegals aliens or otherwise illegal or error that is 125 thousand or 2500 per state.  Does anyone rationally think this is not only possible but likely.  And indeed even more likely that that is low ball estimate?

Title: Numer of illegal aliens affects number of votes in electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 29, 2017, 05:58:24 PM

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/10/illegal-immigrants-could-elect-hillary-clinton-213216

Title: Trumps files for 2020; this will mess with 501 (c) groups
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 01, 2017, 08:44:04 AM

http://disobedientmedia.com/trump-files-with-fec-for-2020-election-bid-outmaneuvers-nonprofit-organizations/

Title: This is Semi-Significant
Post by: DDF on February 01, 2017, 07:12:10 PM

This ruling could be the doorway for third party politics to enter the fray in the United States. As some may recall, I spent a bit f time picking them apart a while ago, when I thought that Johnson may have warranted my support.

https://ivn.us/2017/02/01/breaking-federal-judge-rules-presidential-debate-commission/

Title: Nation: Reps just voted to make voting machines hackable
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 08, 2017, 09:37:55 PM

Anyone have anything on this?


https://www.thenation.com/article/house-republicans-just-voted-to-eliminate-the-only-federal-agency-that-makes-sure-voting-machines-cant-be-hacked/

Title: Re: Nation: Reps just voted to make voting machines hackable
Post by: DougMacG on February 09, 2017, 11:16:22 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 08, 2017, 09:37:55 PM

Anyone have anything on this?
https://www.thenation.com/article/house-republicans-just-voted-to-eliminate-the-only-federal-agency-that-makes-sure-voting-machines-cant-be-hacked/

It's the end of the world as we know it, but not a big enough story to make the Huffington Post's top 100.  Maybe they're not liberal (or deranged) enough.  Searched voting machines on google news and pointed me back to the same story.  USA Today has a story, link and excerpt below.

My take: 1) Our elections aren't hacked because we don't centralize them.  US elections are divided into partially self governing states, congressional districts and in elections especially - the precinct level.  Cheating in Chicago or Detroit does not affect Minneapolis or Wyoming.  Butterfly ballots didn't turn the result in Ohio.  Recall the Chavez recall election in Venezuela.  He was trailing 40-60 and won 60-40.  Jimmy Carter the the UN watched the local sites while presumably the dictatorship moved the result 40 points at the center point.  Then Colin Powell and Bush certified Carter's report like it was the gold standard.  That doesn't happen here. 

Leftists at places like 'The Nation' scream the loudest when all the machines come from one manufacturer, have the same updates and vulnerabilities:  https://www.thenation.com/article/letters-325/


2) To 'The Nation', the agency is judged by it's good intentions; to conservatives the agency had a purpose that was fulfilled.  Government programs shouldn't live on forever.

USA TODAY: "Republicans have long argued the agency is no longer needed and was only meant to be a temporary agency to dole out $3.1 billion to states to improve election systems after the disputed 2000 presidential election. That money is gone. Democrats, however, argue the EAC is needed now more than ever."  http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/07/house-panel-votes-close-election-assistance-commission/97603326/

3) Why didn't Pres. Obama turn the current controversy, imaginary hacking, over to this agency if that is what they are chartered to do and good at?

4) If we closed one of these government solutions agencies every day that step on our 9th amendment, powers left to the people and to the states, there would still be plenty of agencies left to close at the end of 8 years.   MHO.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 09, 2017, 11:38:25 AM

Thank you.

Title: former Labor Secretary Perez admits primary was rigged for Hillary
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 09, 2017, 08:43:33 PM

http://observer.com/2017/02/dnc-chair-candidate-tom-perez-admits-democratic-primaries-rigged/

Title: Like I Said.... non citizens and illegals are voting
Post by: DDF on February 17, 2017, 12:52:36 PM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/15/nearly-2-million-non-citizen-hispanics-illegally-r/

Between 38,000 and 2.1 million of them... my number is actually higher.

The number of non citizens registered to vote (a crime).... will be telling.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 17, 2017, 02:41:49 PM

DDF,

and this poll was only Latinos.    What about the millions of others who are here illegal or legally but are non citizens who may have registered to vote.

Anyone think there ain't people from Asia or Europe or Africa who are not voting illegally?

There seems no easy way to find this out or else it would be in the open
The Dems like it that way obviously.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on February 17, 2017, 06:13:17 PM

Quote from: ccp on February 17, 2017, 02:41:49 PM

DDF,

and this poll was only Latinos.    What about the millions of others who are here illegal or legally but are non citizens who may have registered to vote.

Anyone think there ain't people from Asia or Europe or Africa who are not voting illegally?

There seems no easy way to find this out or else it would be in the open
The Dems like it that way obviously.

An excellent point, and one that I used in my original calculations, which may explain for my number being higher. I used the numbers from USCIS and the US Census as my sources, being that they didn't just count Latinos.

Either way, it definitely needs to be investigated, voting machines done away with, paper ballots, voter ID, and civilian, multiparty oversight of vote counting.

Barring that, it's still the adage "garbage in, garbage out."

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 18, 2017, 07:09:00 AM

And we can also add to the potential numbers fraud from dead people voting, and those registered in more then one state.

I could not know if the total fraud reaches 2.8 million or so but it HAS to be in hundreds of thousands.
It ain't rare.

If it amounts to just 1 in 200 votes we are talking ~ 600K.   

Title: More Than 100 Illegal Voters in Ohio - Ohio Secretary of State
Post by: DDF on February 28, 2017, 09:55:49 AM

The Ohio Secretary of State has found hundreds of non-citizens registered to vote in the state, with more than a hundred of them, who were found to have cast votes at some time, and 82 of them casting votes in the last election.

http://nbc4i.com/2017/02/27/ohio-secretary-of-state-investigation-found-non-citizens-registered-to-vote-cast-illegal-ballots/

“In light of the national discussion about illegal voting it is important to inform our discussions with facts. The fact is voter fraud happens, it is rare and when it happens, we hold people accountable,” Secretary Husted said.

This is what covering one's rear end looks like. That is several Americans who have had their right to a vote stifled, with even one being too many. We're now talking about more than a 100 known cases, and hundreds registering to vote, which means at a minimum, that the thought of voting has occurred to them.

“I have a responsibility to preserve the integrity of Ohio’s elections system,” Secretary Husted said. “When you consider that in Ohio we have had 112 elections decided by one vote or tied in the last three years, every case of illegal voting must be taken seriously and elections officials must have every resource available to them to respond accordingly.”

"[...]non-citizens who have not cast a ballot will be sent letters both informing them that non-citizens are not eligible to vote and requesting that they cancel their registration. A follow-up letter will be sent to any individuals that still remain on the rolls after 30 days. Any non-citizens identified that remain on the rolls after being contacted twice will then be referred to law enforcement, according to Husted. - Why not immediately?

Ohio's demographics are stated to have  240,699 known non-citizens, with the majority being from Mexico. If the demographics for this register a number this high, for a state that ranks relatively low with illegal alien populations, how many non.citizens (illegal or documented), have voted in states where the non-citizen populations number in the millions - California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, New York and Texas? Four of those states voted Democrat, with the other two being very close toss-ups in the last election.

Census data - https://www.census.gov/newsroom/pdf/cspan_fb_slides.pdf

Pew's illegal population numbers - http://www.pewhispanic.org/interactives/unauthorized-immigrants/

Title: DOJ drops opposition to Texas voter ID
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 28, 2017, 11:48:47 AM

http://www.westernjournalism.com/report-justice-department-top-drop-opposition-texas-voter-id-law/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=THENewVoiceEmail&utm_campaign=can&utm_content=2017-02-28

Title: Clinton campaign lawyer charged with registering dead people
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 02, 2017, 07:30:19 AM

http://central-illinoisandbeyond.blogspot.com/2015/11/clinton-campaign-lawyer-charged-with.html

Title: Caveat Lector: Obama & Soros in Macedonia
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 02, 2017, 12:40:43 PM

second post

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/obama-and-soros-colluded-to-bring-down-elected-government

Title: Re: Caveat Lector: Obama & Soros in Macedonia
Post by: DDF on March 02, 2017, 03:55:14 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 02, 2017, 12:40:43 PM

second post

http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/obama-and-soros-colluded-to-bring-down-elected-government

A bit off topic:

I'm currently compiling a database of every government in the world, ministries dedicated to gender, their budgets, etc...for my thesis...

The amount of money flowing through the State Department, the UN, and USAID organizations is ridiculous, and almost untracked...certainly not a thing that makes the evening news.. nor does the money's end location.

Edit: I'm also going to add, that globalists such as Soros and Obama must be delighted that the UN is pushing government policy in almost every country on the globe in a third party manner, directly by paying for poorer countries to do what they say... Burkina Faso... Chad... Belize... you name it... If it's a poor country... they are buying their way into power. The US isn't any different... they'll pay to implement policy in the States as well, in whatever form that may take... they definitely do not sovereignty.. and doubting that...just look at the CEDAW treaty, the UN Commission on the Status of Women, and their meeting agendas to insure that UN policy is followed and implemented. It's a fact, and it has nothing to do with what voters in any particular country might want.

Oddly enough... it also drives a decidedly Leftist ideology at the same time... Imagine that.

Title: Re: More Voter Fraud
Post by: DDF on March 14, 2017, 07:14:42 AM

It's important to note - this story was on Yahoo.com this morning, linking to a story by the Salt Lake Tribune (neither of which are fond of Trump), and are used as "proof" (the "comments" section on the SLT link reflects precisely that mindset), by the Left, that voter fraud on a massive scale isn't happening.

What this story and the other story posted previously fails to take into account, is that:

1.) The data isn't conclusive, nor is it even inclusive of every case.

2.) The stories posted here (including this one), only represent the states of Ohio and Wisconsin, and do not represent the major strongholds of Democrats, in which cases of voter fraud may not be being investigated fervently.


Madison, Wis. • Dozens of 17-year-olds voted illegally across Wisconsin during last spring's intense presidential primary, apparently wrongly believing they could cast ballots if they turned 18 ahead of the November general election, according to a new state report.

Wisconsin Elections Commission staff examined voter fraud referrals municipal clerks said they made to prosecutors following the 2016 spring primary and general elections. The commission is set to approve the findings during a meeting Tuesday and forward a report to the Legislature.

President Donald Trump has called for a "major investigation" into voter fraud and alleged that 3 million to 5 million people may have voted illegally in the November general election, a widely debunked claim. The report lists no instances of underage voters casting ballots in the general election.
 
Trump: "The press is making Obamacare look so good"
 
Republican Ted Cruz won the GOP primary in Wisconsin. Bernie Sanders won the Democratic contest. The state ultimately voted for Trump in the November general election, marking the first time a Republican presidential candidate had won Wisconsin since Ronald Reagan in 1984.

The report found at least 60 cases of 17-year-olds voting in the April primary in 29 counties. Kewaunee County referred nine people to prosecutors for voting as 17-year-olds, Rock County referred seven and Racine County referred five. Brown County referred what the report called "multiple" 17-year-olds to prosecutors. The report did not track charging decisions or for whom the 17-year-olds voted.

Commission spokesman Reid Magney said Monday that he'd never seen this issue crop up before. The teenagers were likely encouraged to go to the polls by messages flying around social media during the spring primary season saying 17-year-olds can vote in some states as long as they turn 18 before the November election, the report said.

Some political campaigns were also spreading false information about eligibility, the report said. The Sanders campaign specifically was sending out national messages on social media about 17-year-olds being able to vote in presidential primaries, Magney said, although Wisconsin election officials didn't see any misinformation from that campaign about Wisconsin.

No one under 18 can vote in any Wisconsin election, but 17-year-olds may have seen Sanders' messages and thought they could vote. Poll workers may not have understood the law or may not have been paying enough attention, he added.

"It wasn't a case of anyone sneaking in," Magney said. "It was a misunderstanding of the law."

Sanders campaign officials didn't immediately respond to an email Monday seeking comment.

Kewaunee County District Attorney Andrew Naze said he chose not to charge any of the 17-year-olds whom clerks referred to him. He said they honestly thought they were eligible to vote and didn't intend to break the law. Prosecutors in Rock, Racine and Brown counties didn't immediately respond to messages Monday.

The report noted that its findings aren't conclusive and it's possible other instances of suspected fraud may have been referred to prosecutors without the commission's knowledge or people may have filed complaints directly with district attorneys.

http://www.sltrib.com/home/5052118-155/story.html

It is obvious that voting in the primary is not the same as casting an official ballot in the presidential election. It does however, mean that minors were involving themselves in an election they had no right to, proving an important point as to the mindset of people in the country who clearly do not follow the law when it will benefit their political beliefs.

If this can be proven, regardless of the scale, and only in places where the desire to ferret out such cases exists, how many people without voting rights, are potentially voting?

There have been several instances in the United States, where elections are decided by very few ballots, and in some cases, even by single ballots.

Just this morning, there is another story in the new by Yahoo (https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/0ba276cc-b9c7-39cb-bd82-a00a566fc764/pregnant-guatemalan-mother-of.html), in which a Guatemalan woman who had come to the United States illegally at the age of 15, and has since had 5 children, is set to be deported. When the risks and rewards for illegal behavior are so high, the motive to vote illegally certainly exists. In places where voter fraud isn't investigated, and with Barrack Obama himself seemingly condoning illegal voting, the need for voter ID has already been established.

An extremely important aspect not mentioned in the story, is that the report mentions "minors" and not "non-citizens." How are they verifying going about the verification of citizenship? Who is on the investigative commission?

Additional Data:

Wisconsin Elections Commission Staff - Alphabetical Listing
http://elections.wi.gov/about/staff

Michael Haas   Administrator - Democrat - "Haas, long before he began working for the GAB in 2008, was an aide for then-Assembly Speaker Thomas A. Loftus, D-Sun Prairie, in 1989. And Haas was at the center of campaign finance controversy that pre-dated the so-called “Caucus Scandal” more than a decade later and the more recent unconstitutional John Doe probe the state Supreme Court has ordered shut down." http://watchdog.org/239568/gab-partisan-michael-haas/

Mark Thomsen - Wisconsin State Election Commission Chairman Democrat http://elections.wi.gov/about/members

To be fair, the Wisconsin State Elections Commission consists of six people, divided evenly between Democrats and Republicans. The Democrats do fill the Chair and Vice-Chair positions though.

Edit: Andrew Naze - Kewaunee County District Attorney - is also a Democrat - Listed on page 12 of the following: http://ethics.state.wi.us/newsandnotices/ElectionFallPotentialCandFiled.pdf and page 49 of the following pdf file listed below.

David J. O'Leary - Rock County District Attorney - Democrat - page 55 - http://elections.wi.gov/sites/default/files/page/candidates_on_ballot_aug_9_partisan_primary_after_20612.pdf

Patricia J. Hanson - Racine County District Attorney - Republican - page 54 - http://elections.wi.gov/sites/default/files/page/candidates_on_ballot_aug_9_partisan_primary_after_20612.pdf

David L. Lasee - Brown County District Attorney - Republican - page 43 - http://elections.wi.gov/sites/default/files/page/candidates_on_ballot_aug_9_partisan_primary_after_20612.pdf

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 14, 2017, 08:11:04 AM

To speed up  the shifting political power AWAY from the aging white population Kalifornia is proposing this now.  NO other reason for it:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-californians-could-begin-voting-at-age-1488914709-htmlstory.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on March 14, 2017, 08:24:05 AM

Quote from: ccp on March 14, 2017, 08:11:04 AM

To speed up  the shifting political power AWAY from the aging white population Kalifornia is proposing this now.  NO other reason for it:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-californians-could-begin-voting-at-age-1488914709-htmlstory.html

Wow. I've been sitting here investigating election oversight in Wisconsin. I should be focused on California.

There can be no doubt as to what party is driving this:

""We want to expand the opportunity," said Assemblyman Evan Low (D-Campbell), author of the constitutional amendment that would have to be approved by a statewide vote in 2018."

Still...before I start that, I want to see how many of the prosecutors that refuse to file charges against cases of voter fraud are Democrats.

Title: 13% of illegal aliens vote?
Post by: DougMacG on March 14, 2017, 09:39:28 AM

The voting age is too low considering how little these young people know about life, politics and economics beyond what their liberal teachers have taught them.  That said, 17 year olds participating in the caucuses and primaries that will be 18 by election time is not any major part of the vote fraud problem.  It is legal in 22 states:  http://occasionalplanet.org/2014/02/11/voting-news-17-year-olds-can-vote-in-primaries-and-caucuses-in-20-states/

Illegals voting activists voting multiple times and live people voting for the dead would be the problems I would like to see investigated.  Also FELON voting.  Oddly, property owners tend to Republican and burglars tend to be Democrat.  Felons vote Dem by a margin of 6 to 1.  http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002716213502931

We give driver's licenses to illegals - even though they don't need one to vote.  They can get utility bills and neighbors to vouch for them.  We let them live here and most workers in the neighborhoods where they live think they should be able to vote.  

But it's against the law and undermining our democracy in treason.IMHO.

13% of illegals admit they vote.  
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote-2015-report/  
http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/13/voter-fraud-real-heres-proof/
Maybe that number is high; maybe that number is low.
Where is the investigation, where are the prosecution, where are the deportations?

Title: Prosecuting Cases of Voter Fraud
Post by: DDF on March 14, 2017, 11:12:41 AM

Prosecuted Instances of Voter Crimes

From the Heritage Foundation:


AL - 12
AK - 1
AZ - 20
AR - 1
CA - 19
CO - 3
CT - 5
FL - 14
GA - 9
HI - 1
ID - 2
IL - 11
IN - 34
IA - 14
KS - 5
KY - 19
LA - 4
ME - 1
MD - 2
MA - 2
MI - 6
MN - 113
MS - 18
MO - 9
NC - 10
NV - 4
NH - 3
NJ - 10
NM - 5
NY - 7
ND - 1
OH - 15
OR - 6
PA - 6
SC - 1
SD - 2
TN - 6
TX - 14
UT - 1
VA - 7
WA - 10
WV - 6
WI - 18
WY - 3

https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/pdf/VoterFraudCases-8-7-15-Merged.pdf

This PDF report is not exhaustive, and generally covers convictions dating back to 1986, with one notable exception of one instance in 1948. It was last modified Tuesday, January 3rd, 2017 on the Amazon server.


Case Law and Statutes

From the Government's 2006 Election Assistance Commission:

Government "Consultants reviewed more than 40,000 cases that were identified using a series of search
terms related to voting fraud and voter intimidation. The majority of these cases came
from courts of appeal. This is not surprising, since most cases that are publicly reported
come from courts of appeal. Very few cases that are decided at the district court level are
reported for public review."

https://www.eac.gov/assets/1/workflow_staging/Page/57.PDF


Partisan Media

From the Mainstream Media:

There are numerous news articles from Leftist news organizations that state the voter fraud is not a serious matter. There are so many, I won't attempt to list them here.


Observations

How is it then, that with more than 40,000 instances of voter fraud, the majority of which never appear before public scrutiny, that states such as Minnesota and Indiana alone, with a combined population of 12,153,005 people, which isn't even a 1/3 of the population of California, which has 39,250,017 people, not counting the largest illegal population in the country, can generate 147 different people convicted of voter fraud crimes; whereas California has generated only 19 people convicted?

To make matters even clearer:

Minnesota and Indiana have a total of 5,775,957 total ballots counted in the last election. California had 14,610,509 total ballots counted.
http://www.electproject.org/2016g

Minnesota and Indiana have generated 7.7368 times more PEOPLE convicted of voter related crimes than California has, while having less than a third of the population California has.

If we include New York's population (19,795,791) and people convicted (7) with California's, the totals are  59,045,808 people, with 22,397,390 ballots counted in the last election, with a historic prosecution of voter fraud of 26 convictions, a collective population 4.85 times greater than Minnesota and Indiana, 3.877 as many ballots per ballots cast in Minnesota and Indiana; yet, have only convicted 17% of the people Minnesota and Indiana have managed to?

Are California and New York, who collectively wield 86 electoral votes (honorable mention also goes to Illinois, who is the 5th largest state by population, heavy illegal population, and also does not prosecute voter fraud [11 people convicted] whilst having 21 electoral votes), compared to Minnesota's and Indiana's collective electoral value of 21.


I won't propose any rhetorical questions.


http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/electorl.htm
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/usa/states/population.shtml
http://www.electproject.org/2016g

Title: Re: Prosecuting Cases of Voter Fraud
Post by: DougMacG on March 14, 2017, 02:06:04 PM

Nice work DDF.

The question to me is not the prosecuted cases, and those are low numbers, it is the unknown and unprosecuted ones.

Interesting that MN leads the list of prosecuted voter fraud cases.  With the exception of the Al Franken theft, Minnesota used to be among the leaders in perception of clean elections.  Now we are a home to Chicago gunfire, Somali terror and Keith Ellison ethics.
Still, most prosecuted cases probably means least fraud.  Inverse relationship.

Documentary on the Al Franken recount, link gone blank.  http://kstp.com/article/stories/S1222327.shtml?cat=5  
I asked the television station for help on this.

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/20/al-franken-may-have-won-his-senate-seat-through-voter-fraud
At least 341 convicted felons voted in Minneapolis's Hennepin County, the state's largest, and another 52 voted illegally in St. Paul's Ramsey County, the state's second largest. Dan McGrath, head of Minnesota Majority, says that only conclusive matches were included in the group's totals. The number of felons voting in those two counties alone exceeds Mr. Franken's victory margin.

MN Gov vetoes 80% voter ID bill:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2011/05/029110.php

Title: Sen. Al Franken
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 14, 2017, 02:32:04 PM

"Documentary on the Al Franken recount, link gone blank.  http://kstp.com/article/stories/S1222327.shtml?cat=5 
I asked the television station for help on this."

Good!

"https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/20/al-franken-may-have-won-his-senate-seat-through-voter-fraud
At least 341 convicted felons voted in Minneapolis's Hennepin County, the state's largest, and another 52 voted illegally in St. Paul's Ramsey County, the state's second largest. Dan McGrath, head of Minnesota Majority, says that only conclusive matches were included in the group's totals. The number of felons voting in those two counties alone exceeds Mr. Franken's victory margin."

With Franken achieving national prominence, it is good to have these URLs on tap.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN, Franken recount
Post by: DougMacG on March 14, 2017, 03:26:45 PM

"...it is good to have these URLs on tap."

With older links going bad, and some in a conspiratorial way, we need to be saving more than just links on the important stuff whenever possible.

With a bias detected in google, searches of information on one side of an issue are often difficult to impossible.  Try finding the Arctic Ocean levels.  And google owns youtube...

Without the conspiracy, some forum searches are failing too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1709.msg33292#msg33292
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 8569


   
How they got the 60th vote
Reply #139 on: November 29, 2009, 11:20:42 AM
Al Franken couldn't hold a 14 point Obama margin against popular centrist Republican incumbent Norm Coleman, but he did hold his election to a zero point margin, and that was enough because of the victory guarantee program his party had put in place ahead the election.

The near sweep of 2006 included replacing a competent (R) Secretary of State with one that was hand-picked by and heavily supported by the left-wing activist group moveon.org.  At the tiime no one outside of the Bush-Gore inner fight understood the significance.  Simultaneous to state change and even preceding it was the takeover of the inner city election process by ACORN.

Twin Cities ABC affiliate KSTP-5 just ran an extensive investigative report concluding that whether or not your questionable or clearly defective ballot was accepted or rejected depended wholly on what jurisdiction you lived in.  In the outlying areas, state law was followed.  In the liberal inner cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, ballots without signatures, witnesses or addresses were commonly accepted.

They interviewed the MN Sec. of State for 90 minutes and he refused to break out his reading glasses to look at any of the material they presented, sticking to generalities that prevailed in the court challenge to the end result.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on March 14, 2017, 03:44:22 PM

Thanks Doug. Spent a few hours on it.


I don't know squat about Franken. I'll have to read up on it.

I concur completely about Google. I speak Russian and use Russian search engines frequently, and there is a huge difference between what google.com shows and that of rambler.ru or yandex.ru will give you as results. I've noticed it before.


To both you and Crafty.... reddit has a link to a webpage archiving system. I'll see if I can't find it and post it here later. Got to run for a few.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on March 14, 2017, 04:32:59 PM

DDF: The importance of Al Franken is that he won his US Senate seat by a very small margin, all on a (failed and uneven) recount, and became the 60th vote in the Senate necessary to pass Obamacare, affecting everyone.  He had previous national fame for playing a (not-funny) comedian role on Saturday Night Live on NBC-TV.  People are impressed that he now plays the role of a serious and sober liberal in Senate committees.  He asked the question that got Jeff Sessions in trouble.  He is a Harvard educated, New York liberal that moved back to Minnesota for the Senate run and then to Washington.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Al_Franken#cite_note-2

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 15, 2017, 01:09:44 AM

"With older links going bad, and some in a conspiratorial way, we need to be saving more than just links on the important stuff whenever possible."

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: Web Archives
Post by: DDF on March 15, 2017, 07:23:33 AM

Doug, Tujon Crafty.... here the archive on reddit - http://archive.today/ - let's you archive a site IMMEDIATELY.

https://www.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/292z2b/ysk_about_archivetoday_a_website_that_lets_you/

There are a number of archiving sites. Some are more trustworty than others, Google - obvousily owning an "archiving" service.

The safest way is to create an archive and save it on your computer or a secondary hard-drive, memory stick, etc.

There are two problems:

1.) Archive.today won't save audio/video files.

2.) If you save the file on your computer, you won't be able to share it online with the ease that one shares a webpage, unless you have your own website (which isn't all that difficult, depending upon the complexity of the site), with the ease that one could share an existing webpage.

Other Options for archiving -

https://archive.org/web/

http://cachedview.com/ - owned by Google



More information - https://www.labnol.org/internet/archive-web-pages/20192/

Title: Judge N suggests Brock used British intelligence to spy on Trump
Post by: ccp on March 15, 2017, 08:23:01 AM

To keep his hands clean:

https://twitter.com/foxandfriends/status/841619127999508480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Title: Re: Judge N suggests Brock used British intelligence to spy on Trump
Post by: DDF on March 15, 2017, 08:29:48 AM

Quote from: ccp on March 15, 2017, 08:23:01 AM

To keep his hands clean:

https://twitter.com/foxandfriends/status/841619127999508480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

This doesn't surprise me at all... from either party. If I was the most powerful man in the world... you can BET that I would do it.

That's the problem with having that much power. It's never good.

Title: Anti-Voter ID study thoroughly debunked
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 16, 2017, 11:41:40 AM

https://patriotpost.us/posts/48015

Title: Non Resident Notaries Certifying Absentee Ballots
Post by: DDF on March 30, 2017, 04:22:03 PM

Elaine Marshall - Democrat - North Carolina Secretary of State

In charge of overseeing elections, etc.

More than 300 North Carolina notaries were illegal residents, records show



"A state representative is demanding the resignation of North Carolina's secretary of state after reviewing documents that show 320 people with no legal residency status were given notary positions for nearly a decade.

Rep. Christopher Millis voiced his concerns in an interview with Fox News over details found within documents provided by North Carolina Secretary of State Elaine Marshall’s office. Marshall told Fox News the Dept. of Homeland Security approved the notary authorizations.

VIDEO: DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKER TIPS OFF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO ICE RAIDS

“We found over 320 nonpermanent residents that her office commissioned as notaries. Including one that was slated for final deportation,” Millis said. “It’s very concerning not just the fact that these individuals will have the ability to affirm items like oath, but also the ability in our state for them to certify absentee ballots.”

Millis says these same documents show Marshall’s office regularly accepted Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) cards as forms of identification which he claims on his website are not valid to prove residency. “A DACA card is a temporary employment authorization to facilitate safe and legitimate employment and income for otherwise undocumented aliens but does not confer legal immigration status.”

DACA RECIPIENT WITH ALLEGED GANG TIES FACES RELEASE FROM DETENTION CENTER

Millis stressed these same concerns in a nine-page letter written to Secretary Elaine Marshall on March 27th. He ended the letter by asking for her resignation.

“I make all of these implications very seriously and I’m not making any of this lightly,” Millis said. “Whenever I ask the Secretary to resign immediately or I made it clear to her that I will move through with a resolution for impeachment if she so chooses not to resign.”

In an email statement to Fox News, Marshall says Millis’ request for her resignation is a political attack by “an opponent in a recent election.”

“The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has authorized the specifically mentioned notaries to work here lawfully,” Marshall wrote. “That federally authorized status continues to be unchanged by the new Presidential administration.”

Millis also said a similar statement was made when this issue became public late last year.

“This being masked from the public and including a number of misleading and false statements made by the Secretary and her office since the article went out in September and all up until this point, its definitely clear it meets the allegations of her impeachment on malfeasance,” Millis said.

Fox News asked Millis what would happen to the notaries in question. His response: “We will see what happens with these notaries moving forward, but it’s definitely outside the letter of the law.”  


Terace Garnier is a Fox News multimedia reporter based in Columbia, South Carolina. Follow her on twitter: @TeraceGarnier"

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/29/more-than-300-north-carolina-notaries-were-illegal-residents-records-show.html

A Notary Public is an official of integrity appointed by state government —typically by the secretary of state — to serve the public as an impartial witness in performing a variety of official fraud-deterrent acts related to the signing of important documents.


Edit: A more important question is the fact that Marshall states, “The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has authorized the specifically mentioned notaries to work here lawfully,” Marshall wrote. “That federally authorized status continues to be unchanged by the new Presidential administration.”

Does that mean that Obama was purposely undermining legal requirements of sovereign state governments as well as the Union?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on April 01, 2017, 10:30:25 AM

"Does that mean that Obama was purposely undermining legal requirements of sovereign state governments as well as the Union?"

Official policy of the dems.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on April 03, 2017, 12:17:38 AM

Quote from: G M on April 01, 2017, 10:30:25 AM

"Does that mean that Obama was purposely undermining legal requirements of sovereign state governments as well as the Union?"

Official policy of the dems.

Exactly. Not to be confused with the Left's yearning to crucify anything having to do with Trump... but Obama.... "he's cool."

It reminds me of the old Saturday Night Live skit where the husband is asking God to "kill me now," so he doesn't have to live with his wife's nagging.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2017, 08:41:01 AM

Winston Churchill story (working from memory):

Woman:  "If you were my husband I would poison your tea."

WC:  "If you were my wife I would drink it."

Title: Electoral, Russians, campaign, administration, spying, hacking, interfering
Post by: DougMacG on April 03, 2017, 10:06:50 AM

There are three questions and three answers emerging in the convoluted Russian spy intelligence scandal web that has been woven:

1) Did the Russians hack/interfere/change the outcome of our election?
2) Did the Trump team play a part in that if it happened?
3) Did the Obama administration spy on the Trump team during the campaign?

As the information is coming in, the answers to that are looking like: no, no, and yes.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DDF on April 03, 2017, 02:16:50 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2017, 08:41:01 AM

Winston Churchill story (working from memory):

Woman:  "If you were my husband I would poison your tea."

WC:  "If you were my wife I would drink it."

 :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

Title: This had to go to a federal appeals court!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2017, 02:20:13 PM

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/02/fed-appeals-court-immigrant-voted-illegally-can-deported/

Title: Re: Electoral, Russians, campaign, administration, spying, hacking, interfering
Post by: DDF on April 03, 2017, 02:27:47 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on April 03, 2017, 10:06:50 AM

There are three questions and three answers emerging in the convoluted Russian spy intelligence scandal web that has been woven:

1) Did the Russians hack/interfere/change the outcome of our election?
2) Did the Trump team play a part in that if it happened?
3) Did the Obama administration spy on the Trump team during the campaign?

As the information is coming in, the answers to that are looking like: no, no, and yes.

1) Not unless other powerful (wealthy people - or "Illuminati/Bilderberg") types had something to do with it. Oddly, WE KNOW that illegals are registering and voting, and the LEFT could care less about voter fraud, but they're ALL OVER Trump. WE KNOW that the NC State Secretary had non-citizens overlooking absentee ballots as notaries... but no charges there....

2) Clearly "no," as Trump didn't have the access and power yet, that would be necessary to do such a thing.

3) Of course he did... (and to be fair) who wouldn't? But he did it in a way where it won't be tracked back to him, and even if it was... it isn't as though anyone on either side of the aisle have done a damn thing to Holder's "executive" privilege, nor Obama or Clinton, for having sent and received classified emails on (or from) non-government servers. And a newflash... outside of Trump, no one on the Left or right will ever do something to crucify one of their own, lestthey some day too, are to be held accountable.

Extra Credit - Has Anthony Weiner done ANY jail time yet? I doubt he will. Huma is still around (emails)...and so is everyone else that has anything to do with anything... all with immunity agreements, with the notable exception of Flynn.

Says everything one needs to know about contemporary politics, with scandals much larger than Watergate, and no one...at all, has locked a single one of them away with the exceptions of Bernie Madoff and the senator from Illinois (his name escaping me at the moment - starts with a "B" (Blagojevich - that's the guy). They're all corrupt... every last one of them, with maybe the exception of Trump... and even that remains to be seen.

Extra Credit - Maxine Waters and her husband, they bank and contracts... so many political scandals, can't even count them all.... Clinton and Travelgate, Clinton and Russian plutonium deal, her foundation, Bush II and warrantless wiretapping.... singing to the chior.

Title: Kansas Non-Citizen Voter Fraud Conviction
Post by: DDF on April 12, 2017, 04:51:58 PM

"It was the first conviction of a non-U.S. citizen voting in Kansas since the proof-of-citizenship law was adopted, and the eighth conviction for voting fraud that Kobach has obtained since passage of a law in 2015 giving the secretary of state's office authority to prosecute voting crimes. [...[ Since the proof of citizenship law took effect in 2013, tens of thousands of would-be voters have had their registrations blocked for failing to provide the required citizenship documents."

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2017/apr/12/non-citizen-pleads-guilty-illegal-voting/

It's not for a lack of effort on the part of non-citizens. It's all about the lack of effort of certain states prosecuting these crimes.

Title: HufPo: No fraud in NV, , , oh wait
Post by: ccp on April 18, 2017, 03:22:34 PM

From the huffo post no less

"voter fraud is extremely rare" click on link to article for the leftist talking points on the matter!

No voter fraud in Nevada.  Oh wait there is voter fraud in Nevada.  
Just check the DMV.  Oh but wait the ACLU tells us the DMV has no business dealing with voters................
What a shock!    :roll:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nevada-voter-fraud_us_58f663b2e4b0da2ff863e0d8?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009

Title: SCOTUS rejects appeal of 4th circuit NC case
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2017, 08:42:34 AM

http://thehill.com/homenews/333401-supreme-court-refuses-to-review-north-carolina-voter-id-law-report?rnd=1494856615

Title: DNC: Rules? We don't need no stinkin' rules!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2017, 10:11:47 AM

second post of day

https://apple.news/AOkUtFgN7QIqOh3qeL5fmMg

Title: Why is it always Democrats scheming to commit vote fraud?
Post by: DougMacG on May 18, 2017, 11:29:40 AM

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/05/17/dallas-county-whistleblower-tapes-democrat-campaign-worker-describing-voter-fraud-schemes/

Dallas County Whistleblower Tapes Democrat Campaign Worker Describing Voter Fraud Schemes

Title: Re: Why is it always Democrats scheming to commit vote fraud?
Post by: G M on May 18, 2017, 11:54:56 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on May 18, 2017, 11:29:40 AM

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/05/17/dallas-county-whistleblower-tapes-democrat-campaign-worker-describing-voter-fraud-schemes/

Dallas County Whistleblower Tapes Democrat Campaign Worker Describing Voter Fraud Schemes

Because they haven't yet managed to dissolve the current American population.

Title: Re: The electoral process, early voting backfires for Dems in Montana
Post by: DougMacG on May 26, 2017, 06:31:09 AM

Sean Trende wrote what I was thinking.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/05/26/four_takeaways_from_gianfortes_win_in_montana__134014.html
early voting provides some flexibility for voters, the evidence that it actually improves turnout is at best limited (with some evidence finding that it actually decreases turnout).
More importantly, to my mind, is that there’s something to be said for the idea of voters heading to the voting booth with the same information.  While early voters tend to be more partisan – and hence less likely to change their votes in response to new information – there are incidents such as this that could do so (or in primaries, where candidates sometimes drop out before Election Day).

Title: Re: The electoral process, early voting backfires for Dems in Montana
Post by: G M on May 26, 2017, 06:37:39 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on May 26, 2017, 06:31:09 AM

Sean Trende wrote what I was thinking.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/05/26/four_takeaways_from_gianfortes_win_in_montana__134014.html
early voting provides some flexibility for voters, the evidence that it actually improves turnout is at best limited (with some evidence finding that it actually decreases turnout).
More importantly, to my mind, is that there’s something to be said for the idea of voters heading to the voting booth with the same information.  While early voters tend to be more partisan – and hence less likely to change their votes in response to new information – there are incidents such as this that could do so (or in primaries, where candidates sometimes drop out before Election Day).

I'm hoping that punching the MSM was what put him over the top. The left likes violence, let them enjoy what they have brought to the table.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on May 26, 2017, 06:47:38 AM

"I'm hoping that punching the MSM was what put him over the top."

Right, but it is the left that wants to keep opening the vote process and this had the potential of being a reason not to do that.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 26, 2017, 06:49:59 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on May 26, 2017, 06:47:38 AM

"I'm hoping that punching the MSM was what put him over the top."

Right, but it is the left that wants to keep opening the vote process and this had the potential of being a reason not to do that.

The left opening the vote process is about enabling fraud, not actually getting actual Americans to vote.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 26, 2017, 08:25:20 AM

GM:
"I'm hoping that punching the MSM was what put him over the top."

Years ago anyone who did this would automatically nullify their fitness for office in my mind. 
Now, I am not necessarily proud to say that if this guy were running in NJ I would be more likely to vote for him.
Just how I feel in today's climate fighting liberals. 
I do  not want Montana's seat going over to the Dems.  Period.
Sad commentary on how the concept of right and wrong seems to have degraded.


BTW
Why is a ***UK***  newspaper! guy running around Montana getting up in the face of a Republican candidate?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 26, 2017, 10:37:31 AM

Punching reporters is a no no.  Period.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 26, 2017, 10:45:25 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 26, 2017, 10:37:31 AM

Punching reporters is a no no.  Period.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/369943.php

May 26, 2017
Here Is Why We Shouldn't Care That Greg Gianforte Won The Special Election In Montana
Remember Congressman Etheridge? Probably not, because the Democrat Party protects its own.

Check the video below the fold for Etheridge's violent reaction to some students asking him questions.

But the Dems were cool with that behavior, because they allowed him to run for the governorship in the Democratic primary, and then after he lost gave him a job in government! He is the executive director of the North Carolina branch of the U.S. Farm Service Agency, whatever the hell that is.

So lets us not get too exercised by Gianforte's behavior. Holding Republicans to a different standard than Democrats is exactly the game plan of the Democrat Party, and it works very, very well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oqIP9yagkQ

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oqIP9yagkQ [/youtube]

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on May 26, 2017, 11:31:46 AM

"Holding Republicans to a different standard than Democrats is ..."

A fact.  Something Republicans surrendered to long ago.

Facts are still unknown here, but the alleged behavior (unfairly) reflects badly on all Republicans.

I'm glad he won, but if convicted of a serious crime, maybe Montana Republicans can nominate someone else next year.
---------------------------

I like ccp's question:

"Why is a ***UK***  newspaper! guy running around Montana getting up in the face of a Republican candidate?"

As is widely known, 'reporters' try to make news, not report news.  That sounds even worse when it is a foreign owned newspaper, trying to change the outcome rather than observe and report.  Since this event may have helped the Republican, maybe Democrats will scream for a congressional inquiry and independent prosecutor to look into British interference into our elections!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 26, 2017, 11:35:54 AM

Perhaps it's time to stop surrendering, and to quote a former president, "Punish our enemies".

Quote from: DougMacG on May 26, 2017, 11:31:46 AM

"Holding Republicans to a different standard than Democrats is ..."

A fact.  Something Republicans surrendered to long ago.

Facts are still unknown here, but the alleged behavior (unfairly) reflects badly on all Republicans.

I'm glad he won, but if convicted of a serious crime, maybe Montana Republicans can nominate someone else next year.
---------------------------

I like ccp's question:

"Why is a ***UK***  newspaper! guy running around Montana getting up in the face of a Republican candidate?"

As is widely known, 'reporters' try to make news, not report news.  That sounds even worse when it is a foreign owned newspaper, trying to change the outcome rather than observe and report.  Since this event may have helped the Republican, maybe Democrats will scream for a congressional inquiry and independent prosecutor to look into British interference into our elections!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 26, 2017, 02:11:02 PM

"Perhaps it's time to stop surrendering, and to quote a former president, "Punish our enemies"."

INDEED!


Today (the other)  GG apologized .  So we do EXACTLY as the LEFT would do.  Accept his apology and move along as though nothing ever happened.

My understanding the assault charge is a misdemeanor.  Do a few hrs of community service (whatever that BS is), and pay a fine, and buy the twit a new pair of glasses.

Then let GG go to Washington and unleash him on Amy's cousin (just kidding)   :-D

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 26, 2017, 05:48:30 PM

I get all that AND for the sake of our integrity-- and our honor in the eyes of others-- we must forthrightly and without hesitation "They do it too" say this was wrong.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 26, 2017, 10:12:18 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 26, 2017, 05:48:30 PM

I get all that AND for the sake of our integrity-- and our honor in the eyes of others-- we must forthrightly and without hesitation "They do it too" say this was wrong.

The left counts on us to be good victims for them. Time for them to understand that's no longer the case. Violence will be met with violence.

Title: Political Violence From the Left Continues Garnering Zero Condemnation in Leftis
Post by: G M on May 26, 2017, 10:16:40 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/369954.php

May 26, 2017
Political Violence From the Left Continues Garnering Zero Condemnation in Leftist Media

You can find my condemnation of Greg Gianforte's bodyslam right next to CNN's condemnation of the professor charged with three accounts of attacking peaceful Trump supporters -- with a bike lock. Which is a heavy metal improvised weapon.

Berkeley police have arrested a former Diablo Valley College professor for committing an assault during the protests that took place this April. During the protest, violence broke out between supporters of President Trump and far-left anarchists who brand themselves "Antifa," many of whom were clad in black and wore full face masks to conceal their identities.
East Bay Times reports that 28-year-old Eric Clanton was arrested Wednesday evening in Oakland and is currently being held on a $200,000 bail in Berkeley City Jail. He was arrested on suspicion of three counts of assault with a deadly weapon, including a U-lock bike lock, a weapon he is alleged to have used to seriously injure three people at the protest.

Note the three attacks hit the victim in the neck or head -- which is the target point which could kill someone with a steel bludgeon -- and also note that it does not appear to be the cops or the media which ferreted out this guy's identity, but 4chan.

Apparently the media couldn't give any fucks about it, and still doesn't.

You can also find my scathing rebuke of violence by the right next to CNN's denunciations of the mob attackers at Middlebury College, at least one of whom participated in an attack on a woman causing her enough injury to need a neck brace.

Oh, and you can also find my denunciation in the same common repository in which CNN scolds Middlebury for promising to punish the violent felons, but then not really punishing them at all.

Many are on temporary probation, with notation of that probably expunged from their record if they don't re-offend for the rest of the semester (that is, until like last week), and others have a notation in their file. This, too, I imagine will never be disclosed to anyone, due to privacy concerns -- so what's the point of a notation?

If students know they won’t be punished for violent and childish behavior, why would they stop?
One wonders if conservative students disrupting, say, a Linda Sarsour or Bill Ayers speech in similar fashion would receive such light sentencing. They certainly wouldn’t receive such a muted response from the mainstream media.

No one can identify the person who caused the injury to the female prof's neck -- but perhaps they're not looking all that hard, as they didn't seem to look very hard into the bike lock attacks in Berkley.

Maybe a job for 4chan again, to do the investigatory work the police and media aren't interested in.

Title: Police Tell Prof He's in Danger for Not Participating in Campus 'No Whites' Day
Post by: G M on May 26, 2017, 10:20:37 PM

https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/05/26/police-tell-prof-hes-in-danger-for-not-participating-in-campus-no-whites-day/

Police Tell Prof He's in Danger for Not Participating in Campus 'No Whites' Day
 BY TOM KNIGHTON MAY 26, 2017 CHAT 178 COMMENTS

An anti-fascist lights an American flag on fire during a free speech rally at Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park in Berkeley, California, United States of America on April 15, 2017. (Photo by Emily Molli/NurPhoto) (Sipa via AP Images)
Evergreen State College hosts an annual event called a "Day of Absence" where, traditionally, minority students and faculty step away from the campus for the day to show just how significant their impact is. Additionally, white students attend workshops on racism.

This year, the school apparently thought it would just be a hoot to change things up and just kick all the white folks off campus instead. Biology professor Bret Weinstein, however, took issue with the event.

Now, students are calling for his head:

Students at Evergreen State College in Olympia, who filmed their exploits and posted the videos on social media, have occupied and barricaded the library, shouting down anyone who disagrees with them or shows insufficient passion for racial justice.
Biology professor Bret Weinstein was berated by dozens of students outside of his classroom Tuesday morning for refusing to participate in an event in which white people were invited to leave campus for a day. Now, he says police have told him to hold his classes off campus due to safety concerns.

Things are “out of control at Evergreen,” he said.

“Police told me protesters stopped cars yesterday, demanding information about occupants,” Mr. Weinstein told The Washington Times. “They believe I was being sought. It appears that the campus has been under the effective control of protesters since 9:30 a.m. Tuesday. Police are on lockdown, hamstrung by the college administration. Students, staff and faculty are not safe.”

A student interviewed denies any knowledge of Weinstein being specifically sought.

Weinstein's sin is simply thinking that asking white folks to leave the campus was very different than minorities choosing to remove themselves from campus. He has a point. It appears that the original intent of this event is to show just how important minorities are to the proper functioning of the school. So why will demanding 66.7 percent of the student body, as well as Lord only knows how many faculty and staff, accomplish that same purpose?

 
Weinstein took issue with the change in an email, which led to him being confronted by students who refused to listen to the professor:

When the professor tells the students he will listen to them if they listen to him, one student responds, “We don’t care what terms you want to speak on. This is not about you. We are not speaking on terms -- on terms of white privilege. This is not a discussion. You have lost that one.”
Another protester asks the professor whether he believes “black students in sciences are targeted.”

After asking for a clarification, Mr. Weinstein says, “I do not believe that anybody on our faculty, with intent, specially targets students of color.”

That remark prompts shrieks of outrage.

Way to keep those lines of communication open, kids. Way to go.

For the record, Weinstein isn't exactly a member of the alt-Right. His brother describes him as "center-left." But in this day and age where Leftism has given up on its former one-sided "dialogue" tactic for all-out fascism, Weinstein suffers from the sin of insufficient enthusiasm for a Leftist cause. Any disagreement makes him Hitler in their minds. How dare he think for himself and challenge their ideas?

Remember, boys and girls, the Social Justice Warrior is not for tolerance and diversity. He's for cleansing society of unbelievers.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 27, 2017, 09:30:29 AM

The prof was on Tucker Carlson last night.  The cowardice of the school's administration that he described boggles the mind.

Title: Hundreds Vote Illegally in North Carolina after Court Bans Election Integrity L
Post by: G M on May 27, 2017, 09:46:50 AM

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2017/04/hundreds-vote-illegally-north-carolina-court-bans-election-integrity-law/

Hundreds Vote Illegally in North Carolina after Court Bans Election Integrity Law

APRIL 26, 2017
 
Less than a year after a federal appellate court sided with the Obama administration to strike down North Carolina’s election integrity reforms, a state audit reveals that hundreds of votes were illegally cast by felons and non-citizens in just one election. Voter impersonation, double voting and irregularities in absentee ballots sent via mail also tainted the election, according to the investigation conducted by the North Carolina State Board of Elections (NCSBE). The probe analyzed records from the 2016 general election.

State auditors found that about 500 ineligible people voted in 2016, more than 440 of them felons. Dozens of non-citizens from 28 different countries also cast ballots, the probe found. “A number of non-citizens said they were not aware that they were prohibited from voting,” the report states. “Interviews and evidence show that some non-citizens were misinformed about the law by individuals conducting voter registration drives or, in at least one document case, by a local precinct official.” North Carolina authorities are also investigating 24 substantiated cases of double voting in 2016. “Some violators appear to be ‘testers’ trying to find holes in the system,” according to the report. “Others claim property ownership in multiple jurisdictions should allow them to vote in each, and others brush past the law to support their candidate by any means necessary. Additionally, a case that initially appears to be a double voter—an individual who votes twice—may actually be a case of voter impersonation—an individual who casts a ballot using the identity of another person.”

The NCSBE concedes that there are probably many more cases of double voting but identifying them is difficult and there’s no reliable method to consistently find them and other types of election fraud. “While no audit exists to catch all possible cases of voter impersonation, double voter or deceased voter audits may detect such cases,” the report says. This brings up another alarming point; if duplicate registrations are voted, there’s no way to tell if that’s fraudulent voting by a single individual—which everyone assumes—or impersonation fraud. Even in the North Carolina probe, we’ll never know if that’s the whole number. “These kinds of stories are a feature of every election and that’s despite the fact that most states often don’t even track these crimes in a systematic way,” said Robert Popper, a former Deputy Chief of Justice Department Voting Section who heads Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project. “Some states admit they don’t track them at all,” Popper added.

Judicial Watch has been heavily involved in the North Carolina case and in 2015 filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in opposition to a lower court ruling preventing the state from implementing its election integrity reform law. Passed by the legislature in 2013 the measure requires voters to present a photo identification, eliminates same-day registration, shortens the early voting period from 17 to 10 days and requires voters to cast ballots in their own precinct. The Obama administration joined a group of leftist organizations to challenge the law in federal court, alleging that it disparately and adversely affects minority voting rights. A federal judge, Thomas D. Schroeder, rejected the claims and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ruled against North Carolina just prior to the November 2014 elections. State officials asked the Supreme Court for a temporary stay of the Fourth Circuit’s ruling and the high court granted it, allowing North Carolina’s election integrity rules to be used in 2014.

In its unanimous decision, the three-judge panel from the Fourth Circuit wrote that North Carolina’s voter integrity law harmed blacks, who overwhelmingly cast ballots for Democrats. “The new provisions target African Americans with almost surgical precision” and “impose cures for problems that did not exist,” the appellate ruling states. “Thus the asserted justifications cannot and do not conceal the State’s true motivation.” Under the racial “disparate impact” theory, which is at the heart of the controversial Fourth Circuit opinion, a defendant can be held liable for discrimination for a policy hat statistically disadvantages a minority group, even if that negative impact was neither foreseen nor intended. The more broadly accepted view by courts under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) says that a violation occurs only when voting practices are motivated by a discriminatory intent and that any incidental racially disparate impact of a voting law is not sufficient on its own to prove a violation of Section 2.

Title: DNC voter fraud investigator found dead
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 28, 2017, 10:25:55 PM

Reliability of source unknown

http://constitution.com/dnc-voter-fraud-investigator-found-dead-florida/

Title: Alien Invasion: Thousands of Foreigners Registered to Vote (and Voting) in VA.
Post by: G M on May 30, 2017, 09:44:43 AM

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2017/05/30/alien-invasion-thousands-of-foreigners-registered-to-vote-and-voting-in-virginia/

Title: USA Today: Did Obama hack our election?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 30, 2017, 10:42:40 AM

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/05/30/obama-admin-illegal-spying-worse-than-watergate-glenn-reynolds-column/102284058/

http://nypost.com/2017/05/26/how-team-obama-tried-to-hack-the-election/

Title: T. Christian Adams on Tucker Carlson 5/30/17
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 31, 2017, 10:16:26 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRqHB6oz7yc

 :-o

Title: ERic Holder and company still
Post by: ccp on June 06, 2017, 07:24:29 AM

https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/another-massacre-for-conservatives-at-the-supreme-court

thought "think progress" thinks this will have the reverse effect:

https://thinkprogress.org/supreme-court-easier-gerrymandering-e6c986056e62

Title: 80 years of Russian meddling in American elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 16, 2017, 09:47:11 PM

https://toinformistoinfluence.com/2017/06/15/moscows-assaults-on-american-democracy-began-80-years-ago/

Title: Gerrymandering cases go to the Supreme Court
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 19, 2017, 08:33:28 AM

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/338404-supreme-court-to-consider-wisconsin-gerrymandering-case

In 2012, after the map was introduced, Republicans won 60 seats in the 99-seat Assembly, even though the party’s candidates won 48.6 percent of the two-party vote, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.  (Marc:  NOTE THIS)

Federal courts have previously ruled that maps that employ “racial gerrymandering” are unconstitutional. In racial gerrymandering, lines are drawn to lower the influence of minority voters, sometimes by scattering them across different districts.

The challenge to Wisconsin’s legislative lines are different because the challenge revolves around whether district lines can be drawn for a partisan advantage.

Title: Far more illegal voters than previously thought
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2017, 09:59:51 AM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/19/noncitizen-illegal-vote-number-higher-than-estimat/

Title: Newt in Oct 2016
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 21, 2017, 08:54:13 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqn6ig2fJro

Title: More evidence of why electronic voting is a bad idea
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 22, 2017, 02:05:14 PM

No Drama Obama
By August, the FBI had evidence that Russian-backed hackers had targeted electoral systems in 21 American states, officials confirmed Wednesday. So why did the Obama administration wait until Oct. 7 to reveal the cyberattack on the U.S. elections process? Former Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, testifying before the House Intelligence Committee on Wednesday, said Obama administration officials feared they would be blamed for trying to influence the election. “We were very concerned that we would not be perceived as taking sides in the election, injecting ourselves into a very heated campaign,” he said.


Also see

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-johnson-russia-20170621-story.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 22, 2017, 02:58:33 PM

To Jeh Johnson / LA Times:  The reason the Obama administration might be perceived as taking sides in the 2016 election is because they did, all the way up and down the departments.  We are still 'unmasking' ways in which they did that, some legal, some not.

On another matter, I would still like to see an inquiry into the 'data mining' operation of 2012 where nearly every recipient of public subsidy received a personal visit from the reelection committee.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 22, 2017, 10:58:42 PM

Or the enabling of foreign donations via credit card online in 2008 , , ,

Mark Levin riffed this afternoon on Debbie Wasserman Schultz in effect calling Jeh Johnson a liar.  Though she herself is one, as we noted here, apparently the FBI only "notified" the DNC of the Russki hack with a phone message on a line that would only go to some lower level flunky and other than that left them hacked for quite some time (one year?)

Title: WaPo burns sources and methods defending Obama's "defense" of our election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 23, 2017, 10:49:38 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/world/national-security/obama-putin-election-hacking/?hpid=hp_hp-banner-high_russiaobama-banner-7a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.8ddbfa156299

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, 5.7 Million Noncitizens Voted
Post by: DougMacG on June 27, 2017, 10:18:57 AM

https://stream.org/5-7-million-noncitizens-voted-past-presidential-elections-study-finds/

Up to 5.7 Million Noncitizens Voted in Past Presidential Elections, Study Finds
Eighty-two percent of noncitizens who admitted to voting in a survey said “I definitely voted” for Obama.

Who knew?

In another story:
Student headed to prison for registering dead voters for Democrats
JUNE 26, 2017, HARRISONBURG, Va. — A man paid to register Virginia voters prior to the 2016 Presidential Election will spend at least 100 days in prison for submitting the names of deceased individuals to the Registrar’s Office.
http://wtvr.com/2017/06/26/andrew-spieles-guilty-plea/

A good deal for him.  They used to get hanged for treason.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 27, 2017, 12:24:20 PM

"Student headed to prison for registering dead voters for Democrats"


“In July 2016 Spieles’ job was to register as many voters as possible and reported to Democratic Campaign headquarters in Harrisonburg,”

You mean he is crat?  Who would have ever guessed?

Title: Election Integrity Commission requests 50 states for voter data
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2017, 04:37:53 PM

This could get real interesting!

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/340117-trump-election-integrity-commission-requests-years-of-voter-data-from

Title: Re: Election Integrity Commission requests 50 states for voter data
Post by: G M on June 29, 2017, 04:40:01 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2017, 04:37:53 PM

This could get real interesting!

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/340117-trump-election-integrity-commission-requests-years-of-voter-data-from

This of course will prompt screams of RAAAAaaaaaAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaacist!!!!11!!!!11!!!1!!!!

Title: what do they have to hide
Post by: ccp on July 01, 2017, 07:34:19 PM

https://pjmedia.com/election/2017/06/30/mississippi-gop-official-on-trump-panels-voter-request-go-jump-in-the-gulf-of-mexico/

Title: Did Vote Fraud Commission fail to say "Mother mayi ?"
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2017, 09:30:31 PM

http://thehill.com/regulation/other/340738-voter-fraud-commission-may-have-violated-law?rnd=1499292453

Title: Re: Did Vote Fraud Commission fail to say "Mother mayi ?"
Post by: G M on July 05, 2017, 09:35:37 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2017, 09:30:31 PM

http://thehill.com/regulation/other/340738-voter-fraud-commission-may-have-violated-law?rnd=1499292453

 :roll:

Title: WaPo: Pence Commission to store voter data in White House
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 07, 2017, 02:52:39 PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-voter-commission-discloses-names-of-members-plan-to-store-data-at-white-house/2017/07/06/74e454ae-625d-11e7-84a1-a26b75ad39fe_story.html?utm_term=.03fe557d3608&wpisrc=nl_headlines&wpmm=1

Are there legit privacy issues here?

Title: Re: WaPo: Pence Commission to store voter data in White House
Post by: G M on July 07, 2017, 03:27:36 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 07, 2017, 02:52:39 PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-voter-commission-discloses-names-of-members-plan-to-store-data-at-white-house/2017/07/06/74e454ae-625d-11e7-84a1-a26b75ad39fe_story.html?utm_term=.03fe557d3608&wpisrc=nl_headlines&wpmm=1

Are there legit privacy issues here?

According to the left, this is not a privacy concern:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-obamacare-patient-privacy-20150622-story.htmlCalifornia's Obamacare exchange to collect insurance data on patients
Covered California enrollment
People stand in line at Panorama Mall in Panorama City to enroll in the Covered California health exchange in 2014. The state-run marketplace is embarking on an ambitious effort to collect insurance company data on prescriptions, doctor visits and hospital stays for every Obamacare patient. (Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)
Chad Terhune    
California's Obamacare exchange embarks on ambitious effort to collect insurance company data on every patient
California's health insurance exchange wants to know why you got sick this summer.

With 1.4 million people enrolled, the state-run marketplace is embarking on an ambitious effort to collect insurance company data on prescriptions, doctor visits and hospital stays for every Obamacare patient.


Covered California says this massive data-mining project is essential to measure the quality of care that patients receive and to hold health insurers and medical providers accountable under the Affordable Care Act.

The state in April signed a five-year, $9.3-million contract with Truven Health Analytics Inc. of Michigan to run the database.

The effort has raised questions about patient privacy and whether the state is doing enough to inform consumers about how their data will be used. There are also worries about security amid massive breaches at Anthem Inc. and other health insurers affecting millions of Americans.

There is potential for so much public good, but there is a greater public good in protecting privacy and security.
— Michelle De Mooy, deputy director for consumer privacy at the Center for Democracy and Technology in Washington
Peter Lee, executive director of Covered California, said protecting sensitive information was a top priority and that consumers stand to benefit from the collection of medical data. He acknowledged the state had no plans to let consumers opt out and keep their records out of the database.

"To understand the quality of care being provided, you need everybody in," Lee said. "Without the data, we are only delivering on half the promise of the Affordable Care Act. We have to get beyond measuring access by anecdote."

For instance, the exchange will look to track how many diabetics are having their chronic condition managed correctly and how many screening tests for cancer led to early diagnosis and treatment.

Accessing voter records information is wrong! Well, unless it's to target someone who dared to question Baraq the Holy!

http://www.toledoblade.com/Politics/2008/10/16/Joe-the-plumber-isn-t-licensed.html

POLITICS 'Joe the plumber' isn t licensed
By LARRY VELLEQUETTE and TOM TROY | BLADE STAFF WRITERSPublished on Oct. 16, 2008
Joe-the-plumber-isn-t-licensedSpringfield Township resident Joe Wurzelbacher answers questions from the media on his front porch.
 THE BLADE/AMY E. VOIGT
Buy This Image
<
>
    COMMENTS   
"Joe the Plumber" isn t a plumber at least not a licensed one, or a registered one.

A check of state and local licensing agencies in Ohio and Michigan shows no plumbing licenses under Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher s name, or even misspellings of his name.

Last night, his name, "Joe the Plumber," came up about two dozen times in the debate between Mr. Obama and Republican nominee John McCain.

Since last night Mr. Wurzelbacher who lives alone with his 13-year-old son has been besieged with local and national news media, willingly granting interviews.

Mr. Wurzelbacher told reporters Thursday morning that he worked for Newell Plumbing & Heating Co., a small local firm whose business addresses flow back to several residential homes, including one on Talmadge Road in Ottawa Hills.

According to Lucas County Building Inspection records, A. W. Newell Corp. does maintain a state plumbing license, and one with the City of Toledo, but would not be allowed to work in Lucas County outside of Toledo without a county license.



Mr. Wurzelbacher said he works under Al Newell s license, but according to Ohio building regulations, he must maintain his own license to do plumbing work.

He is also not registered to operate as a plumber in Ohio, which means he s not a plumber.

Mr. Wurzelbacher said he was hired by Mr. Newell six years ago and that the possibility of him eventually buying the company was discussed during his job interview.

He said it s his understanding he can work under Mr. Newell s license as long as the licensed contractor works on the same site.

Mr. Wurzelbacher said he is working on taking the Ohio plumbing contractors license test.

Mr. Wurzelbacher s notoriety has raised the ire of Tom Joseph, business manager for Local 50 of the United Association of Plumbers, Steamfitters, and Service Mechanics, who claimed that Mr. Wurzelbacher didn t undergo any apprenticeship training.

"When you have guys going out there with no training whatsoever, it s a little disreputable to start with," Mr. Joseph said. "We re the real Joe the Plumber."

Mr. Joseph said Mr. Wurzelbacher could only legally work in the townships, but not in any municipality in Lucas County or elsewhere in the country.

"This individual has got no schooling, no licenses, he s never been to a training program, union or non-union, in the United States of America," Mr. Joseph said.

The association has endorsed Barack Obama, according to Mr. Joseph.

Questions were raised Thursday morning whether Mr. Wurzelbacher is a registered voter.

Linda Howe, executive director of the Lucas County Board of Elections, said a Samuel Joseph Worzelbacher, whose address and age match Joe the Plumber s, registered in Lucas County on Sept. 10, 1992. He voted in his first primary on March 4 of this year, registering as a Republican.

Ms. Howe said that the name may be misspelled in the database.

Mr. Wurzelbacher, 34, acknowledged during an interview at his home late Thursday morning that he knows he s "a flash in the pan," after his fame spread for an impromptu debate he had in front of his Springfield Township home with Mr. Obama last Sunday.

Title: Re: WaPo: Pence Commission to store voter data in White House
Post by: G M on July 08, 2017, 01:43:47 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 07, 2017, 02:52:39 PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/trump-voter-commission-discloses-names-of-members-plan-to-store-data-at-white-house/2017/07/06/74e454ae-625d-11e7-84a1-a26b75ad39fe_story.html?utm_term=.03fe557d3608&wpisrc=nl_headlines&wpmm=1

Are there legit privacy issues here?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-why-the-rebellion-over-trump-voter-commission/article/2627849?platform=hootsuite


Byron York: Rebel states sell info they hide from Trump voter commission
by Byron York | Jul 5, 2017, 11:13 PM 

In the past week election officials in dozens of states have rejected a request from the newly-formed Presidential Advisory Commission on Electoral Integrity to provide voter records for a study on the extent (if any) of election fraud. Some of those officials have expressed great indignation that the commission would even ask. Yet many of those same officials would gladly sell those very same records — to campaigns, to candidates, to political consultants, even to you. It's a situation that baffles some political veterans.

President Trump created the commission by executive order on May 11. Vice President Mike Pence is the chairman, and the vice chairman is Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state and gubernatorial candidate. Kobach is the one who sent the request to officials in all 50 states.


The purpose of the commission, Kobach wrote, is to identify "rules, policies, activities, strategies, and practices that enhance or undermine the American people's confidence in the integrity of federal elections processes." Kobach asked state officials to answer some straightforward questions, like "What changes, if any, to federal election laws would you recommend to enhance the integrity of federal elections?" and "What evidence or information do you have regarding instances of voter fraud or registration fraud in your state?" and "What recommendations do you have for preventing voter intimidation or disenfranchisement?

Nothing too controversial there. But then Kobach added the request that has set off a firestorm:

In addition, in order for the commission to fully analyze vulnerabilities and issues related to voter registration and voting, I am requesting that you provide to the commission the publicly available voter roll data for [your state], including, if publicly available under the laws of your state, the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of social security number if available, voter history (elections voted in) from 2006 onward, active/inactive status, cancelled status, information regarding any felony convictions, information regarding voter registration in another state, information regarding military status, and overseas citizen information.

In response, state officials not only refused to provide Kobach the requested information — at least 45 have said no so far — but have tried to outdo each other in expressing patriotic outrage that the commission would even consider asking such a thing.

"My reply would be: They can go jump in the Gulf of Mexico," wrote Mississippi's Republican secretary of state, Delbert Hosemann.

"[The] Constitution ensures voters ballot choices will always be secret. Americans have died protecting this freedom," tweeted South Carolina's Republican governor, Henry McMaster.

"I find this request for the personal information of millions of Marylanders repugnant," said Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh. "It appears designed only to intimidate voters and to indulge President Trump's fantasy that he won the popular vote."

"I have no intention of honoring this request," said Virginia's Democratic Gov. Terry McAuliffe. "This entire commission is based on the specious and false notion that there was widespread voter fraud last November."

For commission members, the responses are hard to understand. "The reaction to this has been absurd," said Hans von Spakovsky, a former Bush Justice Department official, former member of the Federal Elections Commission, and head of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Election Law Reform Initiative, who is now serving on the Trump commission. "The commission is asking for voter registration and other information that is publicly available. Not only do all of the political parties buy this information routinely from secretaries of states — so do candidates."

It's true. Just look at, say, the Department of Elections webpage in Terry McAuliffe's Virginia. The department lists "client services" that include the purchase of voter lists. To candidates, parties, campaigns, and "members of the public seeking to promote voter participation," the state of Virginia will sell:


Registered Voter List (RVL) and Newly Registered Voter List (NRV) — full name, residence address, mailing address, gender, date of birth, registration date, date last registration form received, registration status, locality, precinct, voting districts and voter identification number.

Want the data in slightly different form? Virginia also sells:

List of Those Who Voted (LTWV) — full name, residence address, mailing address, gender, date of birth, registration date, date last registration form received, registration status, locality, precinct, voting districts, voter identification number, election date, election type, and whether the voter voted in-person or absentee.

For another example, look at the state of Maine, which has also refused to cooperate with the commission, but which by law spells out the types of voter information it will sell:

The secretary of state or the registrar shall make available the following voter record information, subject to the fees set forth in subsection 2: the voter's name, residence address, mailing address, year of birth, enrollment status, electoral districts, voter status, date of registration, date of change of the voter record if applicable, voter participation history, voter record number and any special designations indicating uniformed service voters, overseas voters or township voters.

Notice that much of the information for sale in Maine and Virginia is similar, if not identical, to the data requested by Kobach. Many states have similar provisions. Which raises the question: If voter information is for sale, why is it a matter of principle to refuse to provide it to the Presidential Advisory Commission on Electoral Integrity?

"It's silly," said Chris Wilson, CEO of the political consulting group WPA Intelligence and former head of research and analytics for the Ted Cruz presidential campaign. "This is data that we can purchase online from multiple states and multiple sources."

Von Spakovsky added that, if the fact that states sell voter information were not enough, federal law requires states to keep and give out the same information. The National Voter Registration Act, also known as the Motor Voter law, includes a provision saying, "Each state shall maintain for at least 2 years and shall make available for public inspection and, where available, photocopying at a reasonable cost, all records concerning the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voters…" I asked von Spakovsky if that rather convoluted phrase covered voter rolls and information. "Yes," he answered.

There is one thing that Kobach asked states for — and it is important to note that Kobach's letter is a request, specifically asking only for information that is publicly available under state law — that is not for sale, and that is the request for the last four digits of a voter's Social Security number. Even though having the last four digits might be useful to researchers trying to distinguish between voters with the same names, it might be that states could reasonably refuse to give the commission that one bit of information. But that doesn't account for the across-the-board denials from so many states.

Of course, the big reason many state officials, particularly Democrats, are refusing to provide information is that they simply do not believe voter fraud exists, or exists in anything other than the tiniest numbers. But von Spakovsky points out that there are respected studies pointing to problems with the nation's voter rolls that deserve further study.

In 2012, for example, Pew Research published a study on the nation's voter registration system, which it concluded was "inaccurate, costly, and inefficient." Pew found that:

Approximately 24 million — one of every eight — voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.
More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters.
Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.

The problem with the Pew study, as von Spakovsky sees it, is that Pew did not study whether those registration problems actually resulted in voting problems. "We know for a fact that people who aren't U.S. citizens are registering and voting in U.S. elections," he said. "How extensive is that problem? I don't know because no one has ever done the work to find that out."

Now the Trump commission is seeking answers. To do so, it needs the information that, until now, many states routinely gave out to interested parties. Now, however, the states appear to be spoiling for a fight. Given the amount of public posturing involved so far, it's not at all clear the commission can succeed.

Title: POTB: Rocky past of Vote Panel Member
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 09, 2017, 07:06:02 PM

http://enewspaper.latimes.com/desktop/latimes/default.aspx?pubid=50435180-e58e-48b5-8e0c-236bf740270e

Title: Brock / Holder mob
Post by: ccp on July 12, 2017, 05:47:04 AM

non stop liberals.

Could anyone imagine Brock doing anything else?

https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/obama-joins-eric-holder-powwow-to-fund-dem-electoral-tinkering

Title: Soros backing resistance to Trump Commission
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 13, 2017, 12:41:45 PM

https://patriotpost.us/posts/50146

Title: Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases
Post by: G M on July 21, 2017, 11:42:11 AM

http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/20/voter-fraud-database-tops-1000-proven-cases/

LAWCOMMENTARY
Voter Fraud Database Tops 1,000 Proven Cases
Jason Snead   / @jasonwsnead / Emily Hall   / July 20, 2017 / comments

The Heritage Foundation's voter fraud database now documents 1,071 cases of voter fraud. (Photo: iStock Photos)
COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Jason Snead
Jason Snead
@jasonwsnead
Jason Snead is a policy analyst in The Heritage Foundation's Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. Read his research.

Emily Hall is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation, and a member of Harvard University's Class of 2018.
As the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity convenes its first meeting on Wednesday, the issue of voter fraud in American elections has become even more contentious and hyperbolic.

One of the left’s main arguments against reform is that voter fraud simply does not occur. How liberals arrive at this conclusion, we cannot say.

Time and again, studies and analyses point to one incontrovertible conclusion: that voter fraud is a real and pressing issue that deserves serious solutions, and The Heritage Foundation has the evidence to prove it.

On Thursday, The Heritage Foundation is releasing a new edition of its voter fraud database. Featuring well over 100 new cases, the database documents 1,071 instances of voter fraud spanning 47 states, including 938 criminal convictions.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can't be done alone. Find out more >>

This revamped edition of the database separates cases by type of disposition, allowing readers to easily distinguish not only what type of fraud occurred but the outcome of the case—criminal convictions, pre-trial diversion programs, and other types of adjudication used in various states and counties across the United States.

Below are a few of the egregious examples recently added to the database.

Virginia

Andrew Spieles, a former James Madison University student, pleaded guilty to a charge stemming from his false submission of 18 voter registration forms during the summer of 2016.

He had been working for Harrisonburg VOTES, a voter registration organization affiliated with the Democratic Party, and used false birth dates and Social Security numbers to register deceased persons to vote. Spieles was given prison time for his crime.

This incident is just one of hundreds of cases in the database where individuals illegally registered dead people, names out of the phone book, or others to vote.

While Spieles was caught before votes could be cast on behalf of those falsely registered individuals, there have been many other cases in which ballots were successfully cast in the name of deceased people.

In fact, a 2012 Pew study concluded that 1.8 million voters remained on the rolls after their passing—a grave vulnerability to the integrity of our elections.

Maryland

Fredericus Hubertus Slicher, an illegal alien living in Baltimore, was convicted of numerous charges in 2014. He was residing illegally in the United States, collecting Medicare and Social Security benefits, and voting in U.S. elections.

Slicher had been present in the United States illegally since his temporary work visa expired in 1969. He was convicted of child abuse in 2004, was a registered sex offender, and yet he continued to vote numerous times despite being ineligible.

His case was referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and he was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment, one year’s supervised release, and was ordered to pay $48,928 in restitution.

The newest additions to the database included a dozen cases of illegal voting by noncitizens. This is a particularly important issue to address, as each ballot cast by a noncitizen effectively nullifies the ballot of an eligible voter, effectively disenfranchising American citizens.

Ohio

Debbie Tingler of Reynoldsburg, Ohio, pleaded guilty (Case No. 12 CR 005249) to illegal voting in 2013. She had registered to vote, requested absentee ballots, and submitted those ballots under two names—Debbie Tingler and Deborah Tingler.

She was given a suspended sentence of 120 days’ imprisonment, and she was ordered to pay a $200 fine and court costs.

Tingler’s experience is not uncommon. There are dozens of cases in the database where individuals voted multiple times in the same election.

Given the fact that few states have adequate policies and procedures in place to detect and deter fraud—and prosecutors seldom prioritize these cases—it is likely that far more double voters, absentee-ballot fraudsters, and ineligible voters get away scot-free than are ever brought to justice.

The Heritage Foundation’s voter fraud database is by no means comprehensive, but its 1,071 proven instances of fraud, which took place across all manner of elections and in nearly every state, highlight the importance—and the urgency—of the work of the Election Integrity Commission.

What is needed now is more data to permit analysis aimed at determining, among other things, whether the nation’s voter registration records are accurate or riddled with errors.

In the coming months, the commission—which includes Heritage’s own Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow and one of the nation’s foremost election law experts—will seek to gather this information.

Unfortunately, so far, even innocuous requests for public voter records have been met with hyperbolic rhetoric and stonewalling in some states.

This begs the question, why? If fraud is as rare as liberals say, and if state protections against it are as robust as we are told, why withhold data that would prove these claims?

Perhaps liberals are afraid that the data might, in fact, say the opposite.

One can deny facts for only so long, and with this newest release of The Heritage Foundation’s voter fraud database, the evidence is clear and incontrovertible: Voter fraud is real, and we ignore it at our own peril.

Title: Elected Dem on the Vote Fraud commission
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 23, 2017, 01:56:25 PM

http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/19/meet-the-elected-democrat-who-wants-to-fight-voter-fraud/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTjJNMllUTmhaV1pqWXpObCIsInQiOiI2U3g5NytBVGtLWDQxXC9KRjJnY0dIb01vRFRZUWNzRGg3N0d3NzIyclVXSFN3VWZnOWhcL0gyWVVJblZQTWpCbU9Pdkp5S1VXM29sQmd3OGdoSWx1TGlybHQwUFJaQ29cL0x3eDQ4NFJPSVlaa0tDb0JpaGdiaUEwdzVkZFg3UjhTcCJ9

Title: Trump Voter Commission allowed to proceed
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 24, 2017, 09:08:08 PM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/24/court-allows-trumps-voter-commission-proceed/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWVRJMU9Ua3lORGc0TWpFeCIsInQiOiJ3bm9iU0U1N3hKeWpDZHpYS0FXUGlOWDBIV2hkYUh6bEhqTjc4UHpHdEllMTFxT3N5NDVVYVRJR3RXRGphcG1scWIxSTFiS2U1R1wvdjdrblNnYmx2cHJUSHNDRDdmdm43WFFhRlByRm5mU0pcL21JZGJYZWphbHZwbm9FMFk3QVRMIn0%3D

Title: We need to be aware of these arguments
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 27, 2017, 10:03:09 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/07/27/pences-voter-fraud-commission-will-almost-certainly-find-thousands-of-duplicate-registrations-that-arent-duplicates-heres-why/?utm_term=.c87921a86378&wpisrc=nl_politics&wpmm=1

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/26/federal-judge-upholds-fine-against-kris-kobach-for-pattern-of-misleading-the-court-in-voter-id-cases/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.79e6742345b1

Title: JW launches suit against Montgomery County, MD & MD Bd of Elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 27, 2017, 11:09:32 AM

second post

Judicial Watch Launches New Election Integrity Lawsuit

This week saw the first official meeting of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, which is under attack from leftists who want to preserve the ability to steal elections. Also this week, your Judicial Watch filed a new lawsuit that could serve to get key information about the integrity of election rolls in Maryland (one of the states “resisting” inquiries from the Advisory Commission on Election Integrity).
 
We filed the lawsuit simply to gain access to voter registration lists in Montgomery County, Maryland. The defendants are Montgomery County and the Maryland State Board of Elections. We filed the lawsuit to enforce our rights under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division (Judicial Watch vs. Linda H. Lamone, et al. (No. 1:17-cv-02006)).
 
Back in April, we sent a notice letter to Maryland election officials that explained how there were more registered voters in Montgomery County than there were citizens over the age of 18.  The letter threatened a lawsuit if the problems with Montgomery County’s voter rolls were not fixed. The letter also requested access to Montgomery County voter registration lists to evaluate the efficacy of any “programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of Maryland’s official eligible voter lists during the past 2 years.”  On July 7, Maryland denied us access to the list because Maryland law supposedly restricts the release of voter registration information only to Maryland registered voters.
 
But Section 8(i) of the NVRA provides that “[e]ach State shall maintain for at least 2 years and shall make available for public inspection and, where available, photocopying at a reasonable cost, all records concerning the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voter.”
 
In our lawsuit we noted that the registration list is covered under Section 8(i) of the NVRA:

“Section 8(i) of the NVRA contains no requirement that only an individual person or a registered voter may request the documents that the statute describes. Accordingly, Section 8(i) authorizes and entitles Judicial Watch to inspect and copy the requested voter list.”

In fact, we regularly request and receive records from state and local governments pursuant to Section 8(i) of the NVRA.  (The Director of Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project is Senior Attorney Robert Popper, who was formerly deputy chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.)  In April, we sent letters to 11 states with counties in which the number of registered voters exceeds the number of voting-age citizens. The states are: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina and Tennessee.
 
Maryland needs to make this voter registration information available as federal law requires. Maryland doesn’t want us to expose its voter roll mess, and we hope the courts move quickly so we can begin the process of cleaning up the rolls. This is a national problem, and Maryland is the scene of one of many legal battles we must be prepared to fight for clean elections.

Title: latest on fraud tallies
Post by: ccp on July 30, 2017, 05:33:18 AM

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/hans-von-spakovsky/new-report-exposes-thousands-illegal-votes-2016-election

Title: JW threatens to sue CA over excess of voters over citizens
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 07, 2017, 04:52:06 PM

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-warns-california-clean-voter-registration-lists-face-federal-lawsuit/

Title: Licenses/ID cards sold to illegal aliens by corrupt state workers for vote fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 09, 2017, 09:11:09 AM

Licenses, ID Cards Sold to Illegal Aliens by Corrupt State Workers Used for Voter Fraud

AUGUST 09, 2017

A year after Judicial Watch reported a rise in illegal aliens using fake Puerto Rican birth certificates to obtain authentic U.S. passports and drivers’ licenses, the feds have busted a Massachusetts operation run by corrupt state workers. The state employees sold drivers’ licenses and state identification cards to illegal immigrants who bought Puerto Rican documents on the black market, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The operation perpetuated voter fraud because some of the false identities and addresses were used to vote in Boston, the state’s capital and largest city.

The case is the latest of many illustrating that there’s an epidemic of voter fraud in the U.S. that’s seldom reported in the mainstream media. It’s not clear how many false identities and addresses were used to fraudulently register to vote in Boston, but the feds indicate that it occurred in multiple cases and Judicial Watch is investigating the matter as part of a five-year-old Election Integrity Project. The scheme was operated by four taxpayer-funded employees at the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) along with two outside accomplices who sold Puerto Rican documents to illegal aliens. All six were recently arrested and charged with aggravated identity theft. They probably never would have been caught if not for an anonymous tip received by the Massachusetts State Police nearly two years ago and there’s no telling how long the illicit scheme operated.

The anonymous letter said that a corrupt RMV employee was providing stolen identifications and drivers’ licenses to individuals seeking false IDs, the DOJ announcement states. An investigation ensued and authorities discovered that the four clerks were working with a document vendor and document dealer to provide the licenses and official state ID cards to illegal immigrants in exchange for cash. “The scheme involved several steps,” the DOJ says. First, the document dealer sold a Puerto Rican birth certificate and U.S. Social Security card to the document vendor for approximately $900. The vendor would then sell the stolen identities for more than $2,000 to illegal aliens—some with criminal records—seeking legitimate identities in Massachusetts. After the first layer of illicit transactions occurred, the counterfeit documents and false identities and addresses were used to fraudulently register clients to vote in Boston.

Illegal aliens would then bring the stolen identities to the RMV where the corrupt clerks worked and they would accept cash to illegally issue authentic documents, including drivers’ licenses and ID cards. “The clerks also accepted cash to use the RMV’s system to run queries, including Social Security number audits, to confirm that the identities the clients were stealing actually belonged to verifiable individuals,” the DOJ announcement states. The unscrupulous state workers face up to two years in prison, according to the feds, who won’t reveal the magnitude of the operation and how many authentic state documents were issued fraudulently to illegal aliens.

Last year Judicial Watch published a story about the increasing number of illegal aliens using fake Puerto Rican birth certificates to obtain authentic American documents. Located about 1,000 miles southeast of Florida, Puerto Rico became a U.S. territory about two decades after the Caribbean island was acquired from Spain at the end of the Spanish-American war. Puerto Ricans are American citizens at birth though they don’t have the right to vote in federal elections and the island has only one non-voting representative in Congress. In recent years a record number of Puerto Ricans have left their troubled island for the U.S. and a big chunk has settled on Florida. A recent study found that the island’s ongoing economic recession has led to a mass exodus not seen in more than five decades. The U.S. government and its various agencies accept Puerto Rican birth certificates blindly even though fraud involving the easily forged documents has been pervasive for years.

Title: In CA collusion between FPPC Commission and Dems
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 10, 2017, 06:22:48 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/collusion-between-fppc-commission-and-democrats-to-deny-honest-special-election-editorial-by-stephen-frank/

Title: WSJ: How the Post Office delivered for Hillary
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 26, 2017, 07:22:04 AM

By The Editorial Board
Aug. 25, 2017 6:54 p.m. ET
220 COMMENTS

Congress is digging into a report that the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and its union broke federal law by engineering time off for employees to campaign for Hillary Clinton. With any luck, the probe will kick off a wider reform of taxpayer-subsidized union activity.

Senate and House committee chairmen Ron Johnson and Trey Gowdy this week sent letters to 10 cabinet departments, requesting information about their policies governing what’s known as union Leave Without Pay. The letter follows a July report by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC)—the federal agency that investigates government employment practices—revealing that senior leaders of the USPS “improperly coordinated” with the National Association of Letter Carriers to engineer time off for nearly 100 employees for election purposes.

Federal employees can apply for leave without pay, but this case was a union-engineered job. The union provided management with lists of names, and the USPS sent these out in email “directives,” telling local offices to grant specific leave requests.

The employees were sometimes granted leave over the objections of local postmasters, who faced staffing shortages and overtime costs. The employees then joined an AFL-CIO program to work for Mrs. Clinton and other candidates, and were paid for their time off with union funds.

OSC calls this a “systematic” violation of the Hatch Act, which governs the political activities of federal workers. Government employees are allowed to engage in politics, but on their own time, and federal agencies are required to administer leave programs in a neutral fashion. In the USPS case, the OSC found an “institutional bias” in favor of union-backed candidates, meaning Democrats.

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) separately looked at what is known as “official time,” when federal employees can do union work in lieu of their regular assignments. According to figures from fiscal 2014, federal employees racked up 3.47 million hours of official time, at a cost to taxpayers of $163 million. A January report from the Government Accountability Office found that at the Department of Veterans Affairs federal employees spent 1.1 million hours performing union duties on official time in 2012.

While federal law permits official time, agencies aren’t required to track or report the hours. A 2012 GAO report implied that the actual number of official time hours, and the cost to government, was significantly higher than anything OPM reported. Not that OPM tries hard to keep track. Prior its March report, the last time it looked at official time was in 2012.

In May the House passed a bill sponsored by Rep. Dennis Ross (R., Fla.) that would require OPM to compile statistics on official time each year. Mr. Johnson should push it in the Senate while expanding his USPS probe to the broader misuse of government time.

The unions are howling about the Ross bill, and Senate Democrats may filibuster. But Republicans should be happy to stand on the side of more transparency and accountability. Taxpayers have a heavy enough lift without underwriting partisan politics.

Appeared in the August 26, 2017, print edition.

Title: America may have 3.5 million more voters than eligible adult citizens
Post by: G M on August 26, 2017, 11:35:35 AM

https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/08/11/america-may-35-million-voters-eligible-adult-citizens

America may have 3.5 million more voters than eligible adult citizens

In the United States, there are over 3.5 million more people registered to vote than there are living adult citizens. Such staggering inaccuracy is an engraved invitation to vote fraud.
The Election Integrity Project of Judicial Watch, a Washington-based legal-watchdog group, analyzed data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2011 - 2015 American Community Survey and last month's statistics from the federal Election Assistance Commission. The latter included figures from 38 states. According to Judicial Watch, 11 states gave the EAC insufficient or questionable information. Pennsylvania's legitimate numbers place it just below the over-registration threshold.
My tabulation of Judicial Watch's state-by-state results yielded 462 counties where the registration rate exceeded 100 percent. There were 3,551,760 more people registered to vote than adult U.S. citizens who inhabit these counties.

"That's enough over-registered voters to populate a ghost-state about the size of Connecticut," Judicial Watch attorney Robert Popper told me.
Among some 2,500 U.S. counties for which Judicial Watch had data, these 462 counties (18.5 percent of those studied) exhibit this ghost-voter problem. These range from 101 percent over-registration in Delaware's New Castle County to New Mexico's Harding County, where there are 62 percent more registered voters than living, breathing adult citizens.
Washington's Clark County is worrisome, given its 154 percent over-registration rate. This includes 166,811 ghost voters. Georgia's Fulton County seems less nettlesome at 108 percent over-registration, but for the 53,172 Atlantans who compose that figure.
But California's San Diego County earns the enchilada grande. Its 138 percent over-registration translates into 810,966 ghost voters. Los Angeles County's 112 percent rate equals 707,475 over-registrations. Beyond the official data that it received, Judicial Watch reports that L.A. County employees "informed us that the total number of registered voters now stands at a number that is a whopping 144 percent of the total number of resident citizens of voting age."

All told, California is a veritable haunted house, teeming with 1,736,556 ghost voters. Judicial Watch last week wrote Democratic Secretary of State Alex Padilla and authorities in 11 counties and documented how their election records are in shambles.

"California's voting rolls are an absolute mess that undermines the very idea of clean elections," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. "It is urgent that California take reasonable steps to clean up its rolls. We will sue if state officials fail to act."
Ronald Reagan's California has devolved into a reliably far-left stronghold. While pristine voter rolls should be a given in a constitutional republic with democratic elections, even that improvement might be too little to make the Golden State competitive in presidential elections.
The same cannot be said for battleground states, in which Electoral College votes can be decided by incredibly narrow margins. Consider the multitude of ghost voters in:
• Colorado: 159,373
• Florida: 100,782

• Iowa: 31,077
• Michigan: 225,235
• New Hampshire: 8,211
• North Carolina: 189,721
• Virginia: 89,979
President Donald J. Trump's supporters might be intrigued to learn that Hillary Clinton's margins of victory in Colorado and New Hampshire were lower than the numbers of ghost voters in those states. Clinton's fans should know that Trump won Michigan and North Carolina by fewer ballots than ghost voters in those states.
Perhaps these facts will encourage Democrats to join the GOP-dominated effort to remove ineligible felons, ex-residents, non-citizens and dead people from the voter rolls — for all contests, not just presidential races.
Under federal law, the 1993 National Voter Registration Act and the 2002 Help America Vote Act require states to maintain accurate voter lists. Nonetheless, some state politicians ignore this law. Governor Terry McAuliffe, D-Virginia, vetoed a measure mandating investigations of elections in which ballots outnumbered eligible voters.
Even more suspiciously, when GOP Gov. Rick Scott tried to obey these laws and update Florida's records, including deleting 51,308 deceased voters, Obama's Justice Department sued to stop him.
Whether Americans consider vote fraud a Republican hoax, a Democratic tactic, or something in between, everyone should agree that it's past time to exorcise ghost voters from the polls.
Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News contributor and a contributing editor with National Review Online.

Title: NRO: Voter Fraud Prevention case
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 28, 2017, 09:46:17 AM

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450439/voter-fraud-prevention-registered-voters-duplicate-voters-purge-rolls-obama-justice-department?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202017-08-14&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives

Title: Fed Judge throws out TX voter ID law for 5th time
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 30, 2017, 05:44:19 AM

http://dailysignal.com/2017/08/29/biased-judge-tosses-texas-voter-id-law/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTmpJMlpXVTFPVFF6WkRjeCIsInQiOiJHSEFXZlJINWFZbmF5YUtLTmxcL1VNRkJBTHdhV1wvRkRXbzNpRDNPY3RkSU5aRERXVGNjS2lOZ212SVhPbWQ0YnFrNjN4em5rcTUrZkVaaU84d1ZtZ3FBYWhoSWh4VFU0WTY4aUJ6V2cxN1VLOUl4N0g1Mm5UWWMwNG5IMG9MbGltIn0%3D

Title: POTH: More on Russian electin hacking
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 01, 2017, 10:02:38 AM

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/01/us/politics/russia-election-hacking.html?emc=edit_ta_20170901&nl=top-stories&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

Title: 5,000 voter frauds in New Hampshire NH?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 07, 2017, 03:14:24 PM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/7/voter-fraud-alert-over-5000-new-hampshire-presiden/

Title: Dem Secy of State for NH shows serious integrity
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 14, 2017, 05:11:26 AM

http://dailysignal.com/2017/09/13/why-this-democrat-wants-to-restore-confidence-in-voting-integrity/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRGa016YzFNakl4TkRCaCIsInQiOiJBbUhYcUhvb1U1SVRidjRSb0dYU1lQQ29MRWxPUlJ5UXoxcEpJNExDcUVZaGU5aUF2ejlBelJPVzQ3Ym51VTFidFU4dDRnamFwamlMTFVGRTNUdzN3ZzU5XC80NnZ3U3JJRVp2ZTM0TmpFQ2VieStIWDh4ZjN6ZnllSjhJN05NMDIifQ%3D%3D

Title: response to CRAfty's post
Post by: ccp on September 14, 2017, 05:25:29 AM

**** [Maggie] Hassan recently attacked Gardner, her fellow Democrat, for serving on the presidential advisory commission.

“Secretary Gardner’s association with this partisan commission risks tarnishing his long legacy of fighting for the New Hampshire Primary and promoting voter participation, and it would be in keeping with his distinguished record to immediately relinquish any role with this commission,” Hassan said in a statement.***


It is worth noting and worthy of investigation that this same Hassan (who is a lawyer obviously not interested in law enforcement like a good Democrat)  won her Senate seat by a mere 100 votes!!!!  She could well have won by fraud:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maggie_Hassan

also from above post - New Hampshire has long history of close and strange voting counts:  " in 1974, Republican Louis Wyman beat Democrat John Durkin by 355 votes in that hotly contested U.S. Senate race. After a recount, Durkin beat Wyman by 10 votes. Wyman asked for another recount, which he won by two votes. The U.S. Senate sought to determine the outcome, before sending it back to the state, which called a special election. Gardner served on the House Election Law Committee that sorted out some of the issues in the election"

---------

voter integrity - what voter integrity???   :?

Title: Vote machines can be hacked without a trace
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 17, 2017, 09:01:44 AM

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/sep/12/voting-machines-can-be-hacked-without-evidence-com/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1dRNE5qWXdPR0l6T1RRMiIsInQiOiJOdk45U3pFWVhKOGJGTnpPQ2pTK3FcL0JmUXZFUE14bktXZXBxMjAzbFwvdk9IVk45KzVOb2lxeFRyeWgwZGxSTlwvdHY1djhTTU1yTlBwUXpUQ01McHhZTU90YUdqR2Y5Tjg5YzFrRkdRaXdxSTVTR0o4Z0ZPZ3JyeW1tVE1wb0JYRCJ9

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 17, 2017, 11:29:36 AM

"  Vote machines can be hacked without a trace  "

So can probably everything else.

In any case we on this board told the world  this would happen for years .

But as the Dems keep telling us,

"voter fraud is *exceedingly* rare". 

[the bastards]   :x

Title: Equifax
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 21, 2017, 11:33:04 PM

http://www.speroforum.com/a/ONAPLENCDT53/81729-Equifax-data-breach-reveals-ease-of-voter-registration-hacks?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=PCCYQBJXQN34&utm_content=ONAPLENCDT53&utm_source=news&utm_term=Equifax+data+breach+reveals+ease+of+voter+registration+hacks#.WcSuZnrcCeQ

Title: Election Officials attacked for trying to purge voter rolls
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 05, 2017, 05:19:53 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/election-officials-attacked-from-all-sides-on-purging-voter-rolls/

Title: PA Secrectary of State resigns; enabled many illegals to vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 13, 2017, 02:30:50 PM

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/pedro-cortes-resigns-pennsylvania-secretary-of-state-voters-20171011.html

Title: Gov. Brown signs bill giving jailed felons right to vote IN JAIL
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 15, 2017, 11:03:27 AM

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/09/28/gov-brown-signs-bill-allowing-felons-to-vote-in-jail/#.WeJPGotsPwM.facebook

Title: Re: Gov. Brown signs bill giving jailed felons right to vote IN JAIL
Post by: G M on October 15, 2017, 11:10:08 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 15, 2017, 11:03:27 AM

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/09/28/gov-brown-signs-bill-allowing-felons-to-vote-in-jail/#.WeJPGotsPwM.facebook

What political party would gain from this?

Title: History of meddling in foreign elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 14, 2017, 07:33:09 AM

BTW, I suspect a complete history would include Rep administrations meddling too.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/hypocrisy-obama-clinton-long-history-meddling-foreign-elections/

Title: POTH (Pravda on the Hudson): Culling voter rolls
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 27, 2017, 07:37:55 AM

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/25/us/voter-rolls-registration-culling-election.html?emc=edit_th_20171126&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=49641193&_r=0

Title: Electoral process, fraud, etc: Wisconsin Fraud more sinister than first reported
Post by: DougMacG on December 08, 2017, 11:57:17 AM

Along with the FBI scandals and everything else, this is REALLY BAD STUFF.

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2017/12/doj-report-wisconsins-infamous-john-doe-was-more-sinister-than-first-reported/

Read it all.

Title: Bill to expand NPPD
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 17, 2017, 07:56:53 AM

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/365168-gop-chairman-worried-by-trumps-stance-on-russian-interference

In addition to the Trump related commentary, note this:
==============================================

Last week, the House passed legislation sponsored by McCaul that would elevate Homeland Security’s cybersecurity mission by replacing the little-recognized headquarters office called the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) with an operational, stand-alone agency to handle cyber and infrastructure protection.

Part of the NPPD’s mission is providing penetration testing and other services to state and local officials worried about the security of their voter databases and other systems. Homeland Security opened up election infrastructure to voluntary federal protections after Russia tried to infiltrate election infrastructure in 21 states ahead of last year’s election.

Broadly, NPPD is responsible for protecting critical infrastructure — the majority of which is owned privately — from cyber and physical threats.

McCaul’s legislation has received strong backing from Kirstjen Nielsen, Trump’s new Homeland Security secretary. She has urged the Senate to pass similar legislation

Title: Virginia State legislature now 50/50 by one vote
Post by: ccp on December 19, 2017, 06:10:13 PM

https://www.conservativereview.com/articles/virginia-democrat-wins-election-by-one-vote

I wonder if felons made the difference. 

Title: California vote by mail.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 28, 2017, 10:56:22 AM

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-more-californians-will-vote-by-mail-and-1475187995-htmlstory.html

Title: Re: California vote by mail.
Post by: G M on December 28, 2017, 03:05:23 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 28, 2017, 10:56:22 AM

http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-more-californians-will-vote-by-mail-and-1475187995-htmlstory.html

I'm sure California will be very careful to make sure no vote fraud occurs.

Title: Russian meddling model looks to spread
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 29, 2017, 12:44:56 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/28/russias-meddling-in-us-election-worries-world/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTWpWa04ySTFOVGRtWTJJMyIsInQiOiJrWlVcL1pnWU9hdzRYbDF5NVFScTVGSzF3cGlPV1wvYWhONkVrcEIwanJ4Z1YzQ1VRKzBcL1MyS0RLQmIzc1JBUEQwK0hxR2IxSHJNTnVadERuZHQwT1VxQ1RRbnNSVDArVmd2RUlOc0NOWWw3MDRMakdaR0lCNGVXTFV3NkFXbWxzTSJ9

Title: President Trump dissolves Voter Fraud Commission
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 04, 2018, 06:18:30 AM

A change of tactics or barking to cover surrender?

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/3/donald-trump-dissolves-voter-fraud-commission/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTlRObVptWmxZemswTnpJMyIsInQiOiJkVWVNaHdzVlYwaDhuYVJsR3VTUVQ4UDhSMnF6Q09EeFlBVkE5VWdSU1wvRlVCZWhFMHErZXpsazQxWXg0K3NtYWI1cythUTRKZXVQVFdnbDlCRlhhZXVYYnExVVB3b2x1dmdkT1ZlVkpBWTV6UUpQbnQxRkJiQnp3ODg1OWJnbzQifQ%3D%3D

Title: Morris: Trump fails to stop election fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2018, 05:50:59 AM

http://www.dickmorris.com/trump-fails-stop-election-fraud-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: FED court orders congressional map redrawn
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2018, 05:58:31 AM

second post

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/09/us/north-carolina-gerrymander.html?emc=edit_na_20180109&nl=breaking-news&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

Title: Judge James A Wynn (jr!)
Post by: ccp on January 11, 2018, 06:22:09 AM

And of course guess who appointed the Judge in NC?  ( I will give you two tries - Obama or Clinton):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Wynn_Jr.

Title: Re: FED court orders congressional map redrawn
Post by: DougMacG on January 11, 2018, 11:10:00 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2018, 05:58:31 AM

second post
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/09/us/north-carolina-gerrymander.html?emc=edit_na_20180109&nl=breaking-news&nlid=49641193&ref=cta&_r=0

I wonder what other official governmental action cannot be done for blatant political purposes, DACA, Puerto Rico statehood, Obamacare, disaster relief, DOT grants, voter registration drives,  ...

Title: AZ voter registration ads showing up in Mexico
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 18, 2018, 11:47:20 AM

https://www.westernjournal.com/report-top-arizona-official-is-using-state-tax-money-to-pay-for-voter-registration-ads-in-mexico/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=deepsix

Title: CA automatically registering illegal aliens starting April 1.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 19, 2018, 09:37:29 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/alert-starting-april-1-california-dmv-will-automatically-register-illegal-aliens-to-vote-by-court-order/

Title: Re: CA automatically registering illegal aliens starting April 1.
Post by: G M on January 19, 2018, 09:53:23 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 19, 2018, 09:37:29 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/alert-starting-april-1-california-dmv-will-automatically-register-illegal-aliens-to-vote-by-court-order/

Of course.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 19, 2018, 10:19:32 AM

To vote ??????!!!!!!!!#$%^&*()

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 19, 2018, 04:28:45 PM

From my FB page in response to this:

 Not sure Capoliticalreview read the part of the bill requiring the driver’s license holders be CA citizens eligible to vote in order to be registered. The driver licenses for noncitizens are restricted and clearly designated with "Federal Limits Apply" in big red letters signifying status. Those folks can't get registered as they are not eligible due to their status and the licenses they are issued. If someone comes into the DMV(per the bill) they get registered IF they are eligible to vote. Noncitizens are not eligible and their drivers licenses are clearly marked physically and in the computer systems. They cannot be registered. This story and the like seems to be a scare tactic to ruffle the feathers of republicans fearful of additional eligible Latino voters registering as opposed to an actual threat to democracy. I'm confident they know these facts and choose not to include them in their not so honest stories.



Marc Denny  I'll readily agree Capolitical Review is not always a responsible source, but if I understand correctly, the point is that anyone can lie and declare themselves to be a citizen-- yes?



Erik Lilliedahl:  Not from what I understand. You need to prove who are (16 yro and US citizen) via US birth certificate and SSN in order to get a US resident license the first time. Out of state DL holders use the previous state's DL. You don't have those forms of ID if you are a nonresident. Now you can still get a license in CA if your are a nonresident as we know. You still have to provide forms of identification proof but it doesn't give you resident status. That is a whole different discussion on the pros and cons of that. However, as it stands as a nonresident your DL is marked physically with a "Federal Limits Apply" and likewise in the system. Your DL is in another electronic bucket so to speak. These nonresidents cannot be registered to vote. The politicians know there is always human error so they included a provision in the bill. If you are registered to vote somehow and should not have been, through no fault of your own, and this eronious registration happened via the DMV system. You as an individual will not be held liable for the illegal action. However this shouldn't be able to happen with nonresidents as they cannot be registered. This would be a citizen with restrictions like a felon and what not. Are there going to be mistakes? Probably, but they will be far and few between and nowhere near the 800,000 numbers alarmists are mentioning. But be sure once a mistake happens capolitical and the like will be all over it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 19, 2018, 06:47:31 PM

Your poster does not know what he is talking about. My wife, as a legal aliens had to fight to avoid being registered to vote, as she feared the possible legal ramifications. She has been called for jury duty multiple times and had to jump through hoops and prove she was a noncitizen.

Title: Non-citizens voting
Post by: G M on January 19, 2018, 06:54:13 PM

https://fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-us-elections

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 20, 2018, 02:02:11 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 19, 2018, 04:28:45 PM

From my FB page in response to this:

 Not sure Capoliticalreview read the part of the bill requiring the driver’s license holders be CA citizens eligible to vote in order to be registered. The driver licenses for noncitizens are restricted and clearly designated with "Federal Limits Apply" in big red letters signifying status. Those folks can't get registered as they are not eligible due to their status and the licenses they are issued. If someone comes into the DMV(per the bill) they get registered IF they are eligible to vote. Noncitizens are not eligible and their drivers licenses are clearly marked physically and in the computer systems. They cannot be registered. This story and the like seems to be a scare tactic to ruffle the feathers of republicans fearful of additional eligible Latino voters registering as opposed to an actual threat to democracy. I'm confident they know these facts and choose not to include them in their not so honest stories.



Marc Denny  I'll readily agree Capolitical Review is not always a responsible source, but if I understand correctly, the point is that anyone can lie and declare themselves to be a citizen-- yes?



Erik Lilliedahl:  Not from what I understand. You need to prove who are (16 yro and US citizen) via US birth certificate and SSN in order to get a US resident license the first time. Out of state DL holders use the previous state's DL. You don't have those forms of ID if you are a nonresident. Now you can still get a license in CA if your are a nonresident as we know. You still have to provide forms of identification proof but it doesn't give you resident status. That is a whole different discussion on the pros and cons of that. However, as it stands as a nonresident your DL is marked physically with a "Federal Limits Apply" and likewise in the system. Your DL is in another electronic bucket so to speak. These nonresidents cannot be registered to vote. The politicians know there is always human error so they included a provision in the bill. If you are registered to vote somehow and should not have been, through no fault of your own, and this eronious registration happened via the DMV system. You as an individual will not be held liable for the illegal action. However this shouldn't be able to happen with nonresidents as they cannot be registered. This would be a citizen with restrictions like a felon and what not. Are there going to be mistakes? Probably, but they will be far and few between and nowhere near the 800,000 numbers alarmists are mentioning. But be sure once a mistake happens capolitical and the like will be all over it.

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2016/10/19/podesta-wikileaks-horror-voter-id-doesnt-stop-alien-voting/

https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/Law-Misleading-Non-Citizens-to-Illegally-Register-to-Vote-Attorney-428779283.html

Title: Funny enough, the WAPO published a study indicating that illegals did vote
Post by: G M on January 20, 2018, 02:07:25 PM

https://www.dailywire.com/news/12760/flashback-wapo-publishes-study-claims-millions-john-nolte

The memory hole...

Title: Obama's guy NOW claims Russians got into voting machines
Post by: ccp on February 08, 2018, 05:29:56 AM

So now that the heat is on Obama now that we have real evidence he was involved in the scam to get Hillary off Jeh say Russians hacked into voting machines

Wait I thought there is NO voting fraud
I thought there are many controls to keep this from happening
Now Leftist rag takes jehs say of Russians tampering with election again  thus giving the whole Leftist MSM more crap to speak about while ignoring the corruption from O's administration:

http://www.newsweek.com/russians-successfully-hacked-us-voter-systems-2016-election-top-official-says-801253

But if any of this is true WHY NOW?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 20, 2018, 11:39:02 AM

Somewhere in this thead is a detailed post about a lot of the voting machines being owned/controlled by Soros and subject to manipulation.  I've tried finding it but could use some help please.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on February 21, 2018, 07:05:49 AM

I did not see it in the thread.  Try this:
http://www.businessinsider.com/george-soros-connection-to-voting-machines-2016-10

Soros didn't own the company and the machines weren't used in the election.  Soros was tied to the owners through another organization.

He has plenty of other nefarious mis-deeds undermining elections.

Title: Soros funding anti-Trump using former ACORN employees, May 2017
Post by: DougMacG on February 21, 2018, 07:10:30 AM

Soros, May 27, 2017
Washington Free Beacon
New $80M Anti-Trump Network Spearheaded by Soros-Funded Org With Former ACORN Employees
Network will focus on pushing back against voter laws leading up to the 2018 and 2020 elections
http://freebeacon.com/issues/soros-funded-anti-trump-network-has-acorn-ties/

Title: Glenn Beck exposé on George Soros, The Puppet Master
Post by: DougMacG on February 21, 2018, 07:19:46 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-cHmo85_LA

Long.  Wide ranging.  (He covers the "Open Society Foundation" that is the tie to the owner of the voting machine company.)

Putting it here for reference.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 21, 2018, 08:33:04 AM

Thank you very much Doug!

Title: russkis penetrated seven states prior to 2016 election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 27, 2018, 11:34:54 PM

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-intel-russia-compromised-seven-states-prior-to-2016-election/ar-BBJG4d8?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=DELLDHP

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 28, 2018, 05:01:34 AM

too bad they couldn't turn CA and Ill Republican ... :evil:

Gee whoever would have guessed we would have big problems when they started making voting electronic?

Certainly no one on DBF.   :wink:

Title: Kansas Sec State: voter reg. law catches 1000s illegals illegally registered
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2018, 10:22:30 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/6/kris-kobach-says-kansas-voter-registration-law-blo/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20180310234158

Title: Deep Fake Videos coming
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 15, 2018, 06:08:43 AM

https://clarionproject.org/deep-fakes/?mc_cid=cb4a36cad2&mc_eid=d7eaaa3130

Title: Paper Ballots to hack proof our elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 15, 2018, 06:21:41 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/we-need-to-hack-proof-our-elections-an-old-technology-can-help/2018/02/14/27a805bc-0c4b-11e8-95a5-c396801049ef_story.html?utm_term=.5788bdfc9e9f

Title: Illegals getting to vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 18, 2018, 08:47:36 PM

http://www.newsweek.com/immigrants-are-getting-right-vote-cities-across-america-664467

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 19, 2018, 06:02:21 AM

"http://www.newsweek.com/immigrants-are-getting-right-vote-cities-across-america-664467"

Wow .  This is terrible these darn crats are giving 'our' country away for their own f@#$% power!  What is this? 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on March 19, 2018, 06:26:48 AM

Quote from: ccp on March 19, 2018, 06:02:21 AM

"http://www.newsweek.com/immigrants-are-getting-right-vote-cities-across-america-664467"

Wow .  This is terrible these darn crats are giving 'our' country away for their own f@#$% power!  What is this? 

It’s the core of their open borders policy. They keep losing with the current electorate, so they are working on replacing it with one more easily controlled.

Title: NRO: Cambridge Analytica
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 19, 2018, 01:45:35 PM

   Is Cambridge Analytica Really an ‘Information Weapon’ in a ‘Data War’?
By Jim Geraghty   

March 19, 2018 10:17 AM

(Robert Galbraith/Reuters)

Assuming all the reporting is accurate, Cambridge Analytica used Facebook data that was supposed to be off-limits to it. The firm allegedly paid Cambridge professor Aleksandr Kogan to collect the data on Facebook users and claim it was being used for academic purposes; in reality, Kogan collected and passed along 50 million individual profiles that “could be matched to electoral rolls. It then used the test results and Facebook data to build an algorithm that could analyze individual Facebook profiles and determine personality traits linked to voting behavior.”

No doubt, this is a breach of contract. No doubt, this is unethical. This is going to generate slews of lawsuits.

But does this really constitute manipulating the election, or a form of “data war” or a new “information weapon”? How is this significantly different from any other form of campaign messaging?

Christopher Wylie, the whistleblower at the center of these stories, really makes it sound like mind control: “Cambridge Analytica will try to pick at whatever mental weakness or vulnerability that we think you have and try to warp your perception of what’s real around you.”

Guys . . . it’s Facebook, not a Hypno-Ray or Loki’s staff. At the heart of this is the question of whether a Facebook ad or any kind of clever advertising can get you to do something you otherwise would not do. Sure, an image of delicious food can make you hungry, but does it make you go to the restaurant and eat? Does the car commercial showing the guy driving fast through an empty road in the wilderness make you buy the car? Or does it just persuade you that enjoying that experience is worth the cost of the car?

I’ll put it to my generally right-of-center audience: Do you think there’s some sort of manipulative social-media messaging that could persuade you to vote for, say, Nancy Pelosi?

A common answer is probably, “Well, I’m immune to the manipulative effects of advertising, but a lot of other people are more easily persuaded.” If you really think a decisive portion of the electorate can be easily manipulated into voting for a candidate by slick advertising . . . can there really be such a thing as a free and fair election? (This is how the term “sheeple” gets thrown around.) The subtext of the accusations around Cambridge Analytica is that for a significant portion of Americans, voting for Hillary Clinton was the “rational” choice and some sort of sinister advertising manipulated them into making the “irrational” choice of voting for Donald Trump.

Vox writes, “Cambridge Analytica was also able to use this real-time information to determine which messages were resonating where and then shape Trump’s travel schedule around it. So, if there was a spike in clicks on an article about immigration in a county in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin, Trump would go there and give an immigration-focused speech.”

Okay, except Trump gave immigration-focused speeches his entire campaign — at least to the extent they “focused” on anything. (Haven’t these people watched Trump’s speeches? They’re usually off-the-cuff stream-of-consciousness riffs on whatever he saw on Fox News and Twitter that day.) Did someone really need reams of data from Facebook to conclude that blue-collar workers in Pennsylvania or Wisconsin would be worried about globalization, job security, and competition from underpriced foreign labor?

Campaigns have gathered consumer-research data and used it to target voters for decades. This is how you end up with those odd little factoids like, “Democrats are likely to prefer clearer spirits, like vodka or gin, while Republicans are tend to favor brown liquors, like bourbon or scotch.” Companies keep track of their customers, what they buy, how much they spend, and where they live, to help with future marketing efforts. Most of them are perfectly happy to sell that information to anyone willing to buy it.
Stay Updated with NR Daily

NR's afternoon roundup of the day's best commentary & must-read analysis.

To use an obvious example, assume you’re running a campaign for a pro–Second Amendment candidate in Pennsylvania. You would go to Guns & Ammo and every gun-related publication that is sold in the state, and offer to purchase a list of their subscribers and mailing addresses in the state. Then you would start sending campaign literature touting your candidate’s commitment to gun rights to those addresses.

Honest to goodness, folks, this was considered groundbreaking 14 years ago:

    Republican firms, including TargetPoint Consultants and National Media Inc., delved into commercial databases that pinpointed consumer buying patterns and television-watching habits to unearth such information as Coors beer and bourbon drinkers skewing Republican, brandy and cognac drinkers tilting Democratic; college football TV viewers were more Republican than those who watch professional football; viewers of Fox News were overwhelmingly committed to vote for Bush; homes with telephone caller ID tended to be Republican; people interested in gambling, fashion and theater tended to be Democratic.

    Surveys of people on these consumer data lists were then used to determine “anger points” (late-term abortion, trial lawyer fees, estate taxes) that coincided with the Bush agenda for as many as 32 categories of voters, each identifiable by income, magazine subscriptions, favorite television shows and other “flags.” Merging this data, in turn, enabled those running direct mail, precinct walking and phone bank programs to target each voter with a tailored message.

    “You used to get a tape-recorded voice of Ronald Reagan telling you how important it was to vote. That was our get-out-the-vote effort,” said Alex Gage, of TargetPoint. Now, he said, calls can be targeted to specific constituencies so that, for example, a “right to life voter” could get a call warning that “if you don’t come out and vote, the number of abortions next year is going to go up.”

You know who else focused on using Facebook and “targeted sharing” and created models from data sets to specifically target different groups of voters? The 2012 Obama campaign!

    The Obama team had a solution in place: a Facebook application that will transform the way campaigns are conducted in the future. For supporters, the app appeared to be just another way to digitally connect to the campaign. But to the Windy City number crunchers, it was a game changer. “I think this will wind up being the most groundbreaking piece of technology developed for this campaign,” says Teddy Goff, the Obama campaign’s digital director.

    That’s because the more than 1 million Obama backers who signed up for the app gave the campaign permission to look at their Facebook friend lists. In an instant, the campaign had a way to see the hidden young voters. Roughly 85% of those without a listed phone number could be found in the uploaded friend lists. What’s more, Facebook offered an ideal way to reach them. “People don’t trust campaigns. They don’t even trust media organizations,” says Goff. “Who do they trust? Their friends.”

    The campaign called this effort targeted sharing. And in those final weeks of the campaign, the team blitzed the supporters who had signed up for the app with requests to share specific online content with specific friends simply by clicking a button. More than 600,000 supporters followed through with more than 5 million contacts, asking their friends to register to vote, give money, vote or look at a video designed to change their mind.

    A geek squad in Chicago created models from vast data sets to find the best approaches for each potential voter. “We are not just sending you a banner ad,” explains Dan Wagner, the Obama campaign’s 29-year-old head of analytics, who helped oversee the project. “We are giving you relevant information from your friends.”

The difference is that the Obama campaign persuaded people to use a particular app to reach out to their friends and they consented to the terms of the agreement, while Cambridge Analytica allegedly used data that was obtained fraudulently. If it comes to that, prosecute them for fraud for claiming the data was for academic research when it was being used for private campaign messaging purposes. But let’s not let the voters off the hook for their choices at the ballot box.

After all, it’s not like advertising can make us start doing things we otherwise would never do and say things we otherwise would never say, with just a snap, crackle, pop. We all think different. Ignore the fearmongering and know that you’re in good hands. It’s not like some powerful social-media company can just reach out and touch someone, or just do it. You can have it your way. Because you’re worth it!

Those Unmotivated Trump Voters

Remember during the Obama years, when Democrats fumed that they had a lot of casual supporters who loved the president but who otherwise tuned out politics and wouldn’t show up in non-presidential years?

It’s starting to feel like the circumstances are now reversed:

    Sixty percent of Democratic voters say they have a high degree of interest in the upcoming elections (registering either a “9” or “10” on a 10-point scale), versus 54 percent of Republicans who say the same thing. In addition, 64 percent of 2016 Clinton voters say they have a high level of interest, compared with 57 percent of 2016 Trump voters.

Is it worthwhile to cater to a portion of the electorate that only shows up to vote once every four years?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 19, 2018, 02:26:33 PM

what a joke
we have been discussing for years the tech behemoths , loss of privacy and concern they are using their wares for malfesences

now today because they may have  tread on the political correct crowd it is a big big problem

Title: Re: NRO: Cambridge Analytica
Post by: DougMacG on March 19, 2018, 02:37:20 PM

"You know who else focused on using Facebook and “targeted sharing” and created models from data sets to specifically target different groups of voters? The 2012 Obama campaign!"

This is what they admit, all that is alleged of Trump's campaign and more..  I believe the Obama machine went further, 'yes we can', they went through government program recipient data and did data mining there to reach voters that way too.  The worst part is that no one cares when tens of millions suffer a breach of privacy committed by the people within their own government.  As Hillary said in her excuses, the Obama machine would not give her all of their information.  It wasn't all legally obtained.

Title: You're right Doug, Obama was worse
Post by: ccp on March 19, 2018, 03:50:50 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/cambridge-analytica-social-media-panic/

Seems like FB made a grave error.  Zuck's response to this was not to the Deep States or Dems liking.

He should have been totally forthcoming and down on his knees begging for their forgiveness.

Interesting to see Trump's response.  He is no fan of Bezos politics but he also a de regulator .

Title: US has 3.5M more voters than live adults?!?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2018, 04:55:35 AM

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/u-s-has-3-5-million-more-registered-voters-than-live-adults-a-red-flag-for-electoral-fraud/

Title: Re: US has 3.5M more voters than live adults?!?
Post by: G M on April 08, 2018, 08:20:21 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2018, 04:55:35 AM

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/u-s-has-3-5-million-more-registered-voters-than-live-adults-a-red-flag-for-electoral-fraud/

Math is obviously racist.

Title: Brennan Center: Serious Assertion to the Contrary
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2018, 05:51:31 PM

https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/debunking-voter-fraud-myth

Any merits to this?

What are the counter arguments?

I'm in a big FB debate and need help ASAP!  :-D


PS:  I read some where that sometime around 1992 Miami had its mayoral election annulled due to fraud.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on April 08, 2018, 06:39:38 PM

so if voter fraud is so rare to be almost non existent then why do so many states block efforts to check for it?

and how would anyone really know if we don't ID people

I walked up and signed my name with no one asking for any evidence of who I am.

NO one is checking who IS voting so how can anyone then assert - there is no fraud.

the denials are ludicrous.

Title: 1998 Miami mayoral election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2018, 06:40:32 PM

Ah, found this-- https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/05/us/fraud-ruling-invalidates-miami-mayoral-election.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on April 09, 2018, 12:55:05 AM

Purchasing a firearm is a constitutional right. To do so, I must present legal ID and undergo a background check. Why not the same standard for voting?

Title: Re: Brennan Center: Serious Assertion to the Contrary
Post by: DougMacG on April 09, 2018, 07:13:10 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2018, 05:51:31 PM

https://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/debunking-voter-fraud-myth
Any merits to this?
What are the counter arguments?
I'm in a big FB debate and need help ASAP!  :-D

Debunking the 'debunk', BrennanCanter 'analysis':  That heavily linked article uses the liberal logic string I call, "and another thing..." . They tell you one thing flawed and before you can answer on its validity they go to their second point, which isn't a second point because the first point wasn't so, and they keep going with more and more.  What do lawyers call that strategy when you overwhelm the other side with paperwork and motions to avoid getting to the real question?  It would take weeks to go through all that but look at what they are NOT saying, that "there is no voter fraud', because there is and it cheapens the vote of everyone else, undermines the process and once in awhile in the closest of elections, it changes the result.  

Interestingly though, it can only change the result in one direction because they know they win the votes of the felons and illegals. The side that benefits from fraud wants no protection from it. For appearance sake, they should at least pretend to care about the integrity of the process.

Not mentioned in the "rarely", "almost never" argument is this:
 https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/20/al-franken-may-have-won-his-senate-seat-through-voter-fraud

The election that enabled the 60th vote of the Senate in 2008-2009 had more illegal voters than the margin of victory.  Oh well.  This made Obamacare possible, caused the Dems to lose the House, changed history.  'Nuff said, but there is plenty more.  That was just one incident of irregularity in one election that changed the course of the country.

If it was conservatives saying it is harder for minorities and immigrants than whites to show ID, they would be racist!

2.8 million Americans (that we know of) registered to vote in more than one place.
One in eight active registrations is invalid or inaccurate.  There are about 1.8 million dead people listed as active voters.  12 million registrations have serious errors.  [What could go wrong?]
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/us/politics/us-voter-registration-rolls-are-in-disarray-pew-report-finds.html?_r=0

13% of illegals admit they vote.  How many is too many?  ONE.
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/

How many ineligible residents are we talking about, all targeted by Democratic 'voter registration' and get-out-the-vote drives?
http://www.pewhispanic.org/interactives/unauthorized-immigrants/

'Seldom', 'very rarely', 'almost none', 'very few convictions' for a crime we admittedly don't investigate, what kind of criteria are the see-no-evil people looking for?  I thought it was, EVERY VOTE MATTERS.  If so, every illegal vote matters!

Felons vote mostly Democrat.  Illegals vote mostly Democrat. Both sides know it.  Your debater on the other side should ask, what if the sides were reversed.  But that is not possible in today's politics.  Cynically and without exception, those opposing tighter controls want a particular result in the election.  One side wants illegals to gain the right to vote and then they won't be illegal, but in the meantime they oppose basic ID requirements and they run voter registration turnout operations aimed at populations known to include ineligible voters, such as Motor Voter.  In my state of MN, landlords are required to give tenants voter registration forms without asking or knowing their eligibility status.  I won't do it.  Meanwhile in their excesses, the vote of Trump plus the Libertarian in 2016 just beat Hillary plus Jill Stein in America's formerly most blue of blue states, the only state that never voted for Reagan.  

"May their excesses be their downfall", a wise man once said.  )

Marc, where the intent of the other side is to win by any means and keep integrity out of the process, you will not win them over on the merits of the argument, but you will win those in the middle who insist on integrity in the process no matter the outcome.
  - Doug

Title: Illegals getting to vote 2.0
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 09, 2018, 09:43:14 AM

Excellent post Doug.

Pasting this here so I can give it a subject line making it easier to find through the search command:

 https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/20/al-franken-may-have-won-his-senate-seat-through-voter-fraud

The election that enabled the 60th vote of the Senate in 2008-2009 had more illegal voters than the margin of victory.  Oh well.  This made Obamacare possible, caused the Dems to lose the House, changed history.  'Nuff said, but there is plenty more.  That was just one incident of irregularity in one election that changed the course of the country.

If it was conservatives saying it is harder for minorities and immigrants than whites to show ID, they would be racist!

2.8 million Americans (that we know of) registered to vote in more than one place.
One in eight active registrations is invalid or inaccurate.  There are about 1.8 million dead people listed as active voters.  12 million registrations have serious errors.  [What could go wrong?]
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/us/politics/us-voter-registration-rolls-are-in-disarray-pew-report-finds.html?_r=0

13% of illegals admit they vote.  How many is too many?  ONE.
http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/poll-13-of-illegal-aliens-admit-they-vote/

How many ineligible residents are we talking about, all targeted by Democratic 'voter registration' and get-out-the-vote drives?
http://www.pewhispanic.org/interactives/unauthorized-immigrants/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on April 09, 2018, 09:50:43 AM

I second the motion =>

Great post Doug!!!

Title: CA Sec. of State for honest elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 10, 2018, 04:19:50 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/mark-meuser-secretary-of-state-for-honest-elections/

Title: NYU Brennan Center,13% of illegals admit they vote. How many is too many? ONE.
Post by: DougMacG on April 10, 2018, 01:21:22 PM

Thank you CD and ccp.  The information and the links were already in our threads.  Maybe we can tell NYU Brennan Center where they can come to balance their research.   [Maybe they don't want balance in their analysis.]

13% of illegals admit they vote.  How many is too many?  ONE.  

Seriously, what do our opponents think is the acceptable amount of voter fraud?  A few dozen, a few hundred, a few thousand votes?  Elections don't need to be any more accurate than cell phone polls, internet polls?  We accept error if it's in our favor?  We don't want fraud stopped or investigated?

Remember that Dem Secretaries of State refused to cooperate in the federal voter accuracy investigation?
How dare they refuse to cooperate in the verification process and then tell us there is "very little fraud"!

Title: Re: NYU Brennan Center,13% of illegals admit they vote. How many is too many? ONE.
Post by: G M on April 10, 2018, 04:09:15 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on April 10, 2018, 01:21:22 PM

Thank you CD and ccp.  The information and the links were already in our threads.  Maybe we can tell NYU Brennan Center where they can come to balance their research.   [Maybe they don't want balance in their analysis.]

13% of illegals admit they vote.  How many is too many?  ONE.  

Seriously, what do our opponents think is the acceptable amount of voter fraud?  A few dozen, a few hundred, a few thousand votes?  Elections don't need to be any more accurate than cell phone polls, internet polls?  We accept error if it's in our favor?  We don't want fraud stopped or investigated?

Remember that Dem Secretaries of State refused to cooperate in the federal voter accuracy investigation?
How dare they refuse to cooperate in the verification process and then tell us there is "very little fraud"!

Any amount of voter fraud is acceptable, as long as it gets dems elected. That’s the plan.

Title: big campaign violations
Post by: ccp on May 06, 2018, 10:25:00 AM

By the ONE and his team .  NO biggie pay a fine and no one in the MSM blinks an eye:

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/01/07/obama-campaign-fined-big-for-hiding-donors-keeping-illegal-donations

and then more recent FAcebook disuse hailed as genius by MSM but technically could easily be argued as a campaign violation:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/facebook-favors-for-obama-campaign-may-have-been-illegal-heritage-foundation-legal-fellow

but alas these violations pale in comparison to 130K to a prostitute who was likely extorting Trump for an affair ten yrs earlier.

Title: Morris: The Walking Dead vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 18, 2018, 06:12:07 PM

https://www.westernjournal.com/dick-morris-ghost-voters-keep-democrats-in-office/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=deepsix&utm_content=2018-05-18&utm_campaign=can

Title: Motor voter in California
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 24, 2018, 07:54:01 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ca-voters-beware-theres-a-serious-problem-with-dmvs-motor-voter-system/

Title: Anyone care to bet if Cuomo
Post by: ccp on May 25, 2018, 02:15:49 PM

(or McAullife for that matter)  would have done this if they thought these people were going to vote Republican:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-new-york-election/new-york-governor-to-allow-35000-paroled-felons-to-vote-idUSKBN1HP2VJ

OTOH I guess we would be welcoming this if they were future Repubs

Title: SCOTUS gerrymandering ruling in Wisconsin case
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 18, 2018, 08:09:04 AM

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/392758-supreme-court-rules-against-wisconsin-democrats-in-key-gerrymandering-case?userid=188403

Title: I don't buy this is Constitutional
Post by: ccp on June 25, 2018, 02:53:06 PM

https://www.spartareport.com/2018/06/25-states-attempting-dirty-trick-to-keep-trump-off-2020-ballot/

Title: Re: I don't buy this is Constitutional
Post by: DougMacG on June 26, 2018, 06:40:50 AM

Quote from: ccp on June 25, 2018, 02:53:06 PM

https://www.spartareport.com/2018/06/25-states-attempting-dirty-trick-to-keep-trump-off-2020-ballot/

I also don't believe it is constitutional. 

States (and Feds) cannot create additional requirements is the reason that term limits need to go through the amendment process.

Weird how that doesn't matter to them.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 26, 2018, 07:55:21 AM

agreed
this is nothing more then a variation of vote suppression that the left is always screaming about

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 26, 2018, 08:54:25 AM

Quote from: ccp on June 26, 2018, 07:55:21 AM

agreed
this is nothing more then a variation of vote suppression that the left is always screaming about

It's a waste of time looking for integrity or intellectual honesty in the left. They will adopt any position they see as giving them power.

Title: Read FB's small print carefully
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 26, 2018, 07:19:14 PM

A lot of implications here , , ,

https://www.facebook.com/help/1991443604424859

Title: Re: Read FB's small print carefully
Post by: G M on June 26, 2018, 07:56:03 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 26, 2018, 07:19:14 PM

A lot of implications here , , ,

https://www.facebook.com/help/1991443604424859

 Blocked by facehugger.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 26, 2018, 10:52:37 PM

working for me:

How are we working to protect election security on Facebook?

    Computer Help
    Mobile Helpadditional tabs menu

share
Share Article
We're committed to protecting legitimate political discussion within our community and fighting foreign interference in elections. That's why we're taking steps to increase Facebook's transparency and security.
Increasing Transparency

    Making advertising more transparent: When ads with political content appear on Facebook, the advertiser is required to include information about who paid for them. An ad with political content on Facebook can be identified by the label: Sponsored – Paid for by. This label will be followed by the information about who paid for the ad. Ads that have political content and have appeared on Facebook on or after May 7, 2018 will also appear in the Archive of Ads With Political Content. We're working closely with our newly-formed Election Commission and other stakeholders to launch an API for the archive.
    Making Pages more authentic: People who manage Pages with large numbers of followers will need to confirm their identity. We'll also give you more information about the Page, including if it has changed its name.
    Sharing if you liked or followed a Page or account created by the IRA: We've taken down fake accounts and Pages created by the foreign actors attempting to interfere in the 2016 US Elections. You can log into Facebook on a computer to check if you liked or followed a Facebook Page or Instagram account created by the Internet Research Agency.

Strengthening Enforcement

    Investing in operations: We're doubling the number of people working on safety and security. This includes hiring 10,000 more people including ad reviewers, engineers and security experts.
    Using automation: We block millions of attempts to register fake accounts every day, but some still get through our systems. Machine learning helps us identify behaviors unique to fake accounts to detect and deactivate inauthentic accounts.
    Updating our policies: We're updating our policy to block ads from Pages that repeatedly share stories marked as false by third-party fact-checking organizations.

Supporting an Informed Community

    Fighting false news: We're committed to preventing the spread of false news by removing economic incentives for spammers, reducing the distribution of stories rated false by third-party fact-checkers and helping people make more informed decisions about what to read, trust and share.
    Reducing clickbait: We've made updates so that you see fewer inauthentic stories, such as clickbait, in your News Feed.

0:00
We take this issue seriously and are committed to doing our part to help prevent foreign interference in elections around the world. Learn more about election security on Facebook.
Was this information helpful?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 27, 2018, 08:46:23 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 26, 2018, 10:52:37 PM

working for me:
How are we working to protect election security on Facebook?
We're committed to protecting legitimate political discussion within our community and fighting foreign interference in elections. That's why we're taking steps to increase Facebook's transparency and security.
Increasing Transparency
    Making advertising more transparent: When ads with political content appear on Facebook, the advertiser is required to include information about who paid for them. An ad with political content on Facebook can be identified by the label: Sponsored – Paid for by. This label will be followed by the information about who paid for the ad. Ads that have political content and have appeared on Facebook on or after May 7, 2018 will also appear in the Archive of Ads With Political Content. We're working closely with our newly-formed Election Commission and other stakeholders to launch an API for the archive.
    Making Pages more authentic: People who manage Pages with large numbers of followers will need to confirm their identity. We'll also give you more information about the Page, including if it has changed its name.
    Sharing if you liked or followed a Page or account created by the IRA: We've taken down fake accounts and Pages created by the foreign actors attempting to interfere in the 2016 US Elections. You can log into Facebook on a computer to check if you liked or followed a Facebook Page or Instagram account created by the Internet Research Agency.

Strengthening Enforcement
    Investing in operations: We're doubling the number of people working on safety and security. This includes hiring 10,000 more people including ad reviewers, engineers and security experts.
    Using automation: We block millions of attempts to register fake accounts every day, but some still get through our systems. Machine learning helps us identify behaviors unique to fake accounts to detect and deactivate inauthentic accounts.
    Updating our policies: We're updating our policy to block ads from Pages that repeatedly share stories marked as false by third-party fact-checking organizations.

Supporting an Informed Community
    Fighting false news: We're committed to preventing the spread of false news by removing economic incentives for spammers, reducing the distribution of stories rated false by third-party fact-checkers and helping people make more informed decisions about what to read, trust and share.
    Reducing clickbait: We've made updates so that you see fewer inauthentic stories, such as clickbait, in your News Feed.

We take this issue seriously and are committed to doing our part to help prevent foreign interference in elections around the world. Learn more about election security on Facebook.
Was this information helpful?

Mostly good but still doesn't address what Zuckerberg admitted in testimony, their fact screeners come from a far-left pool.  False conservative stories should be taken down by an authentic conservative fact check board held to a standard no tighter than typical liberal news.

Most of the today's so-called fact checkers are no better or different than the Left politicians and opinion writers.

Title: Boston attempting to make voter fraud legal
Post by: ccp on July 10, 2018, 05:39:34 AM

This is just election tampering plain and simple:

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/boston-considers-giving-non-citizens-the-vote/

One of the privileges of being a citizen is to be able to vote.
But if overstay your visa or sneak into US all illegal - no probleme  - you should have right to vote in local elections
so says the crazy crats in Boston City

Title: since the illegals are probably almost always crats
Post by: ccp on July 17, 2018, 03:43:37 PM

this election MEDDLING should be protected and ignored:

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/foreign-interference-foreigners-voting-in-our-elections/

But say a Republican could benefit (which he did not ) then suddenly it is the CRIME OF THE CENTURY.

 :x

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 17, 2018, 03:54:46 PM

A well-timed point  CCP!

Title: Voting machine installed remote access software
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 17, 2018, 08:48:50 PM

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/mb4ezy/top-voting-machine-vendor-admits-it-installed-remote-access-software-on-systems-sold-to-states

Title: JW's Tom Fitton on illegal alien votes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 19, 2018, 02:35:24 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YarsnFnY5Zw&feature=youtu.be

Title: Newt Gingrich: Dem Strategy is for non-Citizens to vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 26, 2018, 09:19:56 AM

http://www.gingrichproductions.com/2018/07/democrats-electoral-strategy-let-non-citizens-vote/?utm_source=Gingrich+Productions+List&utm_campaign=2cf43844d4-imigration-votes_2018_07_25_01_53&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bd29bdc370-2cf43844d4-46602837

Title: House Intel Chair calls for ban on electronic voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 26, 2018, 12:57:07 PM

second post

http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/398949-house-intel-chair-calls-for-ban-on-electronic-voting-systems?userid=188403

Title: FB identifies new political influence campaign
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2018, 10:09:21 AM

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/399691-facebook-has-identified-new-political-influence-campaign-report?userid=188403

Title: low income people should not need voter ID card to prove they are citizens
Post by: ccp on August 02, 2018, 05:20:32 AM

Question :

how is it people can come up with the proper credentials for food stamps , medicaid, welfare , unemployment , but are incompetent to be able to drive down to the DMV or other location with proper ID to get a voter ID  "

are low income people disenfranchised from benefits ?  Never heard that assertion before

Title: 7 things for which government requires ID
Post by: G M on August 02, 2018, 09:12:48 AM

Quote from: ccp on August 02, 2018, 05:20:32 AM

Question :

how is it people can come up with the proper credentials for food stamps , medicaid, welfare , unemployment , but are incompetent to be able to drive down to the DMV or other location with proper ID to get a voter ID  "

are low income people disenfranchised from benefits ?  Never heard that assertion before

https://www.dailysignal.com/2016/08/26/amid-voter-id-battles-here-are-7-things-the-government-requires-ids-for/

Title: Nelson down in most polls
Post by: ccp on August 10, 2018, 04:35:20 PM

already blaming the Russians for probable loss in Florida. I wonder if he wins he will be blaming the Russians for that:

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) -- Florida Gov. Rick Scott, calling the allegations sensational, demanded on Friday that U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson provide proof to back up his statement that Russian operatives have penetrated some of his state's election systems ahead of this year's crucial election.

Scott, a Republican, is running against Nelson, a Democrat, in November's midterm elections. During a campaign stop in Tampa, Scott said Nelson must provide "evidence for his claims."

"This cannot be swept under the rug," said Scott. "Bill Nelson must come clean and provide a thorough explanation. Elections are not something to try to scare people about."

Nelson late Friday did not comply with Scott's request and instead said he was trying to make sure officials in his home state are "aware of the ongoing Russian threat so they take the steps necessary to safeguard our elections. It's unfortunate that some Florida officials would try to use this issue for personal, political gain."

Nelson earlier in the week said that Russians were able to get inside the election systems of "certain counties" and "now have free rein to move about." He added that "the threat is real and elections officials — at all levels — need to address the vulnerabilities."

The senator, who is the ranking member of the cyber subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has not provided any more details, saying that additional information is classified.

Florida officials responded angrily to Nelson's comments and said they had "zero information" to back up claims of Russian meddling. Secretary of State Ken Detzner, who himself has barely discussed the previous 2016 effort to hack Florida's election systems, sent a letter to the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, asking for "immediate transparency and cooperation" in sharing any information about new hacking efforts.

But North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, the chairman of that committee, declined to confirm or deny Nelson's claims.

"While I understand your questions regarding Senator Nelson's recent public comments, I respectfully advise you to continue engaging directly with those federal agencies responsible for notifying you of and mitigating any potential intrusions," Burr wrote.

Sara Sendek, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security, issued a statement Wednesday that said: "While we are aware of Senator Nelson's recent statements, we have not seen any new compromises by Russian actors of election infrastructure. That said, we don't need to wait for a specific threat to be ready."

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who is also on the Senate Intelligence Committee, wrote a letter with Nelson last month to all 67 of the county election supervisors in their state warning them of potential threats.

Rubio on Friday put out a carefully worded statement where he also did not confirm or deny Nelson's allegations.

"Given the importance of Florida in our national politics, our states election systems have been and will remain a potentially attractive target for attacks by foreign actors," Rubio said.

U.S. Rep. Tom Rooney, a Florida Republican and a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said, "I have seen no evidence that Russians penetrated Florida's election system — but it definitely could happen." Rooney is one of the House sponsors of a measure that would allow state and local governments to voluntarily apply for grants to replace outdated voting machines and modernize their elections systems.

Russian hackers targeted at least 21 states, including Florida, ahead of the 2016 election and are believed to have breached the voter registration system in at least one, Illinois, investigators say. An indictment released last month said that Russian operatives sent over 100 fake emails to elections offices and personnel in Florida as part of the hacking effort. State officials have never acknowledged how many counties were targeted by the Russians.

Scott in May ordered the hiring of special election security consultants after Florida legislators rejected his request for nearly $500,000 to create a stand-alone cybersecurity unit in the Department of State. Legislators, however, did agree to set aside $1.9 million to provide grants to local election officials to purchase a security monitoring service.

Ahead of this year's election, Florida is also distributing more than $14 million in federal election security grants to local election officials.

Title: 170 voters in one CD over 115 years old
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 10, 2018, 05:08:17 PM

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/170-voters-ohio-race-116-years-old/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=PostSideSharingButtons&utm_content=2018-08-09&utm_campaign=websitesharingbuttons

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 10, 2018, 05:37:19 PM

let me guess - they are all Republicans.  So who did vote for these dead people if they existed at all?

Title: Craig Heuy: CA registered me to vote as another person.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 18, 2018, 06:55:46 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/craig-huey-i-illegally-registered-to-vote-as-another-person-california-sent-me-a-ballot/

Title: but, no we can't have voter ID
Post by: ccp on August 23, 2018, 03:21:29 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-blocks-bill-protect-elections-173459278.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 23, 2018, 07:44:45 PM

Not sure I followed what happened there  , , ,

Title: Electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 31, 2018, 10:27:03 AM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/08/28/electoral-college-foes-continue-push-to-make-popular-vote-winner-president/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWVRGall6YzRaREZoWlRZMyIsInQiOiJKek56ZVFrcSt4SzBzWVNsTGJzK3NYRGE0YVcxZFVYNXRSaUtLbGpKY3BIbm9PTFFMUDIwY1hxMnVBcDFOUWw1NDQyckNvTlM0NEZGVTF2Y0t4S28xVEVHZ2xVVmhKVWhVdGxzcWJJXC90V0g0SkFGNm5sd2tybU1rbjRRaVBUYU8ifQ%3D%3D

Title: Study shows non-citizens vote in sanctuary cities
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 01, 2018, 05:17:54 PM

http://www.speroforum.com/a/YJOVFNGNBM9/83937-Study-shows-noncitizens-vote-in-sanctuary-cities?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPJWSCJXTU9&utm_content=YJOVFNGNBM9&utm_source=news&utm_term=Study+shows+noncitizens+vote+in+sanctuary+cities#.W4oZ3HrcB2A

Title: Morris: Russian Interference in 1948
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 01, 2018, 08:42:08 PM

Second post

http://www.dickmorris.com/russian-meddling-in-us-elections-1948-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: Reps block election security money?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2018, 11:32:34 AM

from two months ago:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/08/01/republicans-block-money-election-security/884438002/

Title: The Voting Dead are re-registering to vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2018, 11:37:52 AM

second post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/he-fought-in-world-war-ii-he-died-in-2014-and-he-just-registered-to-vote-in-va/2016/09/29/5e0bffee-8670-11e6-ac72-a29979381495_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.24714c3d57f9

Title: Homeless exploited in voter fraud scheme in LA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 04, 2018, 07:49:43 PM

https://defensemaven.io/bluelivesmatter/news/lapd-cops-uncover-rampant-voter-fraud-exploiting-homeless-people-make-arrests-Fs-OP-NmdkaMefvQFMZF3A

Title: CA DMV discovers yet more voter registration errors
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 08, 2018, 08:09:09 PM

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-dmv-more-voter-registration-errors-20181008-story.html

Title: Re: CA DMV discovers yet more voter registration errors
Post by: G M on October 09, 2018, 01:19:12 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 08, 2018, 08:09:09 PM

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-dmv-more-voter-registration-errors-20181008-story.html

"Mistake"

 :roll:

Title: Re: CA DMV discovers yet more voter registration errors
Post by: DougMacG on October 09, 2018, 06:40:17 AM

Quote from: G M on October 09, 2018, 01:19:12 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 08, 2018, 08:09:09 PM

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-dmv-more-voter-registration-errors-20181008-story.html

"Mistake"

 :roll:

In Minneapolis, where bviously they know a certain percentage of residents are not citizens, all landlords are required to give voter registration information to (all tenants including) illegal aliens.

California and other states do not require you to be a citizen to get a driver's license.  Then give them voter registration materials and emphasize the importance of registering.

Why would I give voting information to someone without first discussing his or her eligibility to vote?

Mistake? No, it is the design of the program.  They are committing a wrong, not a mistake.

Next, they fail to prosecute that crime, measure its incidence by its prosecutions and conclude there isn't a problem.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 09, 2018, 07:19:06 AM

"In Minneapolis, where bviously they know a certain percentage of residents are not citizens, all landlords are required to give voter registration information to (all tenants including) illegal aliens.

California and other states do not require you to be a citizen to get a driver's license.  Then give them voter registration materials and emphasize the importance of registering.

Why would I give voting information to someone without first discussing his or her eligibility to vote?

Mistake? No, it is the design of the program.  They are committing a wrong, not a mistake.

Next, they fail to prosecute that crime, measure its incidence by its prosecutions and conclude there isn't a problem."

But  you gave them $ 6 off their rent if they vote Republican you would be in jail the next day!

Title: A key part of the blue wave!
Post by: G M on October 13, 2018, 08:50:50 PM

https://nalert.blogspot.com/2018/10/video-georgia-democratic-gubernatorial.html

Old and busted: Illegal aliens voting is a right wing myth!

New and fresh: A part of our core voter base!

Title: Reps misbehaving?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2018, 01:06:23 PM

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2018/09/04/polling-places-remain-a-target-ahead-of-november-elections

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/randolph-county-polling-places_us_5b77115ce4b0a5b1febb04fc

Title: More voters than citizens
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2018, 03:09:45 PM

second post


https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/u-s-has-3-5-million-more-registered-voters-than-live-adults-a-red-flag-for-electoral-fraud/

Title: polling locations in US
Post by: ccp on October 14, 2018, 04:42:30 PM

ok # of polling places decreased  by 868
the number of polling stations in the us in 2004  # 113,754   so subtract 868 and we are down  to 112,886.

http://web.archive.org/web/20061214025307/http://www.eac.gov/election_survey_2004/chapter_table/Chapter13_Polling_Places.htm

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2018, 05:48:02 PM

Is that a response to the GA accusations?

Title: Re: More voters than citizens
Post by: DougMacG on October 15, 2018, 06:24:53 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2018, 03:09:45 PM

second post

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/u-s-has-3-5-million-more-registered-voters-than-live-adults-a-red-flag-for-electoral-fraud/

Shocking stat, without sarcasm.  Maybe HRC did NOT win the popular vote.

Fact:  Blue states like MN, CA refused to cooperate with federal inquiry into the voter fraud issue.

Liberal response:  That we don't investigate or prosecute vote fraud proves there is none.

Title: Re: A key part of the blue wave!
Post by: DougMacG on October 15, 2018, 06:58:26 AM

Quote from: G M on October 13, 2018, 08:50:50 PM

https://nalert.blogspot.com/2018/10/video-georgia-democratic-gubernatorial.html
Old and busted: Illegal aliens voting is a right wing myth!
New and fresh: A part of our core voter base!

Not just a part of their core voter base, the fastest growing part - until Trump.

Title: Well what does it mean when an unknown number
Post by: ccp on October 15, 2018, 08:27:31 AM

of polling places close (in southern back communities .

"In the five years since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down key parts of the Voting Rights Act, nearly a thousand polling places have been shuttered across the country, many of them in southern black communities.

The trend continues: This year alone, 10 counties with large black populations in Georgia closed polling spots after a white elections consultant recommended they do so to save money. When the consultant suggested a similar move in Randolph County, pushback was enough to keep its nine polling places open."

Just not enough detail to sort this out.

Because the election "consultant" was white it must be assumed he is a racist .  Do we know the consultant recommended closure of all nine places in Randolph County?

Check this out :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randolph_County,_Georgia

THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF RANDOLPH COUNTY IS 7719.  How many of the entire population votes overall ?   it may be 50 to 65 % of eligible .  
so if maybe half are eligible take 60 % of that is ~ 2300.  

Notice the article starts with "nearly 1000" to inflate the number and the political impact drama of this.  Notice too "many are in Southern Black communities".
Well what does 'many' mean.  It could be 10 it could be 100 or 200.......

How many polling places tend to close in a given year across the over 100,000 places?
How many open ?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZuluc2NpHM

Bottom line taken out of context this is worthy of looking at but otherwise means little without additional information.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 15, 2018, 11:55:36 AM

Dems are using it; and the Rep's Senate candidate's current post is GA Sec. St. so there is an inherent inference of self-dealing.

OTOH the Dem candidate, as I posted the other day, is quoted on tape as favoring the vote for aliens, both legal and illegal.
 

Title: Cases about which the Dems and the Left are howling
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2018, 07:12:48 AM

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/republicans-suppressing-black-votes-738059/?fbclid=IwAR2y2T4MtTneIJX6zmmLnxi1IescrCqOuDL6h-aO356-OX2bz3Mj1Siq4vY

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/report-indiana-has-cancelled-the-voter-registrations-of-469-000-voters-gqyBXQkzEk6AIESavuIVpA/?fbclid=IwAR2lygL-cWps8n2zmjb2r3j8GKID36W6GeYMhS3hrOc9I2dSx8IP1ChdwDY

http://motorcitymuckraker.com/2018/10/10/michigans-dirty-secret-tens-thousands-absentee-ballots-trashed-no-oversight/?fbclid=IwAR3HHT3aY5fXUwDoxY4sEtJusQqgbRxi4QTFFA3hh4AUMG7xYkZ-4a8JabI

https://www.democracynow.org/2018/10/16/trump_won_in_16_thanks_to?fbclid=IwAR0BZedlwwTXKhBknptl7gRg4Jj6UtAXFtrTxHvP89iWjyf8yF3K_uhJ76k

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/georgia-voter-suppression-brian-kemp-736817/?fbclid=IwAR1IoeO4liVZhR1jeWP_XsSd2SqKUSf2kBYZnHB4hzUuLkwlpfBK3zt_3Rk

Title: Re: Cases about which the Dems and the Left are howling
Post by: G M on October 17, 2018, 07:19:12 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2018, 07:12:48 AM

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/republicans-suppressing-black-votes-738059/?fbclid=IwAR2y2T4MtTneIJX6zmmLnxi1IescrCqOuDL6h-aO356-OX2bz3Mj1Siq4vY

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintellectualist/news/report-indiana-has-cancelled-the-voter-registrations-of-469-000-voters-gqyBXQkzEk6AIESavuIVpA/?fbclid=IwAR2lygL-cWps8n2zmjb2r3j8GKID36W6GeYMhS3hrOc9I2dSx8IP1ChdwDY

http://motorcitymuckraker.com/2018/10/10/michigans-dirty-secret-tens-thousands-absentee-ballots-trashed-no-oversight/?fbclid=IwAR3HHT3aY5fXUwDoxY4sEtJusQqgbRxi4QTFFA3hh4AUMG7xYkZ-4a8JabI

https://www.democracynow.org/2018/10/16/trump_won_in_16_thanks_to?fbclid=IwAR0BZedlwwTXKhBknptl7gRg4Jj6UtAXFtrTxHvP89iWjyf8yF3K_uhJ76k

Good!

Title: Maryland smears Judicial Watch to hide voter rolls mess
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2018, 12:04:56 PM

   
 
Maryland Implies Judicial Watch Has Ties to Russian Agents in Shameful Effort to Hide Voter Rolls Mess

 

Maryland officials have resorted to desperate measures to avoid giving Judicial Watch voter registration records—as required by federal law—by suggesting Judicial Watch is connected to Russian government agents.

The absurd implication was made in a federal court document involving a lawsuit filed last summer as part of a national Election Integrity Project to clean up voter rolls. Maryland is one of 11 states with more registered voters than citizens of voting age, according to U.S. Census Bureau data examined as part of Judicial Watch’s ongoing investigation.

In notice-of-violation letters Judicial Watch warned it would sue the 11 states if the problems weren’t fixed. In Maryland’s case, there are more registered voters in Montgomery County, the state’s most populous, than citizens over the age of 18. Besides threatening legal action, Judicial Watch’s notice letter to election officials requested access to Montgomery County voter registration lists to evaluate efforts to ensure the accuracy of eligible voter rolls during the past two years.

Section 8(i) of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) authorizes and entitles Judicial Watch to inspect and copy the requested voter lists. Maryland officials refuse to provide them, claiming that state law restricts the release of voter registration information to Maryland registered voters. The NVRA trumps any reservation the state may have and Judicial Watch is confident it will obtain the records.

Nevertheless, Judicial Watch had to sue in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland to gain access to the voter registration lists under federal law, noting that Section 8(i) of the NVRA contains no requirement that only an individual person or a registered voter may request the documents that the statute describes.

Accordingly, Section 8(i) authorizes and entitles Judicial Watch to inspect and copy the requested voter lists. Maryland officials have chosen to dodge the law, refusing to provide the records and stonewalling with outlandish assertions during the pretrial discovery process. In a federal court document filed on behalf of State Administrator of Elections Linda H. Lamone, Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh tries to associate Judicial Watch with Russian government agents.

Here is the excerpt straight from the interrogatory filed in court by Maryland’s attorney general: “Identify any Russian nationals or agents of the Russian government with whom you have communicated concerning this lawsuit, Judicial Watch’s request for a copy of the list of registered voters in Montgomery County, Maryland, the purposes for which you are seeking a copy of the list of registered voters in Montgomery County, Maryland, and/or any broader effort to obtain copies of similar lists from other jurisdictions of which Judicial Watch’s request for a copy of the list of registered voters in Montgomery County, Maryland, is a part.”

This shows that Maryland officials are using a baseless allegation to retaliate against an organization and its supporters because of their conservative political views, a violation of the First Amendment.

This week Judicial Watch responded to the plainly frivolous request as part of the pretrial process. There is not a shred of evidence or allegation in any pleading, document or even news report of any communications or associations between Judicial Watch and Russian nationals or agents of the Russian government.

Maryland officials knew that when they made the egregious request for documents they believed did not exist solely to associate Judicial Watch with an inflammatory, partisan fight making national headlines. This reflects negatively on Lamone and the Maryland State Board of Elections and both should be ashamed. “It’s completely outrageous,” said Robert Popper, director of Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project and a former deputy chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department. “A government agency is taking Democratic talking points to beat someone up for suing them.”

Other states that Judicial Watch is forcing to clean up voter rolls include Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina and Tennessee. In California, Judicial Watch found more registered voters than voting-age citizens in 11 counties, including Imperial (102%), Lassen (102%), Los Angeles (112%), Monterey (104%), San Diego (138%), San Francisco (114%), San Mateo (111%), Santa Cruz (109%), Solano (111%), Stanislaus (102%), and Yolo (110%).

Under Section 8 of the NVRA, states are required to make a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from official lists due to “the death of the registrant” or “a change in the residence of the registrant,” and requires states to ensure noncitizens are not registered to vote. Many states don’t bother conducting reasonable voter registration list maintenance as mandated under the NVRA.

 

Title: Shelby v. Holder
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 17, 2018, 01:09:37 PM

Second post

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-96_6k47.pdf

Title: Dem voter fraud ring in Texas
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 18, 2018, 09:18:47 AM

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/10/17/paid-democratic-voter-fraud-ring-uncovered-texas/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 18, 2018, 10:49:47 PM

Need help finding citations showing whether black participation in voting in the South now equals white participation either from this thread or elsewhere.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 19, 2018, 06:42:53 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 18, 2018, 10:49:47 PM

Need help finding citations showing whether black participation in voting in the South now equals white participation either from this thread or elsewhere.
[/quote

Turn out by year, by state, by race, but does not directly answer your question.
]https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/voting-and-registration/voting-historical-time-series.html

Title: Native American Voting Rights Bill
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2018, 08:33:36 PM

I get the Shelby decision with regard to the South, but I'm not sure that the Dems do not raise a fair question with regard to Native American votes:

https://govtrackinsider.com/native-american-voting-rights-act-would-bolster-protections-for-tribes-in-elections-508379215c06

Title: Gov Brown signs bill allowing some felons to vote in jail
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2018, 09:44:30 PM

https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/09/28/gov-brown-signs-bill-allowing-felons-to-vote-in-jail/?fbclid=IwAR1T8c6Q820SCyRwBACYmt7UAf2RLkSrnfvwSV1S2P1vexxl7HLSnsr6nfY

Title: Georgia: Is Rep candidate, who is also Sec. of State misusing his post?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 21, 2018, 10:56:37 AM

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/10/19/gop-candidate-also-overseeing-georgia-elections-107000-voters-purged-yet-another?fbclid=IwAR0WW9AzHtDW6WQPr8L9CbpZOxzadhW381Yi6knC21oeM26dLgucItTyb90

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/29/voter-suppression-tactics-in-the-age-of-trump?mbid=nl_Daily%20102118&CNDID=50142053&utm_source=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20102118&utm_content=&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=Daily%20102118&spMailingID=14472846&spUserID=MjAxODUyNTc2OTUwS0&spJobID=1501658805&spReportId=MTUwMTY1ODgwNQS2

Title: Re: Georgia: Is Rep candidate, who is also Sec. of State misusing his post?
Post by: G M on October 21, 2018, 06:21:24 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 21, 2018, 10:56:37 AM

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/10/19/gop-candidate-also-overseeing-georgia-elections-107000-voters-purged-yet-another?fbclid=IwAR0WW9AzHtDW6WQPr8L9CbpZOxzadhW381Yi6knC21oeM26dLgucItTyb90

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/29/voter-suppression-tactics-in-the-age-of-trump?mbid=nl_Daily%20102118&CNDID=50142053&utm_source=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20102118&utm_content=&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=Daily%20102118&spMailingID=14472846&spUserID=MjAxODUyNTc2OTUwS0&spJobID=1501658805&spReportId=MTUwMTY1ODgwNQS2

It's tragic to consider all the dead people in GA. being denied their right to vote.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 21, 2018, 08:26:17 PM

Haha, but what about the other points in the article?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on October 22, 2018, 12:04:19 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 21, 2018, 08:26:17 PM

Haha, but what about the other points in the article?

Standard issue leftist propaganda. Every time I buy a firearm, as is my constitutional right to do, I am required to provide a state issued ID and undergo a background check to ensure that there is no reason to deny me my rights.

Title: Re: Gov Brown signs bill allowing some felons to vote in jail
Post by: DougMacG on October 22, 2018, 05:14:26 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2018, 09:44:30 PM

https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/09/28/gov-brown-signs-bill-allowing-felons-to-vote-in-jail/?fbclid=IwAR1T8c6Q820SCyRwBACYmt7UAf2RLkSrnfvwSV1S2P1vexxl7HLSnsr6nfY

One more reason we will never give them more than two Senators but shameless moves like this are designed to accomplish the Leftist takeover of the House.

Who knew they still sent felons to jail?  Maybe these are jailed Republicans.

Title: Vote suppression accusation plays big role in GA election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 24, 2018, 08:36:51 AM

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/412870-five-takeaways-from-heated-georgia-governor-debate

Title: More problems in GA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 25, 2018, 08:51:50 PM

Caveat lector-- Source unknown:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/670-ballots-in-a-precinct-with-276-voters-and-other-tales-from-georgias-primary/ar-BBLBUA4?ocid=spartanntp&fbclid=IwAR1lxzqtMIcci_VR4F7SE427FP3fFlEcfemlrGiy8-5ujmka4qmeIRdeZAA

Title: A trip down memory lane including Voter Fraud Commission
Post by: DougMacG on October 26, 2018, 08:33:00 AM

Where was the outrage here?
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2010/07/20/al-franken-may-have-won-his-senate-seat-through-voter-fraud
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/york-when-1-099-felons-vote-in-race-won-by-312-ballots
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122644940271419147
Without vote fraud, we wouldn't have Obamacare.  Ends justify means if you are Leftist.

Republicans want to end vote fraud.

It's too bad that states like mine refused to cooperate with the federal investigation into vote fraud in the last election.
https://www.federaltimes.com/management/2018/01/04/trump-dissolves-voter-fraud-commission-amid-controversy-and-state-opposition/

Title: Iranian election interference
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 27, 2018, 08:27:48 AM

https://gellerreport.com/2018/10/iran-us-election-interference.html/

Title: Problems with Texas vote machines
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 27, 2018, 03:05:18 PM

second post

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/texas-voters-machine-malfunction/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=AE&utm_campaign=can&utm_content=2018-10-27

Title: 11 year old boy hacks vote machine
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 29, 2018, 08:25:04 AM

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/an-11-year-old-changed-election-results-on-a-replica-florida-state-website-in-under-10-minutes?fbclid=IwAR0VFNlkSf0f7wueglX2hHxGZ-Q961Ibbf0S7KoO7DheaD8mBBwLohUPrZo

Title: Fed court reaffirms Ohio vote law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 29, 2018, 03:03:28 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-victory-federal-district-court-reaffirms-constitutionality-of-ohio-voting-law-denies-end-run-attempt-around-earlier-supreme-court-ruling/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members&utm_content=20181029191725

Title: The Biannual voter suprresion scam
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2018, 09:26:26 AM

https://spectator.org/the-biannual-voter-suppression-scam/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20181031145324

Title: Re: The Biannual voter suprresion scam
Post by: DougMacG on October 31, 2018, 09:55:30 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2018, 09:26:26 AM

https://spectator.org/the-biannual-voter-suppression-scam/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20181031145324

"The Dems need this fiction to camouflage fraud."

Yes.  And they refuse to allow the investigation of fraud, then measure the lack of fraud with the lack of prosecutions.

"A 2013 National Hispanic Survey study asked a sample of 800 likely Hispanic voters if they were American citizens. 13 percent admitted they were not."
"In 2014, a study ...estimated that approximately 6.4 percent of noncitizens voted In the 2008 presidential election."
"80 percent of noncitizens who appeared to have voted cast their ballots in favor of one party. "
"Nate Silver calculated that states with newly implemented voter ID laws will experience turnout decrease by as much as 2.4 percent of the registered voter population."
https://fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-us-elections

During this brief period that the Left is not in power maybe we could enforce the laws of the land.

Title: Touch screen voting machines
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 01, 2018, 01:17:05 PM

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-voting-machine-errors-reflect-a-wider-crisis-for-american-democracy?mbid=nl_Daily%20110118&CNDID=50142053&utm_source=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20110118&utm_content=&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=Daily%20110118&hasha=52f016547a40edbdd6de69b8a7728bbf&hashb=e02b3c0e6e0f3888e0288d6e52a57eccde1bfd75&spMailingID=14543575&spUserID=MjAxODUyNTc2OTUwS0&spJobID=1520071849&spReportId=MTUyMDA3MTg0OQS2

Title: Los Angeles cuts number of polling places
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2018, 06:39:36 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/los-angeles-to-cut-75-of-polling-places-for-2020-election-vote-suppression/

Title: Who could be behind this
Post by: ccp on November 02, 2018, 06:39:51 AM

in 90% Black Washington DC ?

Why don't we just let everyone in the world vote for our elections and get it over with ?

We are being destroyed from within......:

Washington, DC, could let 16-year-olds vote for president
Associated Press   Associated Press•November 2, 2018
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Washington, D.C., City Council is preparing to vote on a bill to lower the voting age to 16 for all elections, both local and federal.

WTOP-FM reports the bill won 3-0 approval in the Judiciary and Public Safety committee Thursday and will get a final vote before the full council this month.

The 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees citizens 18 and older the right to vote, but scholars have said it doesn't prevent a state, or in this case, the nation's capital, from setting a lower age.

Council member Charles Allen says his bill will "enfranchise the District's young people and bring their voices into the political process."

Title: New Voter Fraud Cases
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2018, 06:41:18 AM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/10/31/new-voter-fraud-cases-show-need-to-secure-our-elections/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTUdOaE1qQmlOR0kyWW1JeiIsInQiOiJDRHJyc0F0aHhOcE9TVVhcLzR4bDN2WXpFcHdvN2VZUU90R3Z0SnJyRkFcLyt0TFwvUFhKQ29JOGwxM3UyOXFxRWJoT2ZxcVlGU2tqTlwvcVJlNXpmUjNHU295MWpWOFJxKzgyblF0MjA1cDBTTWxuSDF2Sk8zb1lvR1YrYUQwWEJEVlEifQ%3D%3D

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 02, 2018, 07:17:26 AM

from post above


will not see this on the fake MSM

GEe wonder why most in the nation do see MSM  as dishonest and fake .  We ain't just responding to Trump.  We have been living and breathing their propaganda since the 90's

just now we are with Trump standing up to them and sticking it back in  their faces.

Title: 8th Circuit rules against Native Americans in ND
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2018, 01:17:28 PM

This does not sit well with me , , ,

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/federal-judge-lets-north-dakota-republicans-block-native-americans-from-voting.html?fbclid=IwAR2MFWSioINodPnNmo9zeMs30swxNnpcphKSF-Xh1G0l6nihI6IWcAA-8Pk

Title: Re: 8th Circuit rules against Native Americans in ND
Post by: G M on November 04, 2018, 01:21:48 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2018, 01:17:28 PM

This does not sit well with me , , ,

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/federal-judge-lets-north-dakota-republicans-block-native-americans-from-voting.html?fbclid=IwAR2MFWSioINodPnNmo9zeMs30swxNnpcphKSF-Xh1G0l6nihI6IWcAA-8Pk

It could have been fixed by the tribes long ago. As sovereign nations, they can choose to set up an address system, or not.

Title: over a million new democrat voters in Florida
Post by: ccp on November 06, 2018, 11:47:25 PM

This will make Florida a blue state now.

Florida voters during Tuesday’s midterm elections approved Amendment 4, automatically restoring voting rights in the state for people previously convicted of felonies.

Florida’s Amendment 4 restores voting rights for people in the state convicted of felonies as long as they have completed their sentences, although anyone convicted of murder or felony sex offenses would be excluded.

Based on the Sentencing Project’s 2016 estimates, this benefits more than a million people. The organization estimated in 2016 that nearly 1.5 million people in Florida have completed felony sentences but can’t vote — about 9.2 percent of the voting-age population in Florida. The total, though, includes some people convicted of murder and felony sex offenses, so not every one of those people benefits under Amendment 4.

Title: Recount in Florida
Post by: ccp on November 07, 2018, 04:22:31 PM

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/uh-oh-florida-senate-race-heads-to-a-recount/

we know what this means

just think if felons could already vote
Fla gov and senator would be democratic already

Title: Democrats again trying to commit fraud in Broward County
Post by: ccp on November 08, 2018, 01:34:36 PM

https://www.conservativereview.com/news/desantis-and-gillum-head-to-a-recount-rubio-blasts-broward-election-officials/

Title: 4th Circuit rules on Maryland gerrymander
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 08, 2018, 09:30:14 PM

https://www.speroforum.com/a/XLHXCLYFQU9/84255-Federal-court-rules-Democrats-unconstitutionally-redrew-Congressional-district-lines?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MRVQAHIDTV55&utm_content=XLHXCLYFQU9&utm_source=news&utm_term=Federal+court+rules+Democrats+unconstitutionally+redrew+Congressional+district+lines#.W-UbKeJRfcs

Title: Texas: What will Gringo O'Rourke have to say about this?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 08, 2018, 09:33:59 PM

second post

https://www.speroforum.com/a/VQTHWPBDEC38/84246-Project-Veritas-exposes-illegal-immigrants-voting-in-Texas?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MRVQAHIDTV55&utm_content=VQTHWPBDEC38&utm_source=news&utm_term=Project+Veritas+exposes+illegal+immigrants+voting+in+Texas#.W-Ubx-JRfcs

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 09, 2018, 04:36:19 AM

Orouke would say what every Dem says, "oh but there is no PROOF"
and fraud is extremely rare .

the fraud is  really bad but no surprise or anything new
there is fraud going on all over
now votes are found in Az and Fl and ALWAYS in favor of the Democrats.
They are stealing elections again and we on the right always seem powerless to stop it.

Florida is about to turn Dem with the ex felons voting
We have lost in my opinion.
I really don't want to live under these people .   

Title: maybe on bright spot in Utah
Post by: ccp on November 09, 2018, 05:07:55 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/uncounted-ballots-could-flip-utah-163251442.html

Title: Skullduggery in Florida?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 09, 2018, 08:27:32 AM

That is good news.  I donated twice to Mia.

========================================

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/woman-overseeing-broward-vote-count-illegally-destroyed-ballots-in-previous-race/


https://www.dailywire.com/news/38153/breaking-voter-fraud-allegedly-found-deep-blue-ryan-saavedra?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=110918-news&utm_campaign=position1&fbclid=IwAR2GxbNiBZwAGfL_6aT5pK6vDaJjuXONGmTDem199ZDgQ-YbMvoa3i9Mwu0

https://www.dailywire.com/news/38157/watch-rubio-shares-video-allegedly-showing-ballots-ryan-saavedra?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=110918-news&utm_campaign=position5&fbclid=IwAR0fr3cCuOtYAB247tpYxEp4ncn0pX4XxkXTsY-n3yMEhpT9FiWRO_mgpqM

Title: John Adams on Elections, 1797
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 09, 2018, 09:15:53 AM

second post

"We should be unfaithful to ourselves if we should ever lose sight of the danger to our liberties if anything partial or extraneous should infect the purity of our free, fair, virtuous, and independent elections." —John Adams (1797)

Title: Florida: Voting early and often; Georgia on our mind
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 11, 2018, 01:26:49 PM

https://www.dailywire.com/news/38153/breaking-voter-fraud-allegedly-found-deep-blue-ryan-saavedra?utm_medium=email&utm_content=111118-news&utm_campaign=position1

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/bombshell-fulton-county-numbers-show-massive-duplicate-ballots-rejected-ballots-non-citizens-trying-to-vote/

Title: 3012 Florida
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 11, 2018, 08:35:50 PM

https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Nearly-200000-Florida-Voters-May-Not-Be-Citizens-151212725.html?fbclid=IwAR0VeiLgKJoBRJ4MNRV9DuMvLvwWUEd84GOuoWXrHYgNJYzvQoeO0Q1zf5U

Title: I am sick of this
Post by: ccp on November 14, 2018, 07:21:07 AM

another liberal Jew and Obama appointed judge again rules in favor of their beloved Democrat Party

https://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-govt--politics/abrams-gains-ground-judges-order-more-georgia-votes-counted/ihrrRsVNW9mpJpcMODLWwJ/

Title: Dems magically appear thousands of votes after the fact in NM
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 14, 2018, 07:37:56 PM

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/thousands-of-provisional-and-absentee-ballots-found-in-new-mexico-democrat-leads-republican/

Title: NO fraud NO fraud NO fraud NO proof No proof
Post by: ccp on November 15, 2018, 03:49:34 PM

Where is the fraud.

I don't suppose the judge they were expecting to rubber stamp altered ballots was an obamster appointed  judge !!!
And no collusion
I would have loved to see then get a Obama judge on this fraud

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/15/report-florida-democrats-urged-voters-to-submit-absentee-ballots-after-election-day-using-altered-forms/

Title: my two cents
Post by: ccp on November 15, 2018, 04:04:39 PM

It is like me being told there is no proof we have never been robbed

well when you are being stalked by true professional white collar criminals they take no chances , they paln everything ahead of time , always have their excuses ready and are very patient.  In our case they have made so much money off the intellectrual property they have no problems waiting for years for the right opportunity , such as waiting for the "insider " just simply take stuff out of our house.

A contractor a relative a "friend" slip into the house when no one is home .
If florida have neighbors all in on it and paid off

So with something like elections the legal eagles know the ropse
most election committees are crats and especially if Dem controlled district it is planned from top to bottom

so kudos to Pam Biondi for taking the time man power to uncover the sleaze.  May this be lesson to the navie who think this stuff does not happen.

I am not holding my breath but I can only hope people will be going to jail
Lock up snpies

Title: Pa;m Beach Skullduggery; identical mail in ballots in CA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 15, 2018, 05:01:30 PM

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/palm-beach-ballot-processing-hidden-from-election-observers-for-hours/

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/photo-four-identical-mail-in-ballots-pictured-in-california/

Title: WSJ: The Gerrymander Excuse
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2018, 12:41:32 PM

The Gerrymander Excuse Implodes
Democrats’ total vote share roughly matches their House majority.
325 Comments
By The Editorial Board
Nov. 16, 2018 7:01 p.m. ET
People react after Democrats gained control of the House of Representatives during the 2018 midterm election results at the Hyatt Regency, Washington, D.C., Nov. 6.
People react after Democrats gained control of the House of Representatives during the 2018 midterm election results at the Hyatt Regency, Washington, D.C., Nov. 6. Photo: Zach Gibson/Getty Images

Elections have a way of blowing up partisan conceits—see what happened to the Democratic Party’s Electoral College “lock” in 2016. This year Democrats busted one of their own cherished myths by proving that Republican gerrymanders weren’t preventing them from retaking the House of Representatives. There’s a lesson here for voters and judges.

State legislatures have been drawing congressional boundaries to favor one party or another since America’s founding. During the 40 years of sustained Democratic control of the House in the late 20th century, this worked in the Democrats’ favor. As political scientist Matt Grossmann has shown, Democrats sometimes enjoyed congressional majorities nearly 10 percentage points larger than their share of the House popular vote.
Potomac Watch Podcast
Florida Election Recounts; Amazon Agonistes

Then came the Republican romp of 2010, followed by the Census and the regular 10-year redistricting to reflect population ebb and flow across the U.S. The new GOP majorities in several states drew districts that increased their representation in the House, as Democrats also did where they had a partisan advantage.

For many commentators the post-2010 redistricting created a crisis of democracy by supposedly locking Democrats out of power. Days before the 2018 election the New York Times’ David Leonhardt cited Republican gerrymandering as evidence that the U.S. could “slide toward Hungarian autocracy.”

Well, so much for that. Democrats last week made their largest gain in House seats since 1974 and appear to be closing in on a 233-seat House majority with several races still not called. This means Democrats will hold about 53.6% of seats—a 7.1% edge. And, what do you know, Democratic House candidates nationwide have 52.8% of votes—7.3% more than Republicans, according to the latest Cook Political Report tally.

More telling is that the Democrats’ popular vote edge is inflated by more than three dozen districts nationwide that had no Republican candidate on the ballot. By contrast, only a few GOP candidates were running unchallenged. Democrats will likely be better represented in the House than they would be if House membership were chosen by a nationwide generic ballot.

Liberals are still complaining that redistricting may have limited Democratic gains this year in states like North Carolina and Ohio because Democrats’ statewide vote share is greater than their share of representatives. But in states like New Jersey (which will have one GOP Congressman out of 12) and California, Republicans are wildly underrepresented by that same standard. The biggest Democratic problem in the House is geography because far more of their voters are concentrated in cities. But that was less of a liability this year as the suburbs turned more Democratic.

None of this should be surprising. Even a cleverly partisan gerrymander contains the seeds of its own undoing as political coalitions change. A district’s partisanship shifts by election based on public mood, changing demographics and the issues debated.

Legislatures looking to protect Republican seats in 2011 drew very different boundaries than would be necessary today. In 2011 Republican Rep. Pete Sessions’ district in Texas was extended east into the suburbs of Garland that were thought to be comfortably Republican. This year Mr. Sessions lost.

The other gerrymandering story from last Tuesday is the success of campaigns in Colorado, Michigan and Missouri (one in Utah is too close to call) to take redistricting power away from the political branches with the aim of creating a less partisan process.

Voters have every right to do this, but “independent” line-drawing may be no less polarizing or unfair. These states may simply be turning political choices over to less accountable authorities with their own partisan biases. The New Jersey congressional and state legislative maps are no less favorable to Democrats because they were designed by a supposedly independent commission.

All of this reinforces the argument that judges should keep out of fights over partisan gerrymanders. They would inevitably favor one party over another and cause more Americans to question judicial independence.

That’s what happened this year in Pennsylvania, where the Democratic majority on the state Supreme Court rewrote the state GOP majority’s 2011 congressional map and helped Democrats flip four seats statewide. The U.S. Supreme Court can use the evidence of 2018 as reason to end its flirtation with ruling on partisan maps—and let the parties fight it out in elections as usual.

Appeared in the November 17, 2018, print edition.

Title: Orange County and the magical mystery ballots
Post by: G M on November 19, 2018, 12:59:47 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/11/all-of-orange-county-turns-blue-after-democrats-find-thousands-of-votes-post-election-day/

Why not? There will not be an investigation, much less consequences for this.


"It doesn't matter who votes. It matter who counts the votes." - Josef Stalin

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 19, 2018, 05:08:50 AM

Why can we not catch them scurrying around gathering votes after the election?  It is plainly obvious they are doing this.

There is no way to determine how many people voted who were not qualified .  We know many did .

Could we simply follow their election people around and see what they are doing?

Or we need to infiltrate with spies .   Too hard to do.  and also we work at jobs .  ........

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 19, 2018, 06:08:12 AM

Quote from: ccp on November 19, 2018, 05:08:50 AM

Why can we not catch them scurrying around gathering votes after the election?  It is plainly obvious they are doing this.
There is no way to determine how many people voted who were not qualified .  We know many did .
Could we simply follow their election people around and see what they are doing?
Or we need to infiltrate with spies .   Too hard to do.  and also we work at jobs .  ........

There should be cameras everywhere that a citizen's ballot can go.  If someone left an office blank, it should stay blank, not get marked.  If a mark is illegible, unclear, it needs to stay that way and not have its "intentions" read.

Thank God the Florida races ended without a fraud caused outcome.  I don't understand what the legitimate beef of the Dems is in the Georgia race.  If Republicans cheated they should be prosecuted.  If people are falsely being accused of felonies, that should have consequences too.

Last cycle the states did not cooperate with the Feds on voter fraud investigation and it stopped.  Someone needs to investigate all votes in all states.  You are eligible to vote or you are not.  Again, a camera placed where the people sign in with footage saved for the entire statute of limitations.  We need enough prosecutions to stop illegal voting, not just denial.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 19, 2018, 06:15:15 AM

"Again, a camera placed where the people sign in with footage saved for the entire statute of limitations.  We need enough prosecutions to stop illegal voting, not just denial."

aren't some of these ballots mail ins?
or other written ballots that may not really be amenable to cameras ?

I don't know?

bags of ballots found in closets or trunks of cars parked in airports.  What a joke.
I notice Scott picked up 900 votes when the machine count was redone.

So do they somehow undercount machine votes and make up written ones ? 
I don't know but it is obviously not just error or incompetence. 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 19, 2018, 07:24:06 AM

"I don't understand what the legitimate beef of the Dems is in the Georgia race."

a) The Rep candidate was also the Secretary of State i.e. in charge of running the election.  Most certainly a fair point to wonder about conflict of interest!

b) In that capacity the accusation is that he shut down numerous polling places in Dem majority areas;

c) In that capacity the argument is that he unfairly disqualified large numbers of people for minor variances e.g. my name is "Marc F. Denny" but my voter registration says "Marc Denny".

Title: Beware this is a Leftist rag
Post by: ccp on November 19, 2018, 07:38:24 AM

https://www.thedailybeast.com/republicans-have-a-secret-weapon-in-the-midterms-voter-suppression

it is obvious to them voter "suppression " is  occuring  ( there may be validity to this - I don't know)
yet it is not obvious the Dems are finding names to put on ballots after the fact.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 19, 2018, 07:53:02 AM

Thanks for the great response to my question.

"In that capacity the argument is that he unfairly disqualified large numbers of people for minor variances [middle initial, no middle initial]"

IF TRUE, I side with the Dems on that.  Real, eligible voters should not be turned away for minor variations that are not in error. There is plenty of real fraud to focus on.

This sounds like an argument for voter ID.  I go by my middle name but I'm registered with first, middle, last.  Any questions, I can show proof just as I would to drive a car or get on an airplane. 

"In that capacity the accusation is that he shut down numerous polling places in Dem majority areas"

I must admit that living 32 years in a small town of 1500 in a metro area of 3.4 million I go to City Hall at the usual time and don't have to when or where to vote.

Sounds to me like an argument for local control (and local funding) of local decisions.  The Secretary of State and legislature should dictate how to run the election, not where.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 19, 2018, 07:54:19 AM

Putting aside the flagrant stupidity in the article of saying that law breakers should get to be law makers and that it is voter suppression to say otherwise, it is incumbent upon our integrity here to consider the possibility that some Reps are capable of skullduggery-- although it could be argued that Rep skullduggery is done legally and Dem skullduggery is done illegally.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 19, 2018, 08:10:09 AM

Quote from: ccp on November 19, 2018, 06:15:15 AM

"Again, a camera placed where the people sign in with footage saved for the entire statute of limitations.  We need enough prosecutions to stop illegal voting, not just denial."

aren't some of these ballots mail ins?
or other written ballots that may not really be amenable to cameras ?
...

I can't imagine they wouldn't have cameras in the room over the table where the mail-in ballots are opened.  If they don't, they should.  And treat the camera records as carefully as ballots or evidence for a trial.  That would cost about ten cents in the larger scheme of things.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, Georgia 2018, Kemp, Abrams, Record Turnout
Post by: DougMacG on November 20, 2018, 12:27:33 PM

A contrary indicator to the charge that large numbers of legal voters were blocked from voting is that this election set a record for Georgia turnout.

If only one side was allowed to vote I would expect half the turnout.  Instead they voted in record numbers across the state. 

When record turnout happens under Democrat governance they give credit to the Secretary of State.

https://patch.com/georgia/atlanta/kemp-abrams-tied-nations-most-watched-governors-race

Title: CA's Orange County, % of foreign born issues
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2018, 12:49:29 PM

Its Breitbart, so read with care but this seems on target:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2018/11/18/orange-county-immigration-midterms-blue/?fbclid=IwAR0MUyjF7JtO3gA0r1Cn41tHcJiQIoslP4oiCRdkFOZg2x8K67RgAll2jVo&utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20181120204707

Title: The Truth about the Georgia GA governor election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2018, 12:57:32 PM

second post

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/brian-kemp-did-not-steal-georgia-governor-race/

Title: Good to see the prosecution
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2018, 04:06:52 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/skid-row-voter-fraud-prosecutors-say-homeless-offered-cash-cigarettes-in-exchange-for-hundreds-of-signatures/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 21, 2018, 07:59:14 AM

yes it is good to see prosecution

I notice left out of this article is which party or candidates the fraudsters were working for.
Let me guess - Democrats

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/california-political-review/

This is center right political news org

no wonder they print this  unlike fake news media which will NEVER point this out - the dirtballs .

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, not a new strategy, see Milwaukee 2014
Post by: DougMacG on November 21, 2018, 08:21:14 AM

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/oct/28/tucker-carlson/carlson-democrats-use-newports-get-out-homeless-vo/

I don't know why they call them homeless.  More urgently they are out of cigarettes.

[Politifact: Story half wrong because the brand of cigarettes used to bribe homeless was never identified!]

Title: Works for me
Post by: G M on December 01, 2018, 09:04:57 AM

https://i.imgur.com/rSE5yBb.jpg

(https://i.imgur.com/rSE5yBb.jpg)

Title: Morris on how Dems stole 7 Congressional elections in moonbeam's state
Post by: ccp on December 04, 2018, 03:59:56 AM

https://www.westernjournal.com/dick-morris-dems-stole-seven-house-seats-california/

Title: Vote harvesting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 05, 2018, 02:58:08 AM

That is quite insidious.

Chances of it being repealed are essentially zero.

Any basis for a challenge to its constitutionality?

Title: Mississippi vote fraud arrests
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 07, 2018, 12:05:36 PM

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/court-docs-democrats-arrested-for-voter-fraud-and-vote-buying-in-mississippi/

Title: election fraud on Rep side?
Post by: ccp on December 08, 2018, 07:24:40 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-evidence-illegal-activity-emerges-022707852.html

from Huff Post  but wait , I thought election fraud is "exceedingly rare".

In any case this is the first I hear of this from the Repub side

I guess this is illegal in NC

does not seem to be illegal in other states like cauliflornia .
Repubs taking a page from the Dems?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 08, 2018, 09:52:16 AM

We stand here for Truth, wherever it may lead us.

Title: Chicago Machine Alive and Well
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2018, 08:29:58 PM

https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/12/college-student-runs-for-public-office-and-meets-the-corrupt-chicago-machine/?fbclid=IwAR31gWsJgwDrVFR3doCsn99W8hgk-MUPPBSOh3s_dxgypnLCfp7z493qtW8

Title: Election Fraud in Montebello CA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 25, 2018, 06:54:30 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/exclusive-los-angeles-county-district-attorney-reviewing-allegations-of-election-fraud-in-montebello/

Title: The World retains its ability to surprise: FB nails Dem scheme
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 26, 2018, 04:37:05 PM

https://eagleactionreport.com/articles/facebook-suspends-accounts-tied-to-dem-disinformation-scheme-in-alabama-race?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=10915&utm_content=20181227003435

Title: Re: The World retains its ability to surprise: FB nails Dem scheme
Post by: G M on December 26, 2018, 04:40:34 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 26, 2018, 04:37:05 PM

https://eagleactionreport.com/articles/facebook-suspends-accounts-tied-to-dem-disinformation-scheme-in-alabama-race?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=10915&utm_content=20181227003435

FaceHugger is feeling a lot of heat right now, so that would explain it.

Title: Fed court orders removal of 1.5 million voters from Los Angeles rolls
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 04, 2019, 06:26:10 PM

https://www.speroforum.com/a/IRDQHUYZEP28/84511-Federal-court-orders-California-to-remove-15-million-inactive-registered-voters?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=BARMEQZKJO24&utm_content=IRDQHUYZEP28&utm_source=news&utm_term=Federal+court+orders+California+to+remove+15+million+inactive+registered+voters&fbclid=IwAR0IPqCSk8o6fC0C9nD9lZO_GKwGKPK4AXZBVIcyf7U6G7ZXnli4RU1KCI0#.XDAVoc17nct

https://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/jw-v-logan-california-nvra-settlement-08948/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=weekly+update&utm_term=members&utm_content=20190105022448

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 04, 2019, 06:44:09 PM

"California's Democratic elected officials in Los Angeles County ****reluctantly**** agreed to remove more than 1.5 million inactive voters from their voter rolls. "

Of course , this makes it harder to steal elections this way .

OTOH there is no hope a Can can win in LA is there?

maybe it would make a difference state wide

I wonder how many of these voted for Hillary in '16?

And this is only LA .............

Title: Voter ID moving forward in NC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 04, 2019, 11:48:15 PM

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article223216960.html?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20190105074705

Title: you have got to be kidding another bama judge again
Post by: ccp on January 13, 2019, 04:11:56 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2019/01/13/florida-judge-sides-with-brenda-snipes-n2538815

Title: working to get states to actually enforce voter laws (Broward County Florida)
Post by: ccp on January 17, 2019, 05:43:43 AM

by cleaning up the rolls.  Amazing how Dems have used this loophole to steal elections with the miraculous after the poll day finding of votes :

https://townhall.com/columnists/kenblackwell/2019/01/17/does-broward-county-hold-the-key-to-stemming-vote-fraud-n2539153

Title: MLK 3 let make it far easier for Dems to commit voter fraud
Post by: ccp on January 24, 2019, 05:44:11 AM

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/mlk-iii-make-it-as-easy-to-vote-as-anything-including-online-voting-same-day-registration/

what a joke

who is this guy kidding

Title: Re: MLK 3 let make it far easier for Dems to commit voter fraud
Post by: G M on January 24, 2019, 01:28:10 PM

Quote from: ccp on January 24, 2019, 05:44:11 AM

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/mlk-iii-make-it-as-easy-to-vote-as-anything-including-online-voting-same-day-registration/

what a joke

who is this guy kidding

When you can electronically find boxes of missing votes without having to waste all the paper, it's better for the earth!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 26, 2019, 09:05:33 AM

https://pjmedia.com/election/get-ready-california-style-elections-are-coming-to-your-state/?utm_source=PJMCoffeeBreak&utm_medium=email&utm_term=January2019


Get Ready: California-Style Elections Are Coming to Your State
By Ellen Swensen January 25, 2019
chat 31 comments
Beverly Darm, an election clerk at the Sacramento County Registrar of Voters, inspects a mail-in ballot, in Sacramento, Calif. (AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File)

If you thought the 2018 elections in California were a mess, you were right. Dangerous new election laws and lax practices contributed to that mess, and now they want the rest of the nation to suffer the way Californians do.

First, the mess. Election Integrity Project, California (EIPCa), a group of concerned citizens in California, has been documenting problems in the state’s election system for years. We have done the hard, messy work on the ground to catalog the problems.

California election officials and legislators have turned our elections into a free-for-all, with few safeguards, all in the name of “voter access."

Recent initiatives include “top two” primary elections, automatic voter registration, allowing non-citizens to vote in local elections, allowing mail ballots to arrive after Election Day, rejecting voter ID, removing restrictions on who can handle and return mail ballots (aka ballot “harvesting”), same-day registration and voting, allowing voters to “cure” their mail ballot signature mismatches via the honor system and, in 2020, providing all registrants with mail ballots.

These are the election laws that some now want to make a federal mandate nationwide.

In some cases, officials simply ignore election laws intended to safeguard California elections. When EIPCa alerted election officials about widespread non-compliance with the few state laws protecting election integrity, election officials continued to ignore the laws and the legislature simply changed those laws rather than comply.

Adding to the mess, “reform” advocates have sprung new initiatives just before our elections with little testing and many technical problems.

Automatic DMV voter registration, known as the state’s New Motor Voter Program, was launched just before the June 2018 primary. It automatically mis-registered 23,000 people, including many ineligible registrants. Not to worry. This effort specifically exempted from prosecution everyone who was ineligible — such as non-citizens — if they “inadvertently” became registered and voted. The problem is that there is no way to reach into the count and remove their votes from the blended tally.
Sponsored

These DMV-generated registration errors were pervasive in California’s November 6, 2018, election. EIPCa observers documented hundreds of angry voters at the polls who found they were re-registered by the DMV as mail voters without their consent. Though registered as mail voters, they did not receive mail ballots, had none to surrender and had to vote provisionally.

This is the chaos that some want as federal law.

Much has been written since the election about how ballot “harvesting” dissolved double-digit leads in several key California House races. What has not been published is that, based on EIPCa observers’ documentation, thousands — possibly hundreds of thousands-- of the state’s mail voters never received their mail ballots, though the counties had announced successful mailings in early October.

Vote by mail is a disaster because it encourages criminal activity in voting, and also puts our elections in the unreliable hands of the United States Postal Service.

Watch Our Trending Videos

Like those whose registrations had been involuntarily altered by the DMV through automatic registration, these voters had no ballots to surrender and were forced to vote provisionally on Election Day, resulting in an unprecedented surge of provisional ballots in many counties. Los Angeles County, for example, had to process about 400,000 provisional ballots compared to 100,000 in the last midterm. They attributed most of the 300,000 ballot increase to mail voters who had no mail ballot to surrender, illustrating the magnitude of the problem.

In addition to flawed election laws, California has chronically lax election practices. Though federal law requires the state to maintain an accurate centralized voter list, California has not been compliant for over 20 years. Since 2010, EIPCa has reported hundreds of thousands of deceased, duplicated, inactive and relocated registrants it has found on the rolls, along with missing names, birthdates, and other required information.

With no voter ID requirement, the risk is that anyone can vote in the name of a deceased, duplicated, or relocated person still on the rolls. EIPCa’s reports were ignored by the counties and the secretary of state until several counties’ bloated lists eventually exceeded the eligible citizen population. EIPCa brought a lawsuit to remedy the problem. A settlement in that case contained a solid first step in removing upwards of 1.5 million ineligible “inactive” registrants, but there is a significant amount of additional work ahead to clean California’s lists.

The effort in Congress to import California’s election system would make it illegal to clean rolls using information about “inactivity” in any way.

Initiatives like same-day registration/voting and automatic DMV registration rely on an accurate state voter list to ensure that registrations are not duplicated. However, EIPCa has shown that the state’s new “VoteCal” system is unable to identify persons already registered in multiple counties or simply registered twice at the same address. That’s how bad it is.

If you think California’s laws and practices cannot affect your state, think again. After a successful 2018 election (some say through the benefit of California’s ballot harvesting and other laws), newly powerful House Democrats’ first legislative act is HR1, an attempt to nationalize the mess that is California. Automatic voter registration with lax oversight of your state’s expanding voter rolls, “seeding” mail ballots to every registrant, and then “harvesting” these ballots may be in your state’s future.

While HR1 is not likely to pass the current Senate, parts of it might. Also, beware: California Secretary of State Alex Padilla is the new chairman of the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State (DASS). Over his four-year term, Padilla sees his work with DASS as an opportunity to encourage other states to pursue policies similar to California because “we think we have the right ideas.”

Citizens across the country need to actively monitor their state legislatures, be on the look-out for California-style election initiatives, and fight to defeat them.

Don’t say we in California didn’t warn you.

 

 

Ellen Swensen is the Chief Analyst for the Election Integrity Project, California, a citizen-funded, nonpartisan 501(c)(3) corporation.

Title: 50,000 + illegals voted in Texas
Post by: ccp on January 26, 2019, 12:06:55 PM

One can imagine how many did in the state Califlower .
Now with Dems controlling the entire state it will be massive and hidden and not one finger lifted to stop it and only corruption and encouragement of it.

And the media yawns:

https://pjmedia.com/trending/texas-says-58000-non-citizens-cast-ballots-in-2018-elections/

Title: New Yorker: How voting machine lobbyists undermine vote process
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 26, 2019, 01:40:35 PM

https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/how-voting-machine-lobbyists-undermine-the-democratic-process?mbid=nl_Daily%20012219&CNDID=50142053&utm_source=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20012219&utm_content=&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=Daily%20012219&hasha=52f016547a40edbdd6de69b8a7728bbf&hashb=e02b3c0e6e0f3888e0288d6e52a57eccde1bfd75&spMailingID=15000144&spUserID=MjAxODUyNTc2OTUwS0&spJobID=1561803483&spReportId=MTU2MTgwMzQ4MwS2

Title: POTH struggles with implications of Texas Sec. of State statement
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 27, 2019, 09:13:43 AM

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/25/us/noncitizens-voting-texas.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 27, 2019, 10:48:26 AM

"  POTH struggles with implications of Texas Sec. of State statement"

This time they don't ignore it. Instead fake news turns this somehow into a *voter suppression* spin.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 27, 2019, 11:46:04 AM

Quote from: ccp on January 27, 2019, 10:48:26 AM

"  POTH struggles with implications of Texas Sec. of State statement"

This time they don't ignore it. Instead fake news turns this somehow into a *voter suppression* spin.

voter (fraud) suppression

Title: Breitbart on H.R. 1
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 29, 2019, 05:14:31 PM

It is Breitbart, so caveat lector

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/28/conservatives-unite-against-h-r-1-ultimate-fantasy-of-the-left/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_content=links&utm_campaign=

The Memo highlights several other features of the bill, including:

    Forces all states to allow all convicted felons to vote.
    Requires all states to allow same-day voter registration, which leads to voter fraud.
    Makes it difficult for a state to discover if a voter is also voting in another state.
    Prevents states from limiting early voting.
    Prevents states from limiting voting by mail.
    Requires all states to provide free mail-in absentee ballots.
    Criminalizes political speech that the government deems “discouraging” to voters who are statistically more likely to vote Democrat.
    Takes redistricting away from elected leaders to give to left-leaning commissions.

Title: 11,000 foreigners registered to vote in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 30, 2019, 06:33:29 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/?_ptid=%7Bjcx%7DH4sIAAAAAAAAAI2RQVODMBCF_0vOTSchAYI3rHVqW1q12GpvgQaIhUAJ0KrjfxcYq9MZD-5pd7997_D2A3C5A1cgKRI6d1_qkQUGoOCxWEtxvOuIgbADEYYEQcwgwV2PDAyzGcVv07n2_Bjr7eoWOgFCkU1MFjIR0CjCxLZDA-9IYHCKOWuNxakQpRQqFL31-Pl-4_lk8TQh5gUdn0RYVzJX_RlmCNE9ckoEUVvGwcTq0GTSLqPUzPeUJq95fqF3wx-xTvKjL7Ii5ZVgU-otRq49WVqOgVpFwvWZgauqrMUAVN9zL176zmbNLG82W2zBL1vzUnJVdSeqTtMBCHlWcBkrfV40Usuegwb-HaABH5sHD59UcMNzNlpdv_8nQFm0ltQeYtMaYsseku5dtRalGwtVtWx3jMDnF9zuT8DVAQAA

Title: Audit finds signs of fraud in NM House race
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 18, 2019, 05:55:32 AM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/02/15/exclusive-audit-finds-signs-of-fraud-in-new-mexico-house-race/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTWpFeVpHSmtNMlV4WldWaiIsInQiOiI3Q0JIQWd3Ymc4VmNCNktPQ2pDbjAzaUZXeDVCR2h4djVZZEVKUXR1QmQrWnk2cVpvQVB1XC94dzhybGFsRFl6anlsQU84a1NERXFBbW1QMDltcFpIdEZmcmJsMmZSb0UxXC9tMzV4eUFjXC81NXRSRisyTjFSQ1FKR0U4N3lqOVg1cCJ9

Title: Eh tu California?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 19, 2019, 07:10:38 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/audit-finds-signs-of-fraud-in-new-mexico-house-race-california-also/

Title: Study: Voter ID does not lead to suppression
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 19, 2019, 10:18:19 AM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2019/02/13/suppression-debunked-study-concludes-voter-id-laws-dont-decrease-voter-turnout-n2541344?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20190219181655

Title: voter ID does not ***suppress*** voting
Post by: ccp on February 19, 2019, 10:29:37 AM

You mean having an ID required to vote does not keep blacks and tans from voting ?


wow
what a shock.

I thought they were too victimized to go to DMV or post office to get an ID like everyone else .

I won't forget the day yrs ago while in the Jersey DMV getting new license for the *third* time because I didn't cross a 't' or dot an  'I'  I was 
finally  told I can get the  id while literally standing to some screaming Eastern European telling DMV people he was some sort of priest in his country and they need to treat him with more respect and he should have no problem getting an ID
and they were falling all over themselves trying to accommodate him after I was simply told to go home bring back more "proof" of who I was live etc,   or simply get lost and have to hear "next" [in line]

I should also add when I left I said something to the officer at the front desk that it seems ID requirements are no more then to annoy the people who are born here and she replied "you got that right!"

Title: Re: voter ID does not ***suppress*** voting
Post by: DougMacG on February 19, 2019, 10:45:22 AM

Leftists saying that blacks (or other races) have a harder time getting valid ID (because of lower IQ?) is racist.  The procedure of getting valid ID in the US is exactly the same for different races.

Just like illegal immigration, their GOAL is vote fraud and they need to be called out on it.

Title: election fraud by NJ Democrats
Post by: ccp on February 22, 2019, 09:37:16 AM

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/431062-new-jersey-senate-passes-bill-that-would-keep-trump-off-2020-ballot

Title: Re: election fraud by NJ Democrats
Post by: DougMacG on February 22, 2019, 02:52:57 PM

Quote from: ccp on February 22, 2019, 09:37:16 AM

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/431062-new-jersey-senate-passes-bill-that-would-keep-trump-off-2020-ballot

1.  It sounds unconstitutional to me.  It prevents NJ residents from particpating in a contested election.
2.  I think Trump can win without NJ.  According to Gallup, NJ is the 38th most conservative state. 
https://news.gallup.com/poll/203204/wyoming-north-dakota-mississippi-conservative.aspx
Only if he already won in a landslide would he win in NJ.
3.  At some point don't all these anti-democratic measures reflect badly on the Dems.  The party of fascism?

Title: Call to ban ballot harvesting nation wide
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 27, 2019, 07:46:25 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/north-carolina-vote-fraud-case-shows-just-why-congress-should-ban-ballot-harvesting-nationwide/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 27, 2019, 08:08:17 AM

Well we don't know if this made the difference in the outcome of the NC election.

Dems love to point this NC example out while denying they do it nationwide every election cycle  for Lord knows how long.
They seem to be able to skirt the law every time with their army of attorneys and local cover ups .

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 27, 2019, 08:26:52 AM

The lack of chain of custody with ballot harvesting is a big point I think AND IT IS ENTIRELY LEGAL HERE IN CALIFORNIA, HENCE THIS ARTICLE'S CALL FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACTION.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 27, 2019, 08:43:50 AM

yes I get it.

agree with federal law but would that apply to only elections for Fed office seekers?

obviously the Dems are gaming the system and we need to close the chance to trick the election results.

Title: Even ACLU opposes Dem bill
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 05, 2019, 03:31:12 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/mar/4/hr-1-democrats-election-reform-bill-unconstitution/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=evening&utm_content=evening&utm_term=evening&bt_ee=hqGlKmuQ6SplrKJpu0tgu5FhFtUFABmHo4SIFCsTLhzSNUEM4VxqTbfl8Rq%2F1lS3&bt_ts=1551825375626

Title: Where is your permit?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 08, 2019, 09:29:31 PM

http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/chris-holbrook/?fbclid=IwAR0gs1G8APf2O0iVV-27IWtGf8-F9Gaq2ODRQXwfhojcI75U4xjPBZe9-6k

Title: Dems vote in favor of illegal alien voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 10, 2019, 03:53:23 PM

https://news.ntd.com/house-democrats-vote-in-favor-of-illegal-immigrant-voting_298610.html?fbclid=IwAR1KVpebgx-qFIYyyRkI_h0ea9jPbKnzDO3a_8bLNrV7lRD03YdpV-Y22MA

Title: Re: Dems vote in favor of illegal alien voting
Post by: G M on March 10, 2019, 04:49:00 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 10, 2019, 03:53:23 PM

https://news.ntd.com/house-democrats-vote-in-favor-of-illegal-immigrant-voting_298610.html?fbclid=IwAR1KVpebgx-qFIYyyRkI_h0ea9jPbKnzDO3a_8bLNrV7lRD03YdpV-Y22MA

Of course they are. It's all part of the plan. That's why we can't have a border.

Title: WSJ on the Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 20, 2019, 08:33:37 AM

Last week we wrote about Democratic ambitions to pack the Supreme Court. This week the Electoral College is on the chopping block as Senator Elizabeth Warren comes out in favor of its abolition, Beto O’Rourke makes sympathetic noises and Colorado’s Democratic Governor signs a bill adding his state to the “National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.” Scrapping the system the U.S. has used to select Presidents since its founding will likely soon be the Democrats’ default position.
Subscribe
Assessing the Democratic Candidates
Assessing the Democratic candidates in the 2020 race.
Targeting the Electoral College
Opinion Live Event

Attend a Talk with Editorial Page Editor Paul Gigot in Washington, D.C. Join WSJ Opinion on Wednesday, April 24, for “Opinion Live: The Supreme Court in an Era of Polarization.” Mr. Gigot hosts a panel of journalists and legal experts to discuss how recent appointments will affect the Court and how the Justices will tackle controversial issues. Book now with WSJ+.

Like the Supreme Court, the Electoral College sometimes frustrates the will of political majorities. That makes it an easy target in this populist age. But while “majority rules” has always been an appealing slogan, it’s an insufficient principle for structuring an electoral system in the U.S.

Presidential elections often do not produce popular majorities. In 2016 neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump won 50%. “Plurality rules” doesn’t have the same ring to it. In the absence of the Electoral College, the winner’s vote share would likely be significantly smaller than is common today. Third-party candidates who can’t realistically win a majority in any state would have a greater incentive to enter the race.

Democrats are upset that Mr. Trump is President with 46% of the vote to Ms. Clinton’s 48%. What if a Republican was elected with a third of the vote in an election featuring five formidable third-party candidates? A free-for-all plebiscite would hurt the system’s legitimacy. The Electoral College helps narrow the field to two serious contenders, as voters decide not to waste their vote on candidates who have no chance to win.

The founders designed the Electoral College to help ensure that states with diverse preferences could cohere under a single federal government. Anyone who thinks this concern is irrelevant today hasn’t been paying attention to the current polarization in American politics. The Electoral College helps check polarization by forcing presidential candidates to campaign in competitive states across the country, instead of spending all their time trying to motivate turnout in populous partisan strongholds.

In a popular-vote contest in 2020, for example, the Democratic candidate might ignore the economically dislocated areas that Mr. Trump won and focus on urban centers along the coasts. Mr. Trump might campaign more in upstate New York or Texas but ignore urban voters.

The Electoral College also contributes to political stability by delegating vote-counting to the states and thus delivering with rare exceptions a faster result. The uncertainty arising from a nationwide recount for President amid myriad regional irregularities—as happened in North Carolina and Florida in 2018—would make Florida 2000 look tame.

The Electoral College abolitionists are unlikely to get a supermajority of three-fourths of states to agree to pass a constitutional amendment. The greater danger is the popular vote compact that Colorado has joined, which requires signatories to ignore their voters and grant their electoral votes to the national popular vote winner. It goes into effect once states representing 270 electoral votes have signed. If the governors of New Mexico and Delaware sign their states’ bills as expected, then 14 states and the District of Columbia with 189 votes will have signed up. A Democratic sweep at the state level could one day get to 270.

The pact is likely unconstitutional. But if it succeeded it would inject more corrosive uncertainty into American elections in pursuit of a hyper-populist system that goes against the structure of the Constitution that has protected liberty for 230 years.

Title: Federalist on the Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 20, 2019, 08:48:27 AM

second post

http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/16/the-electoral-college-still-makes-sense-because-were-not-a-democracy/?fbclid=IwAR0LyHN-IROvUb6d0QzCiL9GHiXRj7iiLNkAzhWMn1I3f6zz2dapT6Dojiw

Title: Re: Federalist on the Electoral College
Post by: DougMacG on March 21, 2019, 09:08:17 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 20, 2019, 08:48:27 AM

http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/16/the-electoral-college-still-makes-sense-because-were-not-a-democracy/?fbclid=IwAR0LyHN-IROvUb6d0QzCiL9GHiXRj7iiLNkAzhWMn1I3f6zz2dapT6Dojiw

Great article.

Trump won 304 electoral votes in an electoral vote contest.  The Democrat HRC won some other contest, the combined, popular vote.  As Elizabeth Warren says to successful entrepreneurs, good for her.  Trump won the states 30-20.  Trump won the counties 2,626 to 487.  Instead of adjusting their policies and message to appeal to people of different interests in different parts of the country as the Founders intended and require, Dems can only think to change the rules to win.

Some states are saying something other than the choice made in their state should determine their electoral vote.  This is unconstitutional.

South Dakota is the 37th most liberal state in the union.  Leftist constitutional amendments like this one will be ratified when the people of South Dakota want to give up all 3 of their electoral votes to NY and California, which is never.  This is why the Left keeps going outside the constitution and outside the amendment process to change the rules.

The Dems are doing exactly what the Founders feared, warned and acted to prevent.  WE DON'T WANT TYRANNY BY THE MAJORITY or by anyone else. “Pure democracy” is just another phrase for “mob rule.” Only the constitution can stop them.  [It's time to start confirming more judges!]

"[Electoral college abolished] equates to the World Series Champions being determined by total number of runs scored."

No one proposes to do baseball that way.  In baseball, the outcome of each game matters.  In Presidential contests, the races in each state matter. 

"The purpose of the Electoral College is to balance voting power across states so no one region of the country can gain too much control."

It still accomplishes that brilliantly. 

Democrats used to love the electoral college (about a minute ago).  They had a pet name for it - they called in their great "Blue Wall".  Their strength in heavily populated states made what was left a needle threading challenge for a Republican to win. 

Now Democrats are the tyranny that the electoral college is designed to stop.  They refuse to consider broadening the appeal of their message or even to hide their hate of the heartland.

Title: CNN caught fibbing about Madison and the Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2019, 04:50:37 PM

https://theresurgent.com/2019/03/20/dear-cnn-and-john-avlon-you-got-this-wrong-and-need-to-correct-it/

Title: WSJ: Gerrymander is a political question
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 25, 2019, 10:27:38 PM

A Gerrymander Mulligan
The Supreme Court should keep judges out of political redistricting.
By The Editorial Board
March 25, 2019 11:35 a.m. ET


The Supreme Court punted last term on the constitutionality of political gerrymanders, but lower courts have run the ball back up the field. Justices will get another two downs on Tuesday, and let’s hope they resolve to leave the issue to the political branches and voters to decide.


Political gerrymanders are older than the republic, and so are the criticisms. Democracy suffers when politicians choose their voters. But judges undermine the Constitution’s ordered liberty when they wade into what Felix Frankfurter called this “political thicket,” and courts have repeatedly failed to discern a manageable standard for reviewing political gerrymanders. The challenges that the Supreme Court will hear to Congressional maps in North Carolina and Maryland again show that none exists.

In Rucho v. Common Cause, the Court will consider a map drawn by North Carolina’s GOP Legislature that a three-judge panel last year blocked for elections after the November 2018 midterms. Liberal groups complain that Democrats control only three of the state’s 13 Congressional districts though they are a plurality of registered voters.

The current controversy stems in part from the judiciary’s earlier redistricting meddling. The GOP legislature redrew the map after a district court in 2016 struck down its prior map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. Republicans then ignored race and prioritized maintaining their majority while ensuring districts adhered to traditional redistricting principles such as compactness and continuity.

Despite some oddly-shaped districts, the jigsaw map divides fewer counties and precincts than those Democrats drew in the 1990s and 2000s. Nonetheless, the lower court ruled that the map discriminated against Democrats by diluting their votes in some districts.

The judges claimed the map’s GOP bias was more “extreme” than 99% of alternatives simulated by plaintiffs’ experts using ostensibly neutral criteria. But as Justice Anthony Kennedy observed in 2004, “race is an impermissible classification. Politics is another.” The Court has long held that politics is intrinsic to redistricting, and neither partisan affiliation nor preferences are fixed.

Case in point: North Carolina’s 9th Congressional district was supposedly safe for Republicans but last year was among the most closely contested in the country. Or consider Wisconsin’s legislative maps, which have also been challenged. A majority of voters cast ballots for GOP candidates and Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin in 18 state Assembly districts. Candidates matter.

Twenty-one (mostly Democratic) states assert in an amicus brief that the Court should adopt a standard that requires “proof of both invidious intent and a partisan-entrenching result that cannot be explained by neutral considerations.” They argue that only the most “extreme maps” like North Carolina’s should be struck down.

Judges will presumably know invidious intent when they see it based on statistical measures they would define. This would create even more confusion than the Court’s muddled guidance on racial gerrymanders when at least the voter classification is clearly defined. In political gerrymanders, is the right measure partisan affiliation, historical voting or some combination of both?
***

The Republican challenge to Maryland’s 6th Congressional district is no more clarifying. After the 2010 reapportionment, the Democratic Legislature lopped off 66,000 Republicans from the district while adding 24,000 Democrats, which GOP plaintiffs claim violated their First Amendment speech and associational rights.

Last term the Justices declined to issue a preliminary injunction because the map had been used for three general elections and thus was unlikely to cause the GOP plaintiffs “irreparable harm.” But they are reviewing the map again after it was struck down last fall by a three-judge panel of two liberals and one conservative.

The GOP plaintiffs in Benisek v. Lamone say the Democratic Legislature engaged in impermissible retaliation when drawing maps. But any political group can make this claim if their votes are diluted under a new map, even one like Maryland’s that was upheld by a voter referendum. Any judicial remedy that seeks to vindicate the rights of one group could impair those of another.

In any case, it’s far from clear that Republicans are at a permanent disadvantage. Former Democratic Rep. John Delaney won the district by 21 points in 2012 but 1.5 points in 2014 when GOP Gov. Larry Hogan carried it by 14—more evidence that candidates matter in addition to partisan affiliation.

Some progressives support the Republican challenge in Maryland because they know that liberal judges will be more inclined to intervene in redistricting disputes. Thus, many more GOP-drawn maps are likely to be struck down than Democratic ones.

Political gerrymander challenges are proliferating as parties seek to use the courts to overturn electoral decisions, and the Court needs to call a stop. Letting judges mediate what are essentially political disputes will prove more corrosive to democracy—and to the judiciary’s independence—than any partisan gerrymander.

Title: Delaware goes against Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 30, 2019, 02:51:29 PM

https://www.theblaze.com/election/delware-national-popular-vote?utm_content=buffer5f58c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=theblaze&fbclid=IwAR31qf79drZqdxH1KpL6EXRh8haABszii6qE1zs9I8THhL43HcbZjbJuGxs

Title: all the crat states
Post by: ccp on April 04, 2019, 05:38:23 PM

working to game the electoral college :

https://www.westernjournal.com/popular-vote-compact-adds-new-mexico-now-189-electoral-votes/

Title: Re: all the crat states
Post by: DougMacG on April 04, 2019, 09:32:28 PM

Quote from: ccp on April 04, 2019, 05:38:23 PM

working to game the electoral college :

https://www.westernjournal.com/popular-vote-compact-adds-new-mexico-now-189-electoral-votes/

Ends justify means.   What if Trump wins the popular vote and not NM, and that puts him over the top?

Title: The Swiss case of the foibles of internet voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 15, 2019, 02:30:31 PM

https://boingboing.net/2019/03/13/principal-agent-problems.html

Title: ballot harvesting - another Democrat voting scam.
Post by: ccp on April 26, 2019, 06:30:19 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/04/26/blue-state-blues-republicans-cannot-win-if-ballot-harvesting-remains-legal/

Title: what a surprise
Post by: ccp on April 28, 2019, 05:50:42 AM

we do voting electronically and low and behold - we should all "lose sleep" worrying about hacking into our voting system .

of course only Russians are smart or motivated to do this.
not democrats:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/26/us/florida-russia-hacking-election.html

of all the stupid shit.
We really did not have a voting problem in Florida with hand ballots except for the corrupt crats of Broward and Dade counties
who were holding up election results while scouring the landscape for "lost " ballots to suddenly appear.

I don 't know if a Soros funded group doing the electronic voting is also in Florida
Same group approaching all the felons getting to register as crats?

I lose more sleep over that manipulation of our elections.

Title: Sen. Lindsey Graham says Russkis up to it again
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 28, 2019, 08:49:06 AM

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/441039-graham-says-russians-up-to-it-again-with-election-interference-we

Title: Texas
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 04, 2019, 08:26:46 AM

Read with precision

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/04/26/texas-voting-rights-groups-win-settlement-secretary-of-state/?fbclid=IwAR0GPYHdirwCZwcnqMc-AXm7cvIBGH4ZerY2YMG5O9vqW4cW70DM-pvhvC8

Title: From above link in CDs post about Texas voting registration
Post by: ccp on May 04, 2019, 10:11:40 AM

****Three months after first questioning the citizenship status of almost 100,000 registered voters,****

then farther down:

****A top election official in the secretary of state’s office later acknowledged that his office had overstated the number of flagged voters by about 25,000 names because of the mistake****

Correct me if I am wrong :

100,000 minus 25,000 = 75,000.  Thus they found 75 thousand names on voter registrations of non citizens.

Why does this article not mention this outright?
  Why does this not "disenfranchise"  ( the Lefts favorite word)  people who vote legally.   

what about the Ohio gerrymandering win for the crass?  in the news past few days:
https://www.cleveland.com/open/2019/05/ohio-congressional-democrats-pleased-by-gerrymandering-decision-republicans-quiet.html

Title: Reconsidering Bush v. Gore
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 21, 2019, 06:26:57 AM

Reconsidering Bush v. Gore
The Florida Supreme Court was wrong, but so was the U.S. Supreme Court.
By Gary Rosen
Updated Nov. 7, 2001 11:59 p.m. ET

Indignation toward the Supreme Court has been a defining feature of American conservatism since at least the early 1960s, when Chief Justice Earl Warren and his like-minded brethren launched the judicial "rights revolution" that has continued, more or less unabated, up to our own day. With each expansive new ruling over the years--on obscenity, school prayer, the death penalty, busing, abortion and a host of equally inflammatory issues--conservatives have found fresh evidence of the justices' disdain not only for the limits of their own office but, more gallingly, for the views of the American people and their elected representatives. In a controversial 1996 symposium, the religious journal First Things went so far as to wonder whether this "judicial usurpation of politics" should be seen as the "end" of American democracy.

Where this question stands now, in the wake of the extraordinary events that brought the 2000 presidential election to a close, is unclear. Judging by the many books published in the past year--and especially in the past several months--on the legal aspects of the dispute over the Florida vote, the right is hardly alone any longer in entertaining serious doubts about the role that the courts play in our democracy, nor is the left alone in discounting such concerns.

To be sure, as matters unfolded in Florida after the vote a year ago today, conservatives--or, to be more precise, the supporters of George W. Bush--saw their longstanding fears about the imperial judiciary confirmed yet again. In a series of remarkably freewheeling decisions, the Florida Supreme Court, invoking the "will of the people" to trump what it called "a hyper-technical reliance upon statutory provisions," allowed or ordered manual recounts that were seemingly designed to give Al Gore every opportunity to overtake the slim official lead of his Republican rival. James Baker, Mr. Bush's chief spokesman in Florida, called it "a sad day for America and the Constitution when a court decides the outcome of an election." For the conservative Weekly Standard, the Florida justices had become, as the magazine's cover declared, "Our Robed Masters."

But within a matter of days the entire situation had been turned on its head, both politically and ideologically. In short order, the five-justice conservative majority of the U.S. Supreme Court--William Rehnquist, Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas-- intervened first to impose a stay on the recount and then to reverse the Florida high court, thus barring any further effort to discover votes among the disputed ballots. The endless wrangling about hanging, dimpled and pregnant chads was over, Mr. Bush was president-elect, and conservatives, who had spent weeks decrying the high-handed activism of judges, were elated.

Now it was the other side's turn to speak of a "stolen" election and to vent its fury at a purportedly out-of-control judiciary. Taking their cue from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who omitted from her opinion the "respectfully" that customarily softens the concluding phrase "I dissent," liberal commentators denounced Bush v. Gore as a "travesty" (Mary McGrory in the Washington Post), a "scandal" (Randall Kennedy in the American Prospect) and a ruling that lacked any "credible explanation" (Anthony Lewis in the New York Times). The "four vain men and one vain woman" of the court's majority were accused of having simply indulged their "self-interested political preferences" (Jeffrey Rosen in The New Republic), rendering a decision that was at once "illegitimate, undemocratic, and unprincipled" (Cass R. Sunstein in the Chronicle of Higher Education). In a full-page ad in the New York Times, 554 law professors--"teachers whose lives," in their own words, "have been dedicated to the rule of law"--declared that by acting as "political partisans, not judges," the justices had "tarnished" the legitimacy of the court.

There was, of course, an element of almost comic irony in these full-throated denunciations, coming as they did from intellectual quarters that have long rationalized or celebrated the overreaching of the American judiciary. Such self-righteous critics should themselves have cleaner hands. But it is not enough to answer a charge of hypocrisy with a charge of hypocrisy. The fundamental question, with all that it portends for our constitutional politics, remains: Were the justices of the Supreme Court right or wrong to play the role they did in the 2000 presidential election?

From the moment reporters were handed Bush v. Gore in the waning hours of Dec. 12, it was apparent that the case had deeply divided the Court. The decision consisted of an almost unprecedented six distinct opinions: an unsigned "per curiam" ruling by all five conservative Justices, a concurrence by the three most conservative of them, and separate but overlapping dissents by each of the four liberal justices--Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter and John Paul Stevens.

The concurrence written by Chief Justice Rehnquist and joined by Justices Scalia and Thomas hinged on the issue of just how activist the rulings of the Florida justices had been. Though "comity and respect for federalism" would normally compel the justices to defer to a state court's interpretation of state law, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, the Constitution did impose certain limits when it came to the procedures for presidential contests. In particular, Article II provides that the electors of each state are to be selected "in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct" (emphasis added in the opinion). Thus it was that the election laws devised by the Florida Legislature took on an "independent significance," demanding a degree of deference that the state's highest court, in its various reworkings of that law, had failed to show. By the light of Article II, the court's most reliably conservative troika held, the Florida justices had "impermissibly distorted" the intention of the state's lawmakers.

The actual judgment of the court--the ruling that carried the force of law--lay, however, in entirely different constitutional precincts, in concerns about the "equal protection" guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Here the conservative justices, now including the more centrist Kennedy and O'Connor, formed a united front.

Where the Florida Supreme Court had run into constitutional trouble, the five justices declared, was in ordering a recount whose lone instruction to election officials was to determine the "intent of the voter." In the absence of more specific standards, this open-ended rule had resulted in a range of abuses, with contested ballots treated differently not only "from county to county but indeed within a single county from one recount team to another." The mechanism set in motion by the Florida court failed, in short, to "satisfy the minimum [constitutional] requirement for non-arbitrary treatment of voters."

Nor was there time, according to the justices, to devise a new procedure, since the Florida Legislature (at least in the estimation of the Florida court) had meant to protect the state's presidential vote from congressional challenge by taking advantage of the "safe harbor" provision of federal law, the deadline for which, as the decision was announced, was just minutes away. For the violations now before it, the Supreme Court concluded, the only available remedy was to bring the whole contentious process to a halt.

For their part, the liberal justices were unanimous in rejecting the idea that the Florida high court had somehow usurped the role of the state Legislature. The rulings of the Florida justices may have been flawed--"other interpretations were of course possible," Justice Souter observed, "and some might have been better than those [that were] adopted"--but they certainly fell within the bounds of permissible interpretation. Furthermore, Justice Stevens maintained, Article II did not "create state legislatures out of whole cloth, but rather takes them as they come--as creatures born of, and constrained by, their state constitutions," a circumstance that, in this case, gave the Florida Supreme Court broad powers of review.

More complicated was the response from this side of the court to the majority's equal-protection claim. On this question the liberal justices split. Justice Ginsburg saw no evidence that the recount "would yield a result any less fair or precise" than the official count that preceded it. Justice Stevens pointed to the danger of "too literal" an interpretation of constitutional principles; after all, he wrote, if the recount was suspect on equal-protection grounds, so too was Florida's entire election system, which left "to each county the determination of what balloting system to employ--despite enormous differences in accuracy."

Justices Breyer and Souter, by contrast, agreed that the conduct of the recount raised serious questions about the unequal treatment of similarly situated voters. But their agreement with the majority went only that far, and still left them very much in dissent. As Justice Breyer stipulated at the outset, and as Justice Souter echoed in his own opinion, "The Court was wrong to take this case."

Moreover, having taken it and found a violation of equal protection, the court was obliged to send it back to Florida for resolution. As both Justices Breyer and Souter stressed, six days remained until the electoral votes absolutely had to be cast on Dec. 18--meeting the imminent "safe harbor" deadline, all four liberal justices insisted, was not in fact required by Florida law--and the state's high court deserved a chance, however fleeting, to devise the uniform standards now demanded of it.

The most curious feature of the reaction to Bush v. Gore among conservatives has been the widespread agreement on two seemingly contradictory propositions: first, that the majority's decision was a necessary vindication of the rule of law; second, that the equal-protection analysis upon which it relied was entirely unpersuasive. Thus, for Rich Lowry, the editor of National Review, the Supreme Court "had little choice but to overturn the Florida court," though the "reasoning in its hasty per curiam decision was so shabby, one can only conclude that the Court did the right thing for the wrong reason." Robert H. Bork, writing in The New Criterion, also found "serious difficulties" with the court's reliance on the equal-protection clause. As he (like Justice Stevens before him) pointed out, disparities like those in the Florida recount "have always existed within states under our semi-chaotic election processes." Nonetheless, Mr. Bork argued, the justices could not permit "the stealing of a presidential election," even at the cost of an "inadequate majority opinion."

As a constitutional matter, what redeems Bush v. Gore in the eyes of Mr. Lowry, Mr. Bork and most other conservative commentators is the concurring opinion of Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas. Indeed, it is widely (and plausibly) assumed that the court's three conservative stalwarts, having failed to persuade Justices Kennedy and O'Connor that the Florida court had violated Article II by rewriting the state's election laws, held their noses and accepted the egalitarian abstractions of what became the majority opinion. Either way, after all, the recount would be stopped.

That the concurrence had the better argument is hard to deny. As Richard A. Epstein of the University of Chicago and Michael W. McConnell of the University of Utah make clear in their separate contributions to "The Vote: Bush, Gore, and the Supreme Court," a useful collection of essays by legal academics on both sides of the controversy, the "interpretations" of the Florida Supreme Court went far beyond what was required to make sense of the sometimes ambiguous or conflicting provisions of the state's election code.

In the fateful first stage of the litigation, the Florida justices transformed a portion of the law concerned with rectifying "an error in the vote tabulation"--a transparent reference to problems with the counting machinery--into a mandate to correct errors committed by voters in the casting of their votes. For good measure, they also ignored a straightforward statutory deadline for certifying vote tallies and replaced it with a much later cutoff date entirely of their own making, thus throwing into disarray the whole process for mounting a challenge to the election results.

In the second stage of the litigation (and largely to compensate for their earlier errors), the Florida justices went still farther down the road of arrogation, ordering a statewide recount of all "undervoted" ballots under the direction of a single circuit judge--an action neither contemplated by state law nor requested by Mr. Gore or Mr. Bush. In all of these proceedings, the basic effect of the court's rulings was the same: to annul the far-reaching discretionary authority of the county and state officials to whom Florida law explicitly assigns the supervision of elections.

This much ground and considerably more are covered by Richard A. Posner in "Breaking the Deadlock: The 2000 Election, the Constitution, and the Courts," the only book-length defense of the ruling in Bush v. Gore yet to appear. For Mr. Posner--a federal appeals court judge, lecturer in law at the University of Chicago and perhaps the country's widest-ranging and most prolific legal thinker--it is not enough to demonstrate that the Florida court went badly astray, "butchering" the state's election laws in violation of Article II. As he argues, with characteristic verve and intelligence, there are still deeper justifications for the Supreme Court's intervention.

Judge Posner concedes that more Florida voters probably set out to support Al Gore than George W. Bush, and that the wider availability of user-friendly voting technology would very likely have sent the Democratic candidate to the White House. But this, he insists, is no defense for what the Florida Supreme Court did. In our representative democracy, with its concern for order and stability, an election is "a formal procedure, a statutory artifact," not "a public-opinion poll." What matters is not some inchoate "general will," &agrave; la Rousseau, but votes, and what constitutes a vote is determined by pre-established rules. By promulgating its own rules after the fact, Judge Posner argues, the Florida court was not perfecting the democratic system, as many have claimed, but undermining one of its fundamental pillars: that succession take place according to procedures that are "fixed in advance, objective, administrable, and clear."

In a similar vein, Judge Posner dismisses those who think that the Supreme Court should ultimately have remanded the case to Florida, allowing the state courts and legislature to resolve the election dispute. Florida was entitled to six more days, he acknowledges, but "a responsible recount could not have been concluded by then." In fact, the whole mess, with rival slates of Florida electors, would soon have found its way to the divided halls of Congress, where it would have led to paralyzing chaos. With a new president still unnamed by Inauguration Day, Judge Posner somewhat fancifully suggests, the office would have passed down the line of executive succession until coming to rest, for various reasons, on then-Secretary of the Treasury Lawrence Summers--thus making him our first Jewish President! "Eventually, with the nation's patience completely exhausted," he writes, either Bush or Gore would have prevailed in the House of Representatives, but his presidency "would have started behind the eight ball, with an irregular and disputed accession, an abbreviated term of office, and no transition."

For Judge Posner, these "pragmatic" concerns are paramount in evaluating Bush v. Gore, and form what he considers its "hidden ground." As he concludes, the majority's decision may have "damaged the Court's prestige, at least in the short run; but it did not do so gratuitously--it averted a potential crisis."

There is much to be said for these exercises in apologetics. As its defenders have rightly stressed, Bush v. Gore, whatever the defects of the ruling, did bring an orderly conclusion to an unsettling chapter in our national politics, and it did so, at least in part, on the basis of a credible argument about the Constitution's Article II.

In these crucial respects, the Supreme Court's election-ending decision is not, as some of its critics have suggested, the ideological mirror image of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 abortion decision that has become synonymous with liberal judicial activism. As many liberals themselves are now willing to admit, the ruling in Roe was essentially a piece of judicial legislation, with no grounding in constitutional text or history. More important perhaps, the abortion decision, with its cavalier dismissal of how the states themselves wished to resolve the issue, continues to roil our politics even now, some 30 years after it was handed down--a marked contrast to the quiet that, outside the law schools, quickly descended over Bush v. Gore.

Still, in at least one key regard, the comparison to Roe is not favorable to the present Supreme Court. Say what one will about the authors of the abortion decision, their reasoning in the case, such as it was, was not a surprise; it followed their own activist precedents with respect to the so-called right of privacy, and it reflected a judicial temperament that they had displayed many times before. In Bush v. Gore, by contrast, the five conservative justices performed what can only be described as an ideological somersault, embracing an equal-protection claim that was not only unpersuasive on its own terms but irreconcilable with the basic tenets of their judicial philosophy.

That is the burden of Alan M. Dershowitz's instructive if at times intemperate and wrongheaded book, "Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000." For Mr. Dershowitz--a professor at Harvard Law School who, when not himself taking part in the Florida litigation, was busily offering his opinions on it to any and all media takers--the clearest indication of the justices' culpability is what he calls "the-shoe-on-the-other-foot test." As he sees it, "they would not have stopped a hand recount if George W. Bush had been seeking it." Acting as partisans, they sought a political end without regard to the ideological means.

In support of this claim, Mr. Dershowitz puts together a damning compilation of the conservative justices' previous rulings and statements on the question of equal protection. All of these reveal, as anyone familiar with their views would expect, a profound reluctance to assign the idea anything like the sweeping effect they gave to it in the Florida case. Typical of the excerpts is this, from an opinion by then-Associate Justice Rehnquist:

In providing the Court with the duty of enforcing such generalities as the equal-protection clause, the framers of the Civil War amendments placed it in the position of Adam in the Garden of Eden. As members of a tripartite institution of government which is responsible to no constituency, and which is held back only by its own sense of self-restraint, . . . we are constantly subjected to the human temptation to hold that any law containing a number of imperfections denies equal protection simply because those who drafted it could have made it a fairer or a better law.

And this, from Justice Thomas:

The equal-protection clause shields only against purposeful discrimination: a disparate impact, even upon members of a racial minority, . . . does not violate equal protection. . . . [W]e have regularly required more of an equal-protection claimant than a showing that state action has a harsher effect on him or her than on others.

As Mr. Dershowitz writes, the "glaring and dramatic inconsistencies" between these earlier opinions and the Florida ruling strike at "the core of everything these Justices have stood for over many years."

Nor have the more clear-eyed members of the left, despite their condemnation of the decision, failed to see the opportunity presented by the conservative justices' epiphany on the meaning of equal protection. In The Nation, the historian Eric Foner found a "silver lining" in the court's having "opened the door to challenging our highly inequitable system of voting." Harvard Law School's Lani Guinier, writing in the New York Times, invoked the decision to renew her call for dispensing with winner-take-all legislative districts and moving to a system of proportional representation, since the court had been explicit in "valuing no person's vote over another."

Indeed, taken to its logical conclusion, the notion of equal protection affirmed by the court in Bush v. Gore would draw into question virtually every aspect of the country's locally run, state-administered and highly decentralized electoral system--a point that the conservative justices themselves, confronted by a different set of litigants, could have been counted on to make. This may explain what is perhaps the most objectionable part of the majority's opinion. As if to confess their bad faith, the justices announced toward the end of the decision that they were not, in fact, playing for keeps. Because "the problem of equal protection in election processes generally presents many complexities," they wrote, "our consideration is limited to the present circumstances."

Alongside this extraordinary disavowal, Alan Dershowitz places the following passage from a 1996 opinion by Justice Scalia, in which the Court's most articulate conservative aptly described the institution's proper role:

The Supreme Court of the United States does not sit to announce "unique" dispositions. Its principal function is to establish precedent--that is, to set forth principles of law that every court in America must follow. As we said only this term, we expect both ourselves and lower courts to adhere to the "rationale upon which the Court based the results of its earlier decisions." . . . That is the principal reason we publish our opinions.

No less disturbing as a matter of judicial philosophy--and seeming partisan favoritism--was the Supreme Court's obvious unwillingness to let the election dispute work itself out in Florida or, if need be, in Congress. If judicial self-restraint means anything, it is that the justices should respect the prerogatives of the other branches of the state and federal governments, especially with regard to those "political questions," as they are known in legal circles, that do not clearly fall within the court's institutional competence and would needlessly involve it in partisan controversy. In such instances, the Justices should exercise what the legal scholar Alexander Bickel called, in his classic formulation, the "passive virtues."

In the Florida case, this would have required, at a minimum, letting the state's high court try to remedy the (supposed) violation of equal protection in its recount standards. Would this have resulted in the political chaos predicted with such flair by Richard Posner? Perhaps. But as he himself grants (and as other commentators on both sides of the political aisle have agreed), the "likeliest outcome of the remand that Justices Souter and Breyer wanted would have been abandonment of the recount when it became clear that it could not be completed, subject to appropriate judicial review, by December 18." Under this scenario, Mr. Bush would still have won--but his victory would not have been tainted by the peremptory action of the court.

More fundamentally, there is the question of whether the Supreme Court should have taken any action at all in the Florida dispute. Even the better argument made by the conservative justices, based on Article II, was, for all its force, without precedent. There can be no doubt that the intentions of the Florida legislature had been perverted, but this alone did not compel the court to take the case or to find an infraction of the Constitution, and concerns about federalism might well have counseled restraint. Moreover, in light of the potential conflicts of interest involved--with candidate Bush having repeatedly declared his admiration for Justices Scalia and Thomas and the justices themselves having an obvious stake in who might be appointed to join them in the future--the court would perhaps have been well advised, in effect, to recuse itself.

Had this happened, we now know, Mr. Bush would almost certainly have retained his lead. As recounts conducted after the election at the behest of news organizations have shown, even the more open-ended counting standards advocated by Democrats and accepted by the Florida court would not have provided enough votes to put Gore ahead. Bush would have made it to the White House on his own.

Needless to say, the justices of the Supreme Court had no way of knowing this as they considered whether to intervene (nor should it have mattered, if their concerns were exclusively of the constitutional variety). What they did know--and what should have furnished the strongest argument for holding back--was that, under both the Constitution and federal law, it was the duty of other, more democratically accountable institutions to safeguard the integrity of the presidential election. The Florida Legislature was prepared to act, and so too was Congress, if disagreement among the branches of the state government had resulted in the naming of separate Republican and Democratic slates of electors.

Had it come to this, the scene on Capitol Hill would certainly have been partisan, and perhaps even ugly. But as we learned from the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton (and as we have had occasion to see again in the wake of the terrorist attack on Sept. 11), our politicians are capable during times of crisis of conducting themselves with the necessary sobriety and seriousness of purpose. Though Judge Posner is probably correct that "whatever Congress did would have been regarded as the product of raw politics," the same has been said, with some reason, about the court's settling of the Florida case--and politics is not supposed to be the court's business.

Why this should be so was well stated more than a century ago by the sponsor of the Electoral Count Act, the law under which Congress would have considered the Florida dispute. As Sen. John Sherman noted in introducing the measure--a belated response to the fiasco surrounding the Hayes-Tilden presidential contest of 1876--some members of Congress had wished to involve the Supreme Court in the process:

But there is a feeling in this country that we ought not to mingle our great judicial tribunal with political questions, and therefore this proposition has not met with much favor. It would be a very grave fault indeed and a very serious objection to refer a political question in which the people of the country were aroused, about which their feelings were excited, to this great tribunal, which after all has to sit upon the life and property of all the people of the United States. It would tend to bring that court into public odium of one or the other of the two great parties.

Naturally enough, much of the bitterness arising from the 2000 election has since evaporated, especially as the country has turned of late to decidedly more urgent matters. But American political life will gradually revert to something like its former state, and when it does, it is unlikely in the aftermath of Bush v. Gore that either of the "great parties" will see the Supreme Court in the same light.

The Democratic Party, of course, has never been well disposed to the court's current majority, and has fought energetically--often unfairly--to keep other conservative judges off the bench. But the critique of the conservative justices has previously been ideological; their ideas were "extremist," their view of the Constitution unacceptably narrow. Now, as never before, liberals have at their disposal the argument that has long served as a rallying cry for conservative critics of the Warren and Burger courts: that the justices are not just mistaken but, in some sense, corrupt, having forgotten the limits of their office.

Perhaps more profound may be the effect on Republicans and conservatives, who, one suspects, will find it difficult to continue avowing their old judicial principles with a straight face. Phrases like "judicial restraint" and "strict construction" may not sound the same for some time. Conservatives will thus be hampered in resisting what may be, in due course, the left's dominant reaction to Bush v. Gore: not second thoughts about its own history of judicial activism, but a renewed commitment to using the courts as an engine of social change. After all, if the judicial gloves are off, they are off for everyone.

The great shame in all this is that the 2000 election might have turned out very differently for the U.S. Supreme Court and our constitutional politics. Given the opportunity to decide who would be President, the conservative Justices, in the service of long-held principle, might have done what members of the high court have always found it difficult to do in the face of society's most pressing concerns and their own strongly held preferences. They might have passed.

—Mr. Rosen is managing editor of Commentary, in whose November issue this article appears, and author of "American Compact: James Madison and the Problem of Founding" (University Press of Kansas, 1999).

Title: Re: Reconsidering Bush v. Gore
Post by: DougMacG on May 21, 2019, 07:40:50 AM

There was a 7-2 vote that effectively ended the recount and handed the election to Bush.  The 5-4 decision on one issue also in favor of Bush did not change the outcome of the case or the election but made for very divisive talking points.

"Noting that the Equal Protection clause guarantees individuals that their ballots cannot be devalued by "later arbitrary and disparate treatment," the per curiam opinion held 7-2 that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional."
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2000/00-949

From the article:
"There can be no doubt that the intentions of the Florida legislature had been perverted, but this alone did not compel the court to take the case or to find an infraction of the Constitution, and concerns about federalism might well have counseled restraint.

The part in bold above ends the discussion constitutionally.  As Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote, the constitution gave that power to the Legislature, not the Courts. 

The equal protection argument the author dismisses was real and valid IMHO - passed 7-2.  They were assessing intent of the voter in order to change votes in 3 Democrat counties and not doing the same for the entire state.  That devalues the vote of the other voters.

The quote from Justice Thomas about equal protection and race pertains to equal protection and race.  That is not the only area where equal protection is required.  There certainly was intent to discriminate and change the outcome in the election with the process of "recounting" different counties differently.

Two Justices, Scalia and Thomas, should have recused because Bush said he admired them?  That is absurd and not the practice of the Justices on the Court.  Buy that logic the other 7 should have recused also because he did not include them as judicial models of the type he would pick and that could bias them against him.

The Court ruled on the facts, the laws and the constitution as well as any constitutionalist could have hoped, in a case of short deadline and high consequences.

Title: SCOTUS blocks gerrymandering decisions
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 24, 2019, 05:22:51 PM

https://dailycaller.com/2019/05/24/supreme-court-gerrymandering-michigan-ohio/?utm_medium=email

Title: Pravda on the Potomac: Not so fast with the felons Gov McCauliffe
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 27, 2019, 07:06:45 AM

Va. high court invalidates McAuliffe’s order restoring felon voting rights

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe issued a sweeping order in April restoring rights to all ex-offenders who are no longer incarcerated or on probation or parole. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)
By Fenit Nirappil and
Jenna Portnoy July 22, 2016
Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s decision to restore voting rights to more than 200,000 felons violates Virginia’s constitution, the state Supreme Court ruled Friday, dealing a major blow to the Democratic governor with implications for the November presidential race in the crucial swing state.

In a 4-to-3 decision, the court ruled that McAuliffe overstepped his clemency powers by issuing a sweeping order in April restoring rights to all ex-offenders who are no longer incarcerated or on probation or parole.

The court agreed with state Republicans who challenged McAuliffe’s order, arguing that the governor can only restore voting rights on a case-by-case basis and not en masse.

“Never before have any of the prior 71 Virginia Governors issued a clemency order of any kind — including pardons, reprieves, commutations, and restoration orders — to a class of unnamed felons without regard for the nature of the crimes or any other individual circumstances relevant to the request,” Chief Justice Donald W. Lemons wrote for the majority. “To be sure, no Governor of this Commonwealth, until now, has even suggested that such a power exists.”

But a defiant McAuliffe released a statement late Friday saying that he would pick up his executive pen and restore the rights of those felons on an individual basis, even if it means signing more than 200,000 orders.

“My faith remains strong in all of our citizens to choose their leaders, and I am prepared to back up that faith with my executive pen,” he said. “The struggle for civil rights has always been a long and difficult one, but the fight goes on.”

The court directed the state elections commissioner, Edgardo Cortés, to cancel the registrations by Aug. 25 of about 13,000 felons who had joined the voter rolls after McAuliffe signed his order. Cortés was also ordered to add their names to the list of prohibited voters.

McAuliffe said in his statement that he would “expeditiously” sign individual orders for those 13,000 felons and then keep on signing.

“Once again, the Virginia Supreme Court has placed Virginia as an outlier in the struggle for civil and human rights,” McAuliffe said. “It is a disgrace that the Republican leadership of Virginia would file a lawsuit to deny more than 200,000 of their own citizens the right to vote. And I cannot accept that this overtly political action could succeed in suppressing the voices of many thousands of men and women who had rejoiced with their families earlier this year when their rights were restored.”

The ruling comes three months after McAuliffe stood on the portico of the state capitol and pledged to erase the last vestiges of Jim Crow-era laws that disenfranchised African American voters. Nearly a quarter of the state’s black population cannot vote because of felony convictions.

Virginia is one of just a handful of states that ban all felons from voting and require individual exemptions for ex-offenders to vote, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. The ban is tinged with racial overtones: When it was adopted in 1902, a delegate testified to the need to “eliminate the darkey as a political factor,” according to Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

McAuliffe said his restoration order was his “proudest moment as governor,” and the state party has rallied around the policy as the premier achievement of his term.

[Virginia Supreme Court considers constitutionality of McAuliffe’s order]

But state Republicans saw it as a partisan move to swell the numbers of Democratic voters heading into the November election, when McAuliffe’s good friend, Hillary Clinton, will be battling to win the swing state and its 13 electoral votes in her presidential race against Republican Donald Trump.

Virginia House of Delegates Speaker William J. Howell (R-Stafford) and Senate Majority Leader Thomas K. Norment Jr. (R-James City), who brought the challenge with four voters, applauded the ruling.

“The Supreme Court of Virginia delivered a major victory for the Constitution, the rule of law and the Commonwealth of Virginia. Our nation was founded on the principles of limited government and separation of powers,” they said in a joint statement. “Those principles have once again withstood assault from the executive branch. This opinion is a sweeping rebuke of the governor’s unprecedented assertion of executive authority.”

Lemons noted in his opinion that Virginia’s last Democratic governor, Timothy M. Kaine, declined in 2010 to issue a blanket voting rights restoration order on advice from a senior adviser who said such a move would be an improper “rewrite” of the law and constitution. A spokeswoman for Kaine, now a senator who was announced as Clinton’s running mate Friday evening, did not return a request for comment.

John Whitbeck, chairman of the Virginia GOP, said in a statement that McAuliffe was trying to “stack the deck for Hillary Clinton” and accused him of a “naked power grab.”

Along with voting rights, the governor’s action restored the right to serve on a jury, run for public office and become a notary public.

Civil rights and progressive groups condemned the ruling.

“It’s disgraceful that some politicians would go to such lengths to block these citizens from participating in our democracy,” said Anna Scholl, executive director of Progress Virginia. “We would be happy to send Governor McAuliffe a box of pens to start signing individual orders.”

Voting access has become a heated topic across the country in a presidential election year that is expected to be especially close and hotly contested. Democrats have been pushing to loosen voting restrictions, saying they disproportionately affect poor and minority voters, while Republicans have been trying to tighten requirements in an effort they say is aimed at combating fraud. Earlier this week, a federal court struck down a voter identification law in Texas, finding it discriminated against minorities.

Tram Nguyen, co-executive director of New Virginia Majority, which dispatched staff to begin registering voters minutes after McAuliffe’s order, called Friday’s ruling “heartbreaking” for felons who had felt redeemed.

“They had a glimmer of hope, and now it’s being completely dashed and taken away,” she said.

But McAuliffe had also faced bipartisan criticism about the way his administration implemented the restoration order and for the decision to keep secret the list of felons who had their rights restored.

[Errors in McAuliffe’s clemency order draws scrutiny]

It was discovered that the list mistakenly included several violent criminals still in custody and 132 sex offenders under involuntary supervision. These errors drew ire from Democratic and Republican prosecutors who say they were not properly consulted ahead of the governor’s order and were tasked with finding errors.

McAuliffe’s order also made it simpler for felons to apply for the right to possess guns.

The Friday ruling also shows the consequences of a protracted and bitter battle in the past year over installing a state Supreme Court justice.

State lawmakers ousted a judge appointed by McAuliffe when the legislature was out of session and installed a preferred alternative. That judge, Stephen R. McCullough, joined three other conservative judges in overturning McAuliffe’s order.

Title: When the Left defended the Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 21, 2019, 09:12:16 PM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/06/06/when-the-left-defended-the-electoral-college/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWVRJMllXUTRNMlJpTkRSaiIsInQiOiJNQjVreFdObERsUzBtMmNTcFowcUlWenczK2VlTFZrUzFcL0psYWdDN3FpZmZXdVpzWmJZRVwvNVdURG0zKzF6QlZBRUJVVEVxZU4yUU9RWHAzVTMwaHhnVmF0ZGpuZHY0TjBqcnlvMk1ONjVjSHpZbEVoZWlcL1wvbDNHdGFnMWw4ZWMifQ%3D%3D

Title: Re: When the Left defended the Electoral College
Post by: G M on June 21, 2019, 10:11:46 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 21, 2019, 09:12:16 PM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/06/06/when-the-left-defended-the-electoral-college/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWVRJMllXUTRNMlJpTkRSaiIsInQiOiJNQjVreFdObERsUzBtMmNTcFowcUlWenczK2VlTFZrUzFcL0psYWdDN3FpZmZXdVpzWmJZRVwvNVdURG0zKzF6QlZBRUJVVEVxZU4yUU9RWHAzVTMwaHhnVmF0ZGpuZHY0TjBqcnlvMk1ONjVjSHpZbEVoZWlcL1wvbDNHdGFnMWw4ZWMifQ%3D%3D

It's only a problem when they don't get their way.

Title: 19 voter fraud arrests in a Texas town
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 22, 2019, 09:49:31 PM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/06/17/19-arrests-later-a-texas-town-is-torn-apart-over-voter-fraud/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Top5&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT1dFM016RTBOelk1TjJWbSIsInQiOiJKdEdjeG1GYkdyanVyTlArNWl0bWRITmtydUtFc0VtK3VXRGtkTWVHd2U1dlhXXC84OHpJc1lMRHB5NVFFcmlHejZRSWNpQ2lkc2k4dDk5bk1PU2tMMUZjUGRYdmpuUElsN0FxTm5QU0k0NGhtTXdqVVRDNXNpRUlHSzA2NDh5T0QifQ%3D%3D

Title: Illegal Aliens voting facilitated
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 27, 2019, 05:34:04 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/06/23/expert-matter-time-illegal-alien-voting-expanded/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20190628002654

Title: Ctizenship on the Census form
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2019, 10:33:46 AM

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/27/597436512/fact-check-has-citizenship-been-a-standard-census-question?fbclid=IwAR09VorLyywapPyDiBO6Y0vg8QOk5upXJWD4jg8jktIZfoxLgtqyn_R-Td0

https://patriotpost.us/articles/63950-roberts-helps-dems-rig-elections?mailing_id=4375&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4375&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: A good bill from the House Dems?!?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2019, 12:34:09 PM

Why would the Reps oppose this?

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2019/06/us-house-passes-election-security-bill-after-russian-hacking/?utm_campaign=DailyEmails&utm_source=AM_Email&utm_medium=email

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 28, 2019, 02:42:15 PM

" .Why would the Reps oppose this?"

just did search to find out but all I could find are LEftist sources . -  NYT WP Salon Politico etc

nothing so far about it, from a source I trust,

Will keep a lookout.

update - I just did search trying to find an answer and page after page of leftist sources saying how McConnell is the creep who blocked this bill in Senate
I wonder if Google is manipulating the search!!!!

This is one way they affect opinion
no doubt their weasley little libs could do this.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 28, 2019, 04:56:34 PM

Quote from: ccp on June 28, 2019, 02:42:15 PM

" .Why would the Reps oppose this?"

just did search to find out but all I could find are LEftist sources . -  NYT WP Salon Politico etc

nothing so far about it, from a source I trust,

Will keep a lookout.

update - I just did search trying to find an answer and page after page of leftist sources saying how McConnell is the creep who blocked this bill in Senate
I wonder if Google is manipulating the search!!!!

This is one way they affect opinion
no doubt their weasley little libs could do this.

Let me assure you, the goolag is working hard to make sure you have exposure to a full spectrum of sources, from the DNC, NPR, MSNBC, and CNN. Oh, and the HuffPo as well.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2019, 07:20:37 PM

So, WHY are the Reps voting against this bill?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 28, 2019, 08:59:44 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2019, 07:20:37 PM

So, WHY are the Reps voting against this bill?

Oh, without looking I would guess it's the usual DC Uniparty garbage.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2019, 11:21:48 AM

Sorry, but I really like the idea of a paper ballot trail.  Indeed, I am under the impression that we here have been advocating exactly that for several years now.

Why can't we find why the Reps are opposing this bill?

Title: Chinese Electoral Meddling Methodology
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 03, 2019, 09:24:21 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-us-bill-calls-attention-to-chinas-meddling-in-upcoming-taiwan-elections_2986816.html?ref=brief_News&utm_source=Epoch+Times+Newsletters&utm_campaign=6c78c7c8d6-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_07_02_05_54&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_4fba358ecf-6c78c7c8d6-239065853

Title: Trump does not drop citizen question on census ?
Post by: ccp on July 03, 2019, 09:32:15 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/64056-trump-drops-citizenship-question-after-roberts-rules-or-does-he
 :|

Title: Re: Trump does not drop citizen question on census ?
Post by: DougMacG on July 03, 2019, 03:19:15 PM

Quote from: ccp on July 03, 2019, 09:32:15 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/64056-trump-drops-citizenship-question-after-roberts-rules-or-does-he
 :|

I want to read the full decision and I was wondering what happens if they go ahead and ask the question anyway.

In the past, they have asked all kinds of unconstitutional, intrusive questions that I'm sure we're not authorized by Congress. This question is relevant, constitutional and traditional. The president made an oath to uphold the Constitution.  So did Chief Justice Roberts and the other four liberals.

Do what is right and let the chips fall where they may. What is wrong with that?

Title: WSJ: A Way forward on Census Citizenship
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2019, 03:40:56 PM

How to Put Citizenship Back in the Census
The 14th Amendment gives the Trump administration the justification it needs.
By David B. Rivkin Jr. and
Gilson B. Gray
July 4, 2019 2:20 pm ET
People await decisions from the Supreme Court in Washington, June 27. Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

The Trump administration said Wednesday it will attempt to add a citizenship question on the 2020 census while complying with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Department of Commerce v. New York. Five justices held that the Census Act allows the question, but a separate five-justice majority found the rulemaking that added the question was procedurally deficient. There is a way forward. The Constitution itself requires the collection of citizenship information.

Section 2 of the 14th Amendment provides that if a state denies the franchise to anyone eligible to vote, its allotment of House seats shall be “reduced in the proportion which the number of such . . . citizens shall bear to the whole number of . . . citizens . . . in such state.” This language is absolute and mandatory. Compliance is impossible without counting how many citizens live in each state.

The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868, and this provision meant to secure the voting rights of newly freed slaves. But it wasn’t limited to that purpose. An earlier version of Section 2, introduced in 1865, specifically referred to limits on suffrage based on “race or color,” but the Senate rejected that limitation. The amendment forbids state interference with the rights of all eligible voters (then limited to males over 21).

Section 2 also applies to every state, a point Rep. John Bingham, the amendment’s principal drafter, emphasized during the floor debate: “The second section . . . simply provides for the equalization of representation among all the States in the Union, North, South, East, and West. It makes no discrimination.”

Congress has dealt with suffrage-abridgement problems through other constitutional and statutory means, especially the Voting Rights Act. But that doesn’t change the constitutional obligation to obtain citizenship data. A future Congress could decide to rely on Section 2 to enforce voting rights, particularly as the VRA’s core provision, requiring Justice Department approval when certain states change voting procedures, becomes irrelevant because of changing attitudes and Supreme Court precedent.

Significantly, the last time the Supreme Court addressed Section 2, it emphasized the need to give effect to both Section 1, which includes the Equal Protection Clause, and 2 of the 14th Amendment. That case, Richardson v. Ramirez (1974), involved an equal protection challenge to California’s policy of disfranchising felons.

The president should issue an executive order stating that, to comply with the requirements of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment, the citizenship question will be added to the 2020 census. In addition, he can order the Commerce Department to undertake, on an emergency basis, a new Census Act rulemaking.

That would trigger another round of litigation. Opponents would choose a federal district court likely to block it again, and the Justice Department would have to seek the Supreme Court’s intervention during its summer recess. While rare, such an emergency review has happened before. With the justification for the citizenship question being clear and compelling, the administration should prevail.

Messrs. Rivkin and Gray are lawyers, based in Washington and New York respectively.

Title: IBD in 2016: Millions of Illegals did vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 13, 2019, 08:35:22 AM

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-is-right-millions-of-illegals-probably-did-vote-in-2016/?fbclid=IwAR0wCigtfgvFtrXeaSTP9Lo2ye4l-pEcgKrmsN51S0VfWAuh3AIDg9t601k

Title: The Russian Hackers who didn't hack anything; where was Obama?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 26, 2019, 08:32:44 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/the-russian-hackers-who-didnt-hack-anything/

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/454766-senate-intel-releases-long-awaited-report-on-2016-election-security

Title: Dick Morris on Russian hacking
Post by: ccp on July 26, 2019, 03:30:47 PM

https://www.westernjournal.com/dick-morris-time-real-russian-election-hacking/

I know we here were against putting voting into electronic machines
of course this could happen

I can only imagine if Trump wins again the Left will continue their tirades for eternity.

Title: This does not look good; top vote machine company ditches paperless voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 27, 2019, 12:29:48 AM

Russia is believed to have probed voting systems in all 50 states in 2016, the Senate intelligence committee said in a heavily redacted 67-page report on their investigation into Russian interference with U.S. elections.
One key detail: "The committee found no evidence of Russian actors attempting to manipulate vote tallies on Election Day, though again the Committee and IC's insight into this is limited," lawmakers wrote in their Thursday report.

Another key detail: A "probe" isn't necessarily an attack, so this doesn't necessarily add to the Department of Homeland Security's 2017 finding that Russian hackers actively sought to penetrate 21 states' election-related systems.

The bigger deal: the Senate committee that has spent the most time looking into foreign interference can't agree on how to stop it. As Joseph Marks writes in the Washington Post: "The long-awaited 67-page report released yesterday contains dozens of recommendations for securing elections. But most artfully sidestep a boiling policy battle between Republicans and Democrats over whether the federal government should ensure they actually happen." The GOP members say it's up to the states; the Democrats say that's a recipe for letting Russia repeat its work from the 2016 U.S. election.

Related: Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., blocked two election-security bills on Thursday. The first would have required the use of paper ballots (a common-sense security measure that voting-machine manufacturers actively support) and boosted funding for the Election Assistance Commission, had already been passed by the House. But the Senate majority leader called it "partisan legislation" and blocked it.

The second bill would have required "candidates, campaign officials and their family members to notify the FBI of assistance offers from foreign governments," The Hill reported. McConnell blocked it one day after former special counsel Robert Mueller reiterated that Donald Trump's campaign had failed to notify U.S. law enforcement after Russian agents offered their aid, warned that Russia is currently trying to interfere with upcoming elections, and lamented that American politicians' acceptance of foreign help — previously seen as a terribly un-American thing to do — would become "the new normal."

Irate: Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, an intel committee member, blasted the report in an addendum and tweeted this for good measure: "Russia's biggest ally in its quest to infiltrate America's elections again is Mitch McConnell."

=================================

https://www.wired.com/story/a-top-voting-machine-company-is-finally-ditching-paperless-voting/?fbclid=IwAR2AW-aAKIIhTthL3Me0YVbqxHhmSmr9HQFcUAAUfE_TZarSvZafc1ojuig

============================================

Title: TheHill: McConnell under fire for burying election security bills
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 27, 2019, 09:56:36 AM

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/454967-mcconnell-under-fire-for-burying-election-security-bills-in-legislative-graveyard

Title: cannot find any truly objective site
Post by: ccp on July 27, 2019, 10:18:57 AM

that explains exactly what the election "security " bill does except to throw more money for "security"

a lot of Leftist trope about McConnell not allowing vote on it of course from NYT and WP claiming his reasoning is to suppress votes etc.

I don't know why no one had any problem with Soros backing at least one of the voting machine companies we talked about few yrs ago.

Rush is correct.  The Left has now and forever opened up " election integrity " that can be used by either side when they lose an election .

Our elections were safer before the electronic voting machines as far as I can tell.

The Lefts answer to keep outside influences from tampering with our elections is always the same as their other fixes - throw more tax payer money at it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 27, 2019, 10:44:17 AM

This plays badly for us I think.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 27, 2019, 11:19:21 AM

"This plays badly for us I think"

With the MSM blasting one sided headlines :

"Republicans block voter systems  security" , with no real objectivity - I agree with you - sounds bad on the face of it.

Title: McConnell looking worse yet
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 28, 2019, 11:21:48 AM

https://www.newsweek.com/mitch-mcconnell-robert-mueller-election-security-russia-1451361?fbclid=IwAR08fZ8FIPAIGsiYvI9fd5xZgmZGrNwWvYSCImCEDmCRkz8Z0rfkB8TVpxM

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on July 29, 2019, 06:23:01 AM

I don't know the merits and flaws in the current bill but the recent history has been crystal clear.  Republicans have been the party of election integrity and Democrats have been the party of election fraud.  One example, Voter ID.

Title: Dick Morris: Russian ARE a threat to elections in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 30, 2019, 09:43:50 AM

http://www.dickmorris.com/for-real-russia-threatens-our-elections-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: This should be a 7 to 0 Supreme decision
Post by: ccp on July 31, 2019, 06:59:09 AM

Newsom and his Kalifornia crownies :

https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-requires-trump-to-release-tax-returns-for-spot-on-primary-ballot-11564515926

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2019, 10:09:46 AM

You mean 9-0, yes?

Title: 9 to 0 NOT 7 to 0
Post by: ccp on July 31, 2019, 02:10:29 PM

yes

I posted 6:59 ; one minute before I start work.
I was just beginning my energy drink and think that explains the mistake.

Title: Lib Prof testifies that Goolag affected and affects vote results
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 08, 2019, 04:05:24 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNvgl38TLvI&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3mwbTJKiBWYx5MDiI6vY5XPX0xlYnt8DHhhCd78Q6E9hgMOtPrgPvGkfg

Title: Foreign interference in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 12, 2019, 12:44:45 PM

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2019/08/heres-what-foreign-interference-will-look-2020/159062/?oref=defenseone_today_nl

Title: disaster in waiting
Post by: ccp on August 13, 2019, 05:40:20 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/voting-paperless-study-brennan/2019/08/13/id/928377/

we have had at least 2 election that are paperless in NJ
we sign in on paper then go into curtained machine and press electronic buttons then leave.

no one could guarantee this being fool proof
of cousse paper is not either but this I believe has potential to be worse

only matter of time

Title: At last one gets caught!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 24, 2019, 04:35:45 PM

https://lawofficer.com/news/michigan-state-police-arrest-democratic-official-six-felony-charges-election-fraud/?fbclid=IwAR2BJCj-jp4F5qYhFsP0KoDSirPImBFg8yUQ7CQo6yuKHUcME5YDosuj7I0

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 24, 2019, 04:56:02 PM

"Hawkins’ arrest comes just months after she was honored May 18 at the Michigan Democratic Party’s Legacy Dinner"

certainly one of her accomplishments to get this honor was voter fraud

just not to get caught.

it seems mostly it is the absentee ballots

no wonder Dems always try to hold off the close elections looking for the "lost ballots".

Title: Reps sue CA over voter rolls; Ballot harvesting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 02, 2019, 01:11:04 PM

https://www.kqed.org/news/11777489/republicans-sue-california-charging-ineligible-voters-are-on-voter-rolls?fbclid=IwAR0wrgBZ5mccJ551YKThfWJoEwk9JuiRpKb6bJ799Q7-TeLftiAcrspNpQg

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/opinion/the-conversation/sd-what-is-ballot-harvesting-in-california-election-code-20181204-htmlstory.html?fbclid=IwAR3pGghN8T0Bx4hHcuWm0dmD5uaiulf2yzk0NUrJRlQHWUdm0i0rfi7ZmBo

Title: Weintraub of the FEC and Campaign Finance Law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 24, 2019, 12:19:53 PM

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/22/fec-ellen-weintraub-campaign-finance-law-229872

Title: Senate Intel Committee: RUSSIAN ACTIVE MEASURE'S CAMPAIGNS AND INTERFERENCE
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 27, 2019, 09:56:35 AM

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Report_Volume2.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1Pi4xdfm9NnMTvf49nQ-NAXuoHK0P9s5Mgs_dNdaS0hZBi5khuZMjWQBs

Title: IRS Targeting Scandal
Post by: DougMacG on October 30, 2019, 10:11:00 AM

Posting this in two threads for easier retrieval before it is forgotten.

God this was hard to find, go to page 188:
https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/REPORT%20-%20IRS%20&%20TIGTA%20Mgmt%20Failures%20Related%20to%20501(c)(4)%20(Sept%205%202014,%209-9-14%20update).pdf

Reminiscing the tactics of Trump's predecessors.  What did Biden know and when did he know it?  Does he even know it now?   Does the MSM? 

IRS Targeting - 700 conservative groups were prevented from raising money and participating (against Obama's reelection and policies) by action / inaction of the federal bureaucracy, while the IRS commissioner was visiting the White House 500 times more often than his predecessor. 
-----
Page 188 of the report claiming, "both liberal and conservatives groups received the same bad treatment and were targeted by the IRS":
http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/reports

"104 conservative groups were asked 1552 questions.  7 liberal groups were asked a total of 33 questions.

100% of liberal group applications were approved."

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/REPORT%20-%20IRS%20&%20TIGTA%20Mgmt%20Failures%20Related%20to%20501(c)(4)%20(Sept%205%202014,%209-9-14%20update).pdf

100% [all] of the 292 groups applying for tax-exempt status whose names contained "tea party", "patriot", or "9/12" were denied tax-exempt status for two years coming into Obama's reelection.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323873904578571363311816922

That's not the same bad treatment for right and left.
-----------------
What is missing from a valid Nazi analogy to the Obama administration is that the government did not then go out and kill them when they submitted opposition group applications.

All of this swept under the rug - even by our side.   (

Title: Dems seek to win election in court
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2019, 07:34:10 AM

https://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/democrats-launch-effort-to-win-2020-election-in-court/

Title: National Guard shoring up against election hacking
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2019, 03:24:52 PM

second post

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/11/05/the-national-guard-is-shoring-up-to-fight-2020-election-hacking/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Army%20DNR%20110519&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Army%20-%20Daily%20News%20Roundup

Title: From 2008: Obama's illegal fundraising
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 13, 2019, 07:58:43 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Obama-fundraising-illegal/2008/09/29/id/325630/?fbclid=IwAR2nBFd5JBDXFdqErgl6EpfrAfgHKmo73sWlDQjG0FF8dBfLnQTR2Fng4mc

Title: WSJ: The Mythology of Voter Suppression
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 23, 2019, 11:16:32 AM

TEXT
94
OPINION  REVIEW & OUTLOOK
The Mythology of Voter Suppression
Democrats cling to the falsehood despite the election turnout facts.
By The Editorial Board
Nov. 22, 2019 7:02 pm ET

Voters form long lines at Ousey United Methodist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, Nov. 6. PHOTO: MIGUEL JUAREZ LUGO/ZUMA PRESS
Democrats picked up 40 House seats and nine governorships last year. We’d call that a good year. Yet during the debate Wednesday night the presidential candidates continue to flog the falsehood that Republicans stole the 2018 Georgia Governor’s race and are generally stifling voter turnout.

“Right here in this great state of Georgia, it was the voter suppression, particularly of African-American communities, that prevented us from having a Governor Stacey Abrams right now,” Cory Booker declared. Bernie Sanders claimed that voter suppression “cost the Democratic Party a governorship here in this state” by “denying black people and people of color the right to vote.” Pete Buttigieg opined that “partisan voter suppression . . . dictates the outcome of elections before the voting even begins.”

Impeachment Polls Turn Down, and Moderate Democrats Go Up


SUBSCRIBE
The facts are that Black and Latino turnout nationwide last year hit a record high for a midterm election despite voter ID requirements, registration checks, and limits on early voting in some states. Turnout increased 13.4 percentage points for Hispanics (40.4%), 11.4 percentage points for blacks (51.1%), and 11.7 percentage points for whites (57.5%) from 2014, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Democrats say Ms. Abrams, last year’s Democratic nominee for Governor in Georgia, lost because Republicans cancelled 1.4 million voter registrations. But federal law requires states to periodically remove names of registered voters who haven’t cast ballots in awhile to ensure the integrity of the vote. Only Georgians who hadn’t cast ballots in more than seven years and didn’t respond to notices to confirm their residency were removed.

This alleged voter “purge” had scant impact on minority turnout: A larger share of blacks (59.6%) voted than whites (56.1%) last year. Black turnout in Georgia increased 16.6 percentage points from 2014 versus 11.3 percentage points for whites, and Ms. Abrams received 90% more votes in Atlanta’s Fulton County than the Democrat did four years earlier.

Democrats also say Republicans in Georgia and some other states have limited early voting to make it harder for blacks to cast ballots. In 2011 Georgia cut early voting to 21 days from 45. Three weeks is ample time for anyone to cast a ballot, and a longer early-voting period means voters might miss information about candidates that emerges late in the campaign.

The people most likely to vote early tend to be more educated and have higher incomes, perhaps because they are more politically engaged. And folks in the South are 10 times more likely to vote early than those in Northeastern states. If Republicans conspired to suppress minority turnout, they failed.

Title: The Voting Dead
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 13, 2020, 10:02:58 AM

https://denver.cbslocal.com/2016/09/22/cbs4-investigation-finds-dead-voters-casting-ballots-in-colorado/#.Xhova7JINZi.facebook

Title: Wisconsin judge starts fining electoral commission
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 13, 2020, 04:54:24 PM

second post

https://www.theblaze.com/news/wisconsin-election-commission-contempt-of-court?utm_content=buffer4c776&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=fb-theblaze

Title: Citizens United was correctly decided
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2020, 10:47:21 AM

Celebrate the Citizens United Decade
The ruling has empowered small-dollar donors and political outsiders, not corporations.
By Bradley A. Smith
Jan. 20, 2020 3:59 pm ET


‘Last week,” President Obama declared a decade ago, “the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in our elections.”

Mr. Obama was wrong in almost every respect about Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which the court decided on Jan. 21, 2010. Hysterical predictions about Citizens United—then-Rep. Ed Markey, among others, compared it to Dred Scott—haven’t held up.

Contrary to Mr. Obama’s assertion about a century of law, Citizens United overturned portions of McCain-Feingold, a campaign-finance law that wasn’t even 10 years old, and another law from 1947. Those laws prohibited unions and corporations, including nonprofits, from voicing support for or opposition to candidates for federal office.

Citizens United didn’t affect the longstanding ban on corporate contributions to candidates, and it didn’t legalize foreign political spending in the U.S. Most Russian online ads in 2016 would have been protected under the First Amendment even before Citizens United, because the ads didn’t urge a vote for or against a candidate.

Far from handing power to the 1%, Citizens United unleashed rapid political diversification. Since the ruling, the White House or Congress has changed parties in every federal election except 2012. Twenty eighteen saw the highest midterm voter turnout in a century. Small-dollar donors are more coveted than ever. Donald Trump raised more money from donors who gave less than $200 than any candidate in history.

Since Citizens United, party outsiders such as Mr. Trump and Bernie Sanders have risen to national prominence. And money hasn’t been able to buy elections as predicted. Sheldon Adelson donated record amounts to Republican super PACs in 2012 but failed to prevent strong Democratic victories. Democrats Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg came up empty after putting huge sums of money behind climate change and gun control.

Hillary Clinton outspent Mr. Trump 3 to 1 in 2016. Congressional leaders and big-time fundraisers such as Reps. Eric Cantor (R., Va.) and Joe Crowley (D., N.Y.) lost their seats to primary challengers who spent a fraction of what the incumbents did. Incumbent re-election rates in the House never dipped below 94% from 1996 to 2008, but did in 2010, 2012 and 2018.

Citizens United deserves a share of credit for all these trends. The decision made it easier to promote (or criticize) a candidate without help from party leaders or media elites.

Perhaps the worst prediction was that Citizens United would allow a corporate takeover of democracy. The New York Times accused the justices of having “paved the way for corporations to use their vast treasuries to overwhelm elections” and “thrust politics back to the robber-baron era of the 19th century.”

A decade later, most spending comes from the same place it always has: individuals who donate directly to candidates, up to legally limited amounts. Corporations contribute well under 10% of federal political spending, Their voice is not dominant—and voters have a right to hear it. Justice Anthony Kennedy and his colleagues didn’t hold that “money is speech” or “corporations are people.” The ruling was part of a healthy shift in favor of free speech in politics—a trend that began with 2007’s Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC, and continued through 2014’s McCutcheon v. FEC.

The questions is whether the justices think their work is done. If they truly want to empower democracy, they should continue to look skeptically at regulation of campaign finance. Political speech, after all, is at the core of the First Amendment’s protection.

Mr. Smith served as chairman of the Federal Election Commission, 2001-05, and is chairman of the Institute for Free Speech.

Title: Bladen County Board of Elections vs. the Pledge of Allegiance
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2020, 04:08:06 PM

https://www.westernjournal.com/dem-official-threatens-call-cops-pledge-allegiance-recited/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=PostSideSharingButtons&utm_campaign=websitesharingbuttons

Title: US targets Chinese meddling
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 24, 2020, 05:45:43 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-targets-chinese-political-interference-ahead-of-2020-elections_3212913.html?utm_source=Epoch+Times+Newsletters&utm_campaign=364c1bd566-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_01_23_09_28&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_4fba358ecf-364c1bd566-239065853

Title: Georgia hack in 2016? 2018?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 24, 2020, 06:46:48 AM

second post

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election/georgia-election-server-hacking-brian-kemp-stacey-abrams-vulnerabilities-report-a9290236.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1579435946

Title: North Carolina 2 counties with more voters than citizens
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 25, 2020, 04:11:13 PM

https://www.ncspin.com/watchdog-group-says-two-north-carolina-counties-have-more-registered-voters-than-voting-age-citizens

Title: MI arrests Dem official on six felony counts of election fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 02, 2020, 08:51:05 PM

https://www.lawofficer.com/michigan-state-police-arrest-democratic-official-six-felony-charges-election-fraud/

Title: Putin helps Trump in Iowa
Post by: ccp on February 04, 2020, 06:43:14 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/952511/1

Who would have thought electronic counting would have problems like this?

no one on this board

Klobacher happy as . lark
Butti claims he won
Bernie screwed again

and Napoleon keeps spending his bottomless pit of money for himself and has already bought out the DNC.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on February 04, 2020, 07:11:35 AM

They can't make a website work, can't name an impeachable offense -in an impeachment trial, can't tally caucus results - with turnout way down, but they want to run all of our healthcare, shutting down all alternatives.  Hopefully voters tell them to go pound sand.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on February 04, 2020, 08:17:23 AM

(https://static.pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Tommy-Boy-600x555.png)

Title: JW: Eight Iowa counties have registration larger than eligible voters
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 04, 2020, 10:38:44 AM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-eight-iowa-counties-have-total-registration-rates-larger-than-eligible-voter-population-at-least-18658-extra-names-on-iowa-voting-rolls-2/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=press_release

When I posted this on FB it informed me that they were tagging it as false info.  No citation was given.

Title: Atlantic: Computer Geek recommends paper balloting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 18, 2020, 12:17:21 PM

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/12/guardian-of-the-vote/544155/?utm_source=atlfb

Title: WSJ: Will VA drop electoral college?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 18, 2020, 01:45:24 PM

Will Virginia Drop the Electoral College?
The new Democratic state government moves for a popular vote Presidency.
By The Editorial Board
Feb. 17, 2020 4:42 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
680

The Virginia State Capitol in Richmond.
ILLUSTRATION: ZACH GIBSON/GETTY IMAGES
Virginia has long been a presidential battleground, but with Democratic control in Richmond it’s moving swiftly to shed its swing-state status. Last week the House of Delegates passed a bill that aims to do an end run around the Electoral College.

Under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, Virginia would award its 13 delegates to the candidate who gets the most votes nationwide no matter how he performed in Virginia. The compact goes into effect once states worth 270 electoral votes (a majority) have signed on. If Virginia ratifies the compact, that would bring the number to 209.

Barr Takes on Trump's Roger Stone Tweets


SUBSCRIBE
The remaining 61 would be a steep climb, but getting there isn’t out of the question as the legitimacy of the Electoral College becomes a partisan issue. A Democratic statehouse sweep in 2020 could put 270 within reach. Once the compact became active the lawsuits would rain down, and let’s hope the Supreme Court would provide clarity before the compact throws an election into chaos.

Our view is that the compact is likely unconstitutional, but that’s not the only reason to oppose it. Choosing Presidents by plebiscite could make the general election for President look like the Democrats’ Iowa caucuses. The winner-take-all Electoral College is a barrier to regional and third party bids. A national popular election would invite many more candidates, and the results might regularly not be known for days after Election Day. It could also deepen polarization as less populous regions are passed over because getting out the vote in large urban areas is more efficient.

Virginians might also heed self-interest. The state has turned blue in large part because of the growing number of gentry liberals surrounding Washington, D.C., but the socialist candidate currently leading the Democratic field doesn’t cater to that constituency. The Old Dominion could be competitive in a changed 2020 map, and a potentially decisive state may want to think twice about giving up its influence picking the President.

Title: Russian interference in 1984
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 22, 2020, 10:16:32 AM

https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/report/how-moscow-meddles-the-wests-elections

Title: Russian meddling claims still a scam
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 24, 2020, 12:19:45 PM

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/23/politics/intelligence-briefer-russian-interference-trump-sanders/index.html

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/02/russian-election-meddling-claims-still-a-scam/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/john-ratcliffe-adam-schiff-is-russias-best-asset-in-sowing-election-discord

Title: WSJ: Campaign Finance Laws created candidate Bloomberg
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2020, 11:39:20 AM

Campaign-Finance Laws Created Candidate Bloomberg
They don’t level the field; they tilt it to the advantage of billionaires, especially if they own media firms.
By Bradley A. Smith and John R. Lott Jr.
Feb. 24, 2020 6:33 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
203

Michael Bloomberg in Washington, D.C., on April 28, 2001.
PHOTO: MARK WILSON/NEWSMAKERS
House Democrats held a panicked hearing this month about how to respond to the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which upheld the right of corporations to spend in elections. Their concern was the undue influence corporate spending might have on the coming elections.

In the entire 2016 campaign cycle, corporations spent less than $300 million on federal races, less than 5% of total spending. Meanwhile, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has already spent more than $360 million on cable, broadcast and radio advertisements since declaring his candidacy in mid-November. That doesn’t include Mr. Bloomberg’s spending on staff, office space, logistics and internet advertising. Overturning Citizens United wouldn’t touch that money.

Can Mike Bloomberg Rebound From His Debate Flop?


SUBSCRIBE
“It’s a shame Mike Bloomberg can buy his way into the debate,” tweeted Sen. Elizabeth Warren. The Washington Post’s Greg Sargent typifies liberal angst with the claim that Mr. Bloomberg’s spending “threatens to constitute a moral and political disaster.”

Whether Mr. Bloomberg’s ad barrage translates to more than a brief blip in the polls remains to be seen—he was savaged by his rivals in his first debate.

But Mr. Bloomberg’s ad campaign is likely to help the eventual Democratic nominee, whether it is Mr. Bloomberg or someone else. Many of his ads directly attack President Trump. Since Mr. Bloomberg is a candidate, federal law mandates that he get the lowest unit ad rate. If Mr. Bloomberg used the same money to fund a super PAC, it would have to pay market rates. Thus being a candidate wins Mr. Bloomberg an advantage in softening up Mr. Trump for the Democratic nominee. At the same time, super PACs backing other candidates have to pay far more for their ads than Mr. Bloomberg does, while their campaigns are subject to strict limits on the size of contributions they can receive. The former mayor doesn’t need contributions.

But all this misses an even bigger elephant in the room: Bloomberg Media, which Mr. Bloomberg owns. Federal law exempts the institutional press from campaign finance restrictions, allowing media corporations to coordinate their spending with campaigns—which is illegal for other corporations—and to avoid burdensome reporting requirements, all the while spending what they want to elect their favored candidates. Favorable media coverage—or hostile coverage of an opponent—is invaluable.

A media corporation owned or controlled by a candidate is excluded from the exemption unless its coverage is part of “a general pattern of campaign-related news” that gives “reasonably equal coverage to all opposing candidates.” But unless and until they are formally nominated, Mr. Bloomberg and President Trump are not, under the law, considered “opposing candidates.” The law holds that until then, Mr. Bloomberg is competing only with other Democrats for the nomination. So for now, Bloomberg News is free to trash the president and his policies all it wants.

Thus, attacking the president and sparing his Democratic rivals is the official policy of Bloomberg News and its 2,700 reporters. Bloomberg’s editor in chief has written, “We will continue our tradition of not investigating Mike . . . and we will extend the same policy to his [Democratic] rivals.” But it “will continue to investigate the Trump administration.”

Even if Mr. Bloomberg becomes the Democratic nominee, there is no way to prevent Bloomberg News from shaping its coverage of the economy and current events to help its owner’s candidacy or harm the president’s. For example, despite the strong economy, on a recent weekend Bloomberg News headlines included: “In Hot U.S. Jobs Market, Half of College Grads Are Missing Out,” “All the Ways Stock Market Bulls Have Gone Off the Rails. Again,” and “China Trade War Walloped More Than Half of U.S. States in 2019.”

OPINION LIVE EVENT
Election 2020 and the Future of American Politics

Join WSJ Opinion’s Paul Gigot and Kimberley Strassel with guests Marie Harf and Karl Rove as they discuss the upcoming election at the Perot Museum of Nature and Science in Dallas on Tuesday, April 14 at 7 p.m.. Sign up here.

Wage growth has been strong, and those with lower incomes have seen the largest percentage increases. But this decline in income inequality is no reason to celebrate at Bloomberg News, which frets, “In recent years, while high-school graduates have seen a sharp pickup in earnings, the lower-earning half of college graduates haven’t—and the gap between them is now the smallest in 15 years.”

Bloomberg News also runs regular over-the-top opinion pieces criticizing Mr. Trump, with headlines such as: “An Unrestrained Trump May End Up Trapping Himself,” “Trump Is Already Making Stuff Up About Voter Fraud,” and “Trump’s Tariffs Haven’t Rescued American Steel.” Again, all from a single weekend.

The value of these stories to Democrats in general, and to Mr. Bloomberg in particular, almost certainly exceeds Mr. Bloomberg’s advertising expenditures. But there is no way that the government could or should police Bloomberg News’s content for political bias.

Further, Bloomberg News’s headlines and stories are not substantially different from those one finds in the Washington Post (owned by the world’s richest man, Jeff Bezos), the New York Times (which is controlled by the Sulzberger family and for several years counted Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim as its largest shareholder), or most other traditional news outlets. Meanwhile, candidates operate under strict limits on contributions, making it difficult to counteract the influence of magnates with newspapers.

The whole saga illustrates the impossibility of putting government in control of campaign speech, and the unfairness that results from trying. Campaign finance laws don’t equalize political influence—they give an advantage to some of the richest and most powerful men in America.

Congressional Democrats have busied themselves with proposing constitutional amendments to overturn Citizens United. That’s small beer. If Democrats want to make campaigns “equal,” they’ll have to repeal the First Amendment’s guarantee of press freedom. I doubt they want to go that far.

Mr. Smith served as chairman of the Federal Election Commission, 2001-05, and is chairman of the Institute for Free Speech. Mr. Lott is president of the Crime Prevention Research Center.

Title: Prager U.: Is voter fraud real?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2020, 11:45:58 AM

second post

https://www.prageru.com/video/is-voter-fraud-real/

Title: likely voter fraud already in swing states
Post by: ccp on February 27, 2020, 05:54:36 PM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/group-threatens-lawsuits-over-suspiciously-high-voter-registration-rates-in-swing-states

Russians are at it again  :wink:

Title: Tulsi Gabbord takes on the intel agencies and her opponents
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 03, 2020, 06:21:53 AM

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/485051-tulsi-gabbard-presidential-candidates-must-also-condemn-election

Title: WSJ: CA fux up
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2020, 08:19:26 AM

California Steals Its Own Election
Voting reforms create an electoral mess and deny Sanders a bigger win.
By The Editorial Board
March 6, 2020 7:14 pm ET

Voters arrive to cast their ballots for the 2020 presidential primary at Castelar Elementary School in Chinatown, Los Angeles, March 3.

PHOTO: FREDERIC J. BROWN/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES

Bernie Sanders supporters who complain that the Democratic primary contest is rigged may have an ironic point. Look how he was denied what might have been a bigger victory in California on Super Tuesday that would have countered Joe Biden’s Eastern U.S. rout narrative. Blame incompetent progressive government.

California’s tally at our deadline Friday had Mr. Sanders with 33.6% of the statewide vote to Mr. Biden’s 25.3%. But about three million mail-in and provisional ballots still have to be counted, and the state has until April 10 to certify results. So we won’t know how many of California’s 415 delegates Mr. Sanders won for another month or so.

Experts predict Mr. Sanders will win most of the uncounted ballots since young people often vote late. But the delayed results will dampen the benefit he might have gained from his California victory on Super Tuesday’s election night. Not that his friends on the left in Sacramento care. “In the state with the largest electorate in the nation, the vote count does not end on Election Night—and that’s a good thing,” declared Secretary of State Alex Padilla on Tuesday.

Mr. Padilla is trying to put a positive spin on California’s voting fiasco. Lawmakers recently overhauled election procedures in the name of making it easier for young people and Hispanics to vote. Yet the result was the opposite, and Mr. Sanders is the victim.

Start with the state’s 2016 Voter’s Choice Act, which allowed counties this year to reduce polling places and instead send absentee ballots to all voters. The law also expanded in-person voting and let voters cast ballots at any polling place in their county. Voters may also register, or change their party identification or address, on Election Day.

As a result, polling places were swamped with new voters and independents who didn’t realize they had to formally request mail-in Democratic ballots. Fifteen counties experienced problems trying to connect to online voter databases. After waiting in line for hours, many voters had to cast provisional ballots.

The Legislature gave Los Angeles County an exemption from the 2016 law after local officials complained it was too expensive to mail ballots to each of its 5.5 million voters following a $300 million voting system upgrade. Called Voting Solutions for All People, the upgrade made Iowa’s caucuses look competent.

Poll workers were supposed to use computer tablets to look up voter registrations, but the devices stalled as more tried to connect with the county online database. Then voters couldn’t figure out the high-tech voting contraptions, which required selecting choices on a touch screen, printing out a physical ballot, re-inserting the ballot into the machine and clicking a final button.

Many voters left without completing all steps or realizing they didn’t vote. Because machines repeatedly broke down, many voters had to complete write-in forms, some of which were in languages they didn’t speak. All these dysfunctions resulted in hours-long lines, which one voter compared to being stuck in traffic on LA’s 405 freeway.

Only two companies bid for LA’s new voting system because one condition was that it be publicly owned—i.e., socialized. One was U.K.-based company Smartmatic, which got its start developing a new system for Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela in 2004. The other had developed ObamaCare’s Healthcare.gov website, which famously crashed on its launch date. Smartmatic won. Voters lost.

Even considering uncounted votes, turnout is running lower than in the June 2016 primary. So to recap: California Democrats moved up the state’s primary to make it more relevant and reduced voting obstacles to boost liberal turnout. In the end they disenfranchised many Democratic voters, and denied Mr. Sanders the flush of his primary victory. This would be darkly amusing if it didn’t undermine trust in the legitimacy of election results.

Title: Redistricting in VA (Holder flip flop)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 12, 2020, 09:09:10 AM

WSJ

Eric Holder’s Redistricting Flip
Virginia is revealing the cynicism of complaints over gerrymanders.
By The Editorial Board
March 10, 2020 7:13 pm ET

Former Attorney General Eric Holder insists that his redistricting lobbying and litigation shop merely wants to make maps less partisan. Responding to our editorial last November on his court redistricting coup, he wrote that he supported “citizens or nonpartisan commissions to draw electoral lines so neither party benefits.” Interesting, then, that he’s not supporting such a reform in Virginia now that Democrats control the Legislature.

Last week Virginia’s House of Delegates voted 54-46 to place a referendum on the November ballot to establish an ostensibly nonpartisan citizen commission to draw legislative and Congressional maps after the 2020 Census. A majority of the General Assembly must vote in two successive sessions to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot.

Friday was the second vote, and it’s notable that the referendum passed because nine Democrats joined all 45 Republicans. Most Democrats supported the referendum last year while in the minority but did an about-face after winning control in November. All Republicans but one supported the referendum even when they were in the majority.

Many Democratic legislators now say the referendum would give too much power to unelected judges, and they have a point. Maps would be drawn by a 16-member commission composed of eight citizens and eight legislators. But the state Supreme Court would have the final say, and the technocratic design makes us wonder if Pete Buttigieg helped design it.

The Legislature’s four party leaders would each nominate 16 citizens, and a committee of five retired state circuit court judges would select two from each leader’s list. Four of the judges on the committee would be selected by the four party leaders and the fifth would be chosen by the four other judges. Comprende?

New maps would have to win the support of at least six legislators and six citizens on the commission. If the commission deadlocks, the state Supreme Court would draw the maps. Ditto if the General Assembly rejects the commission’s maps.

“I fear any ‘democracy’ in which control of the legislature is chosen by judges who were chosen by a legislature that was chosen by the judges chosen by the legislature in a never-ending loop that permanently circumvents voters,” Democratic House Member Mark Levine wrote in a Washington Post op-ed.

We also have qualms about redistricting commissions, which have shown they can be easily manipulated by partisans (see California) and dilute political accountability. But Democrats in Virginia said they were worried the state Supreme Court’s conservative majority would wind up drawing maps to favor Republicans.

This is ironic since liberal federal judges last year redrew the state House map to help Democrats after Mr. Holder said districts were racially gerrymandered. Pennsylvania’s Democratic Supreme Court also redrew maps in 2018 that helped the party win three seats following a lawsuit backed by Mr. Holder.

Now Mr. Holder is refusing to support the Virginia referendum, which he says lacks protections for minorities. Yet the referendum states that “every electoral district shall be drawn in accordance with the requirements of federal and state laws that address racial and ethnic fairness.” Mr. Holder supports “nonpartisan” maps only if they favor Democrats.

Title: Sotomayor recuses
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 12, 2020, 09:43:17 AM

second

https://www.theepochtimes.com/justice-sotomayor-recuses-herself-from-case-on-electoral-college-electors_3267093.html

Title: Killing democracy in California
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 14, 2020, 07:42:21 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/in-california-primaries-sometimes-the-winning-strategy-is-to-help-a-foe/

Title: Re: The electoral process, Early voting means wasted votes
Post by: DougMacG on March 16, 2020, 08:42:07 AM

Our host yesterday voted early for Bloomberg who is not on tomorrow's ballot in her state.

The answer for this is something called Election Day, not Ranked indecision.

Title: Harris County TX loses fight to hide illegal voting records
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 20, 2020, 04:16:35 PM

https://kprcradio.iheart.com/featured/the-pursuit-of-happiness/content/2020-03-19-harris-county-loses-legal-fight-will-disclose-records-of-illegal-voting/

Title: WSJ: Wisconsin's election confusion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2020, 04:36:07 AM

Wisconsin’s Election Confusion
Decisions to alter voting need to follow the law, even in a pandemic.
By The Editorial Board
April 7, 2020 7:24 pm ET


Wisconsin held its election Tuesday on schedule despite coronavirus, and Democrats are blaming the Supreme Court for endangering public health. That’s not what happened. On Monday night the Justices rightly reversed a district judge’s last-minute order that would have allowed Wisconsin ballots to be cast after the election was legally over. The confusing episode is a reminder that, even in a pandemic, steps as grave as rewriting voting rules should be up to elected representatives and not freelanced by judges.

Wisconsin planned to mitigate the coronavirus threat with a large increase in vote-by-mail so fewer people would need to leave their homes. The Democratic National Committee sued to force the delay of the election outright.

The Coronavirus Surge


SUBSCRIBE
Last Thursday a federal judge denied that extreme request but said vote-by-mail needed to be extended. Instead of receiving ballots by April 7, he said, clerks needed to count any ballots received by next Monday, April 13. After apparently realizing that this could distort the electoral process by allowing Tuesday’s reported results to influence votes, the judge issued another order banning the state elections board from reporting any results before April 13.

The Republican National Committee asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene, and five Justices agreed that the district judge was outside his authority. His remedy would “fundamentally alter the nature of the election by allowing voting for six additional days after the election,” they wrote in an unsigned opinion. By trying to muzzle election results, they added, “the District Court in essence enjoined non-parties to this lawsuit.”

The Supreme Court decision came an hour after the Wisconsin Supreme Court swatted aside Gov. Tony Evers’s effort to unilaterally postpone the election. Through March, Mr. Evers, a Democrat, had indicated the election should proceed and issued an executive order exempting polling places from his mass-gathering ban.

Yet liberal pressure built in recent days and on Monday Mr. Evers tried using his emergency powers to call off the next day’s voting. The state’s Supreme Court ruled 4-2 that he didn’t have that power—election law would need to be changed by the legislature (though in other states Governors’ emergency powers are broader). And so voting went ahead, with long lines at socially distanced polling places and a surge in absentee ballots—more than a million compared to less than a quarter million in 2016.

More than a dozen states have postponed their spring primary elections because of the virus. Yet Wisconsin’s election is more consequential than the all-but-finished Biden-Sanders primary that is the main item on the ballot in many states. A state Supreme Court seat and criminal-justice referendum are both contested. Postponing it by months could require altering the duration of elected officials’ terms.

Republicans in the Legislature didn’t show interest in postponing the election, but neither did Mr. Evers until recently. If voters are disappointed, they can hold legislators accountable in November or boot Mr. Evers in 2022.

The pandemic has disrupted much of American life and voting is no exception. But both the district judge’s jury-rigged order and Mr. Evers’s last minute 180-turn under political pressure set a bad precedent. This virus will be here for some time, and people in different states need to deal with it through the democratic process. Americans have already temporarily lost some of our freedom and we shouldn’t also toss out the rule of law.

Title: AG Barr says China in full court blitz to undermine US elections.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 10, 2020, 03:30:29 PM

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/04/video-ag-barr-says-china-in-full-court-blitzkrieg-to-undermine-us-elections-and-institutions/?utm_source=smartnews

Title: Re: AG Barr says China in full court blitz to undermine US elections.
Post by: DougMacG on April 10, 2020, 04:21:50 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 10, 2020, 03:30:29 PM

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/04/video-ag-barr-says-china-in-full-court-blitzkrieg-to-undermine-us-elections-and-institutions/?utm_source=smartnews

Is that an act of war?  Our response should be, bring down their regime - also without firing a bullet.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 11, 2020, 07:12:26 PM

Given how many elections we have interfered with around the world I'm thinking it would be hard to muster the political support, not to mention the viability of a military strategy is not apparent to me; Trump was wise to go with trade instead.

Title: John Lott: Jimmy Carter was right, Mail In Voting=Fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 12, 2020, 08:39:58 AM

Heed Jimmy Carter on the Danger of Mail-In Voting
‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.’
By John R. Lott Jr.
April 10, 2020 6:27 pm ET

‘Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.” That quote isn’t from President Trump, who criticized mail-in voting this week after Wisconsin Democrats tried and failed to change an election at the last minute into an exclusively mail-in affair. It’s the conclusion of the bipartisan 2005 report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform, chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker III.

Concerns about vote-buying have a long history in the U.S. They helped drive the move to the secret ballot, which U.S. states adopted between 1888 and 1950. Secret ballots made it harder for vote buyers to monitor which candidates sellers actually voted for. Vote-buying had been pervasive; my research with Larry Kenny at the University of Florida has found that voter turnout fell by about 8% to 12% after states adopted the secret ballot.

You wouldn’t know any of this listening to the media outcry over Mr. Trump’s remarks. “There is a lot of dishonesty going on with mail-in voting,” the president said Tuesday. In response, a CNN “fact check” declares that Mr. Trump “opened a new front in his campaign of lies about voter fraud.” A New York Times headline asserts: “Trump Is Pushing a False Argument on Vote-by-Mail Fraud.” Both claim that voter fraud is essentially nonexistent. The Carter-Baker report found otherwise.

Intimidation and vote buying were key concerns of the commission: “Citizens who vote at home, at nursing homes, at the workplace, or in church are more susceptible to pressure, overt and subtle, or to intimidation. Vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail.” The report provides examples, such as the 1997 Miami mayoral election that resulted in 36 arrests for absentee-ballot fraud. The election had to be rerun, and the result was reversed.

There are more recent cases, too. In 2017 an investigation of a Dallas City Council election found some 700 fraudulent mail-in ballots signed by the same witness using a fake name. The discovery left two council races in limbo, and the fraud was much larger than the vote differential in one of those races. The case resulted in a criminal conviction.

In a 2018 North Carolina congressional race, Republican Mark Harris edged out Democrat Dan McCready by 905 votes. Fortunately, the state had relatively complete absentee-ballot records. Election officials became suspicious when they discovered that the Republican received 61% of mail-in votes, even though registered Republicans accounted for only 19% of those who had requested mail-in ballots.

A Republican operative, L. McCrae Dowless Jr., had allegedly requested more than 1,200 absentee ballots on voters’ behalf and then collected the ballots from voters’ homes when they were mailed out. Mr. Dowless’s assistants testified that they were directed to forge voters’ signatures and fill in votes. A new election was required, but Mr. Harris didn’t run. Mr. Dowless faces criminal charges for absentee-ballot fraud in both the 2016 and 2018 elections and has pled not guilty.

It is often claimed that impossibly large numbers of people live at the same address. In 2016, 83 registered voters in San Pedro, Calif., received absentee ballots at the same small two-bedroom apartment. Prosecutors rarely pursue this type of case.

Mail-in voting is a throwback to the dark old days of vote-buying and fraud. Because of this, many countries don’t allow absentee ballots for citizens living in their country, including Norway and Mexico. Americans deserve a more trustworthy system.

Mr. Lott is president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and author, most recently, of “The War on Guns.”

Title: 16.4 mail in ballots went missing in 2016, 2018
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 13, 2020, 05:00:37 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/federal-data-16-4m-mail-in-ballots-went-missing-in-2016-2018-elections/

Title: Re: 16.4 mail in ballots went missing in 2016, 2018
Post by: DougMacG on April 13, 2020, 07:00:21 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 13, 2020, 05:00:37 AM

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/federal-data-16-4m-mail-in-ballots-went-missing-in-2016-2018-elections/

Sound like a good system we should try to do more of?  Begs the question, which ones went missing??  In Minneapolis to win the 60th vote in the Senate, 2008-2009, they found some of the missing ballots in the trunk of a car.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122644940271419147.html

We used to have something in America called 'election day', and you needed a good reason to vote absentee.

The early voting in 2020 could kill the Democrats - if Biden is replaced on the ballot in the last days.

Title: Undelivered WI absentee ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 13, 2020, 02:13:24 PM

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/04/10/usps-investigating-undelivered-wisconsin-absentee-ballot-issues/5135563002/

Title: 08/2017 IBD More registered voters than live adults
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 26, 2020, 10:15:34 AM

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/u-s-has-3-5-million-more-registered-voters-than-live-adults-a-red-flag-for-electoral-fraud/

Title: JW on the job!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 02, 2020, 06:49:00 AM

Judicial Watch Sues Pennsylvania to Force Voter Roll Clean Up

Judicial Watch hasn’t let the coronavirus crisis slow down our essential legal efforts to protect and promote clean elections. Our legal team just filed a lawsuit against Pennsylvania and three of its counties for failing to make reasonable efforts to remove ineligible voters from their rolls as required by the federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA). According to Judicial Watch’s analysis of voter registration data, these counties removed almost no names under NVRA procedures for identifying and updating the registrations of those who have moved (Judicial Watch v. Pennsylvania, et al (No. 1:02-at-06000)). The lawsuit also points out that the Commonwealth has over 800,000 “inactive” registrations on its voter rolls. One Pennsylvania county almost immediately removed 69,000 inactive names earlier this year in response to a Judicial Watch letter.

In its complaint, Judicial Watch points out that the State’s abnormally low number of removals under NVRA procedures designed to identify voters who have changed residence indicates that it is not removing inactive registrations as the law requires. According to data the State certified to the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), in the most recent two-year reporting period:
•   Bucks County, with about 457,000 registrations, removed a total of eight names under the relevant NVRA procedures;
•   Chester County, with about 357,000 registrations, removed five names under those procedures; and
•   Delaware County, with about 403,000 registrations, removed four names under those procedures.
Judicial Watch also argues that an abnormally high percentage of registrations compared to the population over 18 years of age is an indicator “that the jurisdiction is not taking steps required by law to cancel the registrations of ineligible registrants.” It alleges that “[t]he registration rates for Bucks, Chester, and Delaware Counties are high in comparison to other counties in Pennsylvania, and high in comparison to other counties throughout the U.S.”  As of April 2020, Pennsylvania’s own data shows it has over 800,000 inactive registrations.

Other Pennsylvania counties have acted to avoid being sued by Judicial Watch. On January 14, 2020, CBS Pittsburgh reported that because of the threat of a lawsuit from Judicial Watch, Allegheny County removed 69,000 inactive voters. David Voye, Elections Manager for the county told CBS, “I would concede that we are behind on culling our rolls,” and that this had “been put on the backburner.”

Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections – that’s one reason why we’re going to court to force Pennsylvania to follow federal law to clean up its voting rolls. Pennsylvania must take the simple steps necessary to clean from its rolls the names of voters, which number over 800,000, who probably have moved away or died.

Judicial Watch is the national leader in enforcing the NVRA.

Recently, a federal court ordered the State of Maryland to produce complete voter registration records for Montgomery County that include the registered voters’ dates of birth. The judge found that Judicial Watch made “reasonable justifications for requiring birth date information, including using birth dates to find duplicate registrations and searching for voters who remain on the rolls despite ‘improbable’ age.”

Judicial Watch recently filed a lawsuit against North Carolina to force the state to clean its voter rolls that included over one million inactive voters. In December 2019, Judicial Watch provided notice to 19 large counties in five states that it intended to sue unless they took steps to comply with the NVRA by removing ineligible registrations from their rolls. In addition to North Carolina and Pennsylvania, Judicial Watch sent letters to counties in California, Virginia, and Colorado.

In 2018, the Supreme Court upheld a voter-roll cleanup program that resulted from a Judicial Watch settlement of a federal lawsuit with Ohio. California settled an NVRA lawsuit with Judicial Watch and last year began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls. Kentucky also began a cleanup of hundreds of thousands of old registrations last year after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.

Despite successful litigation by Judicial Watch to bring counties and states into compliance with the NVRA, voter registration lists across the country remain significantly out of date. Judicial Watch’s 2019 study found 378 counties nationwide that had more voter registrations than citizens old enough to vote, i.e., counties where registration rates exceed 100%. These 378 counties combined had about 2.5 million registrations over the 100%-registered mark. This is a drop of about one million from Judicial Watch’s previous analysis of voter registration data in 2017.

Two federal lawsuits in one month to clean up nearly 2 million “inactive” names from voter lists is something that only Judicial Watch is able and willing to do – thanks to your support!

Until next week …
 
 

Title: LA County to send vote by mail ballots to all registered voters in November
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 02, 2020, 03:33:38 PM

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/coronavirus/la-county-to-send-vote-by-mail-ballots-to-all-registered-voters-in-november/2353716/

Title: the process of rigging already beginning
Post by: ccp on May 02, 2020, 03:46:25 PM

"LA County to send vote by mail ballots to all registered voters in November"

The Dem mob controlled areas already prepping to rig the counts.

Waiting for other strongholds to follow suit

Title: of course if it helps the Dem party lets do it
Post by: ccp on May 09, 2020, 07:51:25 AM

Rahm Emanuel biggest achievement is making famous the phrase " 'Never let a good crisis go to waste"

This will be as far as I am concerned the only thing he will be remembered for

And the Democrats took the hint:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/08/california-gavin-newsom-orders-vote-by-mail-for-november-election/

Title: WSJ on Faithless Electors
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 13, 2020, 11:06:41 AM

‘Faithless Electors’ at the Supreme Court
A constitutional case could destabilize presidential elections.
By The Editorial Board
May 12, 2020 7:26 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
170

Bret Chiafalo speaks outside the U.S. Courthouse in Seattle, Dec. 14, 2016.
PHOTO: ELAINE THOMPSON/ASSOCIATED PRESS
In December 2016, Hillary Clinton’s campaign called for members of the Electoral College to be briefed on Russia-related intelligence before voting to ratify Donald Trump’s November election victory. This was unprecedented and amounted to an effort to nullify the judgment of 137 million voters.

Yet such gambits could become more common depending on the outcome of two cases before the Supreme Court Wednesday. In Colorado Department of State v. Baca and Chiafalo v. Washington, ex-Electoral College members want the Justices to declare that they can’t be bound by their states’ voters. They say all 538 presidential electors can instead vote their conscience like Senators or members of a jury.

The Supreme Court is right to settle this ahead of what looks to be a fiercely contested 2020 election. While the Founding-era ideal of an Electoral College of philosopher-kings may be appealing in the abstract, the Constitution leaves responsibility for selecting and regulating electors to the states. Those that want to enforce electors’ pledges should be allowed to do so.

Voters expect a state’s electors to vote for whichever presidential candidate wins the state. That’s the basis of the ubiquitous red-blue Electoral College map showing a path to a 270-vote majority. “Faithless electors” have historically been rare.

Thirty-two states require that an elector vote for the candidate he or she has pledged to. Among those states are Colorado and Washington, where Hillary Clinton won in 2016. When a Colorado elector sought to cast a ballot for a different candidate in 2016, the Secretary of State removed him. When electors did the same in Washington state, they faced a $1,000 fine. The Washington Supreme Court upheld the fine, while the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals held that Colorado couldn’t constitutionally enforce electors’ pledges.

The electors—represented, ironically, by anti-Electoral College crusader Lawrence Lessig—argue that the Founders intended the Electoral College to be independent or they wouldn’t have created it. They point to Alexander Hamilton’s ruminations in the Federalist Papers about the electors serving as an intermediary between the masses and the Presidency.

Yet the states note that Hamilton’s views weren’t shared by all the Founders. If there had been a consensus around Electoral College independence, it would have been protected in the Constitution. The framers of the original Electoral College also did not envision parties. The 12th Amendment in 1804 rewrote the Electoral College rules to prevent a President and Vice President of opposite parties.

Most important, the Constitution gives states broad control over their Electoral College process. States appoint electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,” implying they can attach conditions to serving. They can bind electors—or not—and decide what if any penalty to impose for breaking a pledge. In the absence of a constitutional restriction on states’ authority, federalism ought to carry the day.

The Republican National Committee in its amicus brief argues the real mission of this lawsuit is “to sow chaos in the Electoral College.” More chaos is coming as Democratic state legislatures seek to nullify it through the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which could also one day end up at the Supreme Court. Meantime, the Justices should not swoop in to create more opportunities for 2016-style shenanigans after votes are cast this fall

Title: Michigan
Post by: ccp on May 20, 2020, 06:57:44 AM

already sent out 7.7 mail in ballots [so their operatives can get started on
harvesting votes - me]:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/20/donald-trump-threatens-to-punish-michigan-for-mailing-absentee-ballot-applications-to-voters/

gotta get Michigan to vote against Trump
reason whitmore may be chosen as VP cand.

Title: Several vote fraud pieces to be found here
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 21, 2020, 08:07:34 PM

https://www.projectveritas.com/investigations/

Title: DOJ: PA officials paid to stuff ballot box
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 21, 2020, 09:10:28 PM

second post

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/21/doj-democrats-paid-pennsylvania-election-officials-to-stuff-ballot-box/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20200521

Title: Absentee ballot fustercluck in WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2020, 10:22:28 AM

Wisconsin’s Election Mess: Thousands of Missing or Nullified Ballots
As Wisconsin scrambled to expand voting by mail for its election on Tuesday, many absentee voters said their ballots went undelivered.


Nick CorasanitiStephanie Saul
By Nick Corasaniti and Stephanie Saul
April 9, 2020

Three tubs of absentee ballots that never reached voters were discovered in a postal center outside Milwaukee. At least 9,000 absentee ballots requested by voters were never sent, and others recorded as sent were never received. Even when voters did return their completed ballots in the mail, thousands were postmarked too late to count — or not at all.

Cracks in Wisconsin’s vote-by-mail operation are now emerging after the state’s scramble to expand that effort on the fly for voters who feared going to the polls in Tuesday’s elections. The takeaways — that the election network and the Postal Service were pushed to the brink of their capabilities, and that mistakes were clearly made — are instructive for other states if they choose to broaden vote-by-mail methods without sufficient time, money and planning.

More than 860,000 completed absentee ballots had been returned by Tuesday, already a record for Wisconsin spring elections. But for thousands of other voters, who never received their ballots, there was only one recourse: putting their health at risk and defying a stay-at-home order to vote in person during the coronavirus pandemic. Many chose not to show up.

Federal health officials have suggested that expanding voting by mail could help reduce crowds at polling places and therefore make elections safer amid the outbreak. The issues that have arisen in Wisconsin offer a warning for other states of the potential pitfalls of a rapid, last-minute expansion of absentee balloting, particularly one marred by a flurry of court challenges and 11th-hour rulings that created confusion and chaos.

The mix of missing and mismarked ballots suggests that thousands of Wisconsin voters were effectively disenfranchised, an issue that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg warned of in her dissent to a Supreme Court decision on Monday that blocked extended absentee balloting in the state. Tens of thousands of people who did not receive their ballots in time, Justice Ginsburg wrote, “will be left quite literally without a vote.”

But many Republicans, and even some Democrats, have continued to cast concerns on the security and veracity of vote-by-mail systems, especially ones expanded so rapidly.

“It’s a harder system to administer, and obviously it’s a harder system to police writ large,” Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, Democrat of New York, said in a radio interview on Thursday, when asked about the downsides to expanding voting by mail. “People showing up, people actually showing ID, is still the easiest system to assure total integrity.”

In Wisconsin, the missing votes could also portend a long legal battle over the results; one race on Tuesday’s ballot was a hotly contested State Supreme Court seat that, in a normal election, was expected to be extremely close. The margin in the state’s 2019 Supreme Court race was about 6,000 votes.

“This has all the makings of a Florida 2000 if we have a close race,” said Gordon Hintz, the Democratic minority leader in the Wisconsin State Assembly. Mr. Hintz, who lives in Oshkosh, was one of the voters who never received his absentee ballot — even though the state’s website said it had been mailed to him. He chose not to vote in person.

Others in Mr. Hintz’s district may have encountered the same problem. On Tuesday, calls began flooding the office of Dan Feyen, the state senator whose district includes Oshkosh, from voters saying they never received their ballots, even though they were told their ballots had been sent out. Nearly every one of those voters had requested their ballots on one of three dates: March 18, March 22 and March 23, more than two weeks before the election.

Mr. Feyen, a Republican, filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Elections Commission, asking it to investigate. He also wants those voters to be given a chance to fill out and return ballots.

On Wednesday, the commission received a phone call from a postal worker in Milwaukee who said three bins of absentee ballots had been located that had never reached their destinations, mostly in Oshkosh and nearby Appleton. The number of ballots in the bins was not clear.

A spokeswoman for the Postal Service, Martha Johnson, said Thursday that officials were “aware of potential issues with absentee ballots in Wisconsin and are currently conducting an investigation into the claims.”


Meagan Wolfe, the elections commission’s administrator, said she did not think the U.S. Supreme Court decision left any room for ballots to be counted if they were not postmarked by Tuesday’s deadline. “There really isn’t any additional things for this election that a voter could do if their ballot didn’t make it by the deadline,” she said in a news conference on Wednesday.

Many of the complaints from voters came from the Oshkosh and Appleton areas, but voters from all over the state said they had not received the absentee ballots they requested.

Dianne Ostrowski of Waukesha, about 20 miles west of Milwaukee, said she had filed an online request for an absentee ballot but never received one.

“I’m talking via Facebook with my family in Madison. Same thing. They never got their ballot either,” said Ms. Ostrowski, who is retired from the financial services industry. Madison, the capital, is more than an hour west of Waukesha.

Tamera Goodwin and her husband, who live in Madison, also said they hadn’t received ballots. “I was looking all over the place, I was looking on the news, Facebook, my state assemblyman’s page, talking to neighbors at a distance, but everyone was confused,” Ms. Goodwin said. “None of us has gotten our ballots and none of us had clarity of where to go.”

Lacking other options, Ms. Goodwin and her husband went to vote in person on Tuesday.

In Racine, about 40 minutes south of Milwaukee, Dawn and Jeff Loken, also retired, complained that they did not receive their ballots. The two Democrats finally trudged to the polls Tuesday night, not to be deterred by what Mr. Loken, who describes himself as a “die-hard Democrat” viewed as an intentional effort by Republicans to suppress his vote. (State Republican lawmakers rebuffed the Democratic governor’s request to postpone the election.)

Some absentee voters who received their ballots and mailed them back in time are running into a separate issue: postmarking.

After much legal wrangling over this year’s absentee ballot deadlines, the Supreme Court’s decision held that ballots must be postmarked by Election Day to count. But in at least one city, Madison, a number of ballots received by the clerk were never even postmarked to begin with.


“We are still receiving mail now from the post office, and about half of it is postmarked,” said Maribeth Witzel-Behl, the city clerk. “It’s probably by now a couple thousand that we’ve received from the post office with no postmark.”

She said her office is dating the ballots with its own stamp as soon as they arrive, and is working with the city attorney to determine what to do with them.

Even when postmarks are applied, they can prove problematic, particularly for some rural voters. Michelle Schwenneker, who lives in rural Jackson County, said that the mail truck in her town comes once a day, at 7:30 a.m., so if she put her ballot in the mailbox on Election Day it wouldn’t be postmarked in time.

“For me, basically, mailing your ballot and having it postmarked are basically two different things,” said Ms. Schwenneker.

With ballots still trickling in and results yet to be released, there has been no major legal challenge to Tuesday’s election. But activist groups and election lawyers in Wisconsin are still reviewing their options and monitoring reports of missing ballots.

Even in states that already vote entirely by mail, lost ballots can plague a system. In Colorado, Secretary of State Jena Griswold excoriated the Postal Service last November after 828 ballots arrived in Denver-area mailboxes on the afternoon of a tight mayoral race in suburban Aurora — too late for many people to vote.

But perhaps nothing presented as great a challenge for Wisconsin as the vast expansion of the absentee system in such a short period of time. More than 1.2 million ballots were requested this year; only about 250,000 were issued in Wisconsin’s 2016 spring election.

Kim Wyman, the secretary of state in Washington, a mail-voting state, said it is important for elections officials to work with local postal systems to make sure they can handle the sudden increase in volume.

“These states are going from 0 to 100,” she said.

Title: JW sues Gov. Nancy's Nephew over EO
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2020, 12:46:30 PM

   
Judicial Watch Sues to Stop California Governor Newsom’s “Vote by Mail” Mandate

Plaintiffs Include Voters and Congressional Candidate Darrell Issa
 
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced yesterday it filed a lawsuit to stop the special, statewide vote-by-mail mandate issued by California Governor Gavin Newsom. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include former U.S. Representative Darrell Issa (a candidate in the upcoming November election) and individual California voters from across the political spectrum. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court in Sacramento against Gov. Newsom and California Secretary of State Alex Padilla (Darrell Issa, et al. v. Gavin Newsom, et al. (No. 2:20-cv-01044)).

The Judicial Watch complaint argues that Newsom’s Executive Order N-64-20, requiring all California counties to conduct all-mail ballot elections, violates the U.S. Constitution and California state law. According to the U.S. Constitution, only state legislatures may determine the “Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives,” and only state legislatures may establish the manner in which electors to the Electoral College are appointed. The lawsuit points out that “[n]either defendant in this case is a ‘Legislature,’” as required under the Constitution, and “[t]he California Legislature never delegated to [Newsom] its authority under the Elections Clause or Electors Clause to regulate the manner of conducting elections for senators, representatives, or presidential electors.”

Judicial Watch also contends that Newsom’s mandate violates the California Voter’s Choice Act of 2016, which grants counties the option to qualify for and opt in to a system of mail-in voting. Judicial Watch argues the law reflects the legislature’s deliberate choice to delegate to each county the decision about whether to qualify and opt in to the all-mail ballot system. During the March 3, 2020 primary election, only 15 of California’s 58 counties qualified and opted-in to the all-mail balloting system.

The lawsuit alleges the plaintiffs will be harmed by Newsom’s mandate for all-mail voting because it imposes an entirely new election system that ignores the extensive qualifications required by California law before a county can opt in to all-mail balloting. Judicial Watch argues its plaintiffs will be at risk of having their votes thrown out or diluted by invalid votes under Newsom’s illegal system, and that Mr. Issa will have to expend additional resources to respond to the illegal mandate during his campaign.

“Governor Newsom’s vote-by-mail mandate is unconstitutional and may cause the votes of countless voters to be thrown out or not counted,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “California law prohibits blindly mailing out ballots to every registered voter in the state. This scheme raises the risk of Election Day chaos as well as voter fraud.”

In 2018, California settled a federal lawsuit with Judicial Watch and began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls. Judicial Watch late last year sent notices to 11 additional California counties warning them of voting list maintenance issues. Judicial Watch recently sued North Carolina and Pennsylvania to force them to clean up their voter rolls.


###

Title: Morris
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2020, 01:55:17 PM

fourth post

https://www.dickmorris.com/the-length-to-which-the-democrats-will-go-to-enable-voter-fraud-lunch-alert/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 22, 2020, 04:57:57 PM

Dick does not look so good
I heard he is battling some type of cancer.

he looks closer to 90 then 73 .

we need his voice

he has atoned for getting Jerry Nads elected to high school president and Clinton re elected in '96.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2020, 05:05:52 PM

Yes, cancer.  Sounds serious.

Title: FEC Chairwoman
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 28, 2020, 12:30:28 PM

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/499890-fec-chairwoman-no-basis-for-trump-claims-voting-by-mail-leads-to-fraud

Title: heritage foundation on mail in ballots
Post by: ccp on May 30, 2020, 08:07:44 AM

https://thefulcrum.us/voting/vote-by-mail-2646068275

all plainly obvious

as Tucker points out.

yet the crats and their media propaganda machine encourages cheating.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 30, 2020, 05:35:49 PM

Thanks for this.

Title: like it or not, here we come
Post by: ccp on May 31, 2020, 05:33:00 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/mail-in-voting-2020-election/

no doubt there are already swing locations that have teams of Dem operatives ready
to harvest the "crops" of ballots.

Title: Re: like it or not, here we come
Post by: DougMacG on May 31, 2020, 06:30:45 AM

Quote from: ccp on May 31, 2020, 05:33:00 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/mail-in-voting-2020-election/

no doubt there are already swing locations that have teams of Dem operatives ready
to harvest the "crops" of ballots.

Burning major city US post offices to the ground in the name of racial justice and the police headquarters that defends it, and knowing this will get worse and spread across the nation throughout the heat of the summer, doesn't help the case for mail in elections in my humble opinion. 

Was my ballot in that carnage?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 31, 2020, 06:37:34 AM

".Was my ballot in that carnage?"

yes.

But guess what someone found it and I have to ask
Doug , when did you switch to Democrat?
 :wink:

Title: How GOP cam turn vote by mail to its advantage
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 08, 2020, 10:47:14 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/06/06/pinkerton-how-the-gop-can-turn-vote-by-mail-and-vote-by-app-lemons-into-lemonade/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=todays_hottest_stories&utm_campaign=20200606

Title: Gingrich: Voter Fraud is real
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 08, 2020, 11:57:58 AM

second post

https://www.gingrich360.com/2020/06/ep-84-election-2020-voter-fraud-is-real/

Title: WSJ: PA's mail in pains
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 09, 2020, 03:51:44 PM

Pennsylvania last year passed legislation to allow mail-in voting, and the June 2 primaries were the first test of this new system. Nearly a week later, voters still don’t know the victors for some races, and don't be surprised if some candidates challenge the results in court. Behold the messiness of mail-in voting—and brace for November.

The vote-by-mail law passed before the coronavirus hit, but the pandemic prompted many to ditch the ballot box for the mailbox. Pennsylvania saw some 1.8 million applications for absentee and mail-in ballots, up from some 108,000 in 2016. In some counties, mail-in ballots must be opened by hand before they can be counted. That meant some delays were inevitable, even if Election Day went as planned. It did not.

Protests broke out across Pennsylvania in the days leading up to the primary. In Pittsburgh police cruisers were set on fire over the weekend, and in Philadelphia police arrested more than 250 people on June 1 and the morning of June 2. Citing the unrest, Gov. Tom Wolf issued an executive order extending the mail-in deadline.

Ballots were supposed to be received by Election Day. But in six counties any ballot postmarked by June 2 and received by June 9 will now count. As a result, some Pennsylvanians got more time to vote than others, and the final results for some contests won’t be in until a week after the election. Mr. Wolf’s executive order may also set a problematic precedent for unilateral eleventh-hour rule changes. This time it was a protest, but in November it could be a snowstorm. Last-minute interventions fuel partisan suspicions that can undermine public trust in the result.

Such complications are especially troubling in close contests, like the race for a state house seat in the 188th district in Philadelphia. Progressive Rick Krajewski, who is challenging a longtime incumbent, is a proponent of mail-in ballots but admits “we really have to step up how we’re handling this.” As of Monday, about half the votes in his race hadn’t been counted. “Now we’re in this holding pattern,” he said.

Mr. Krajewski says his impression is that “everyone’s in a state of ‘how do we get the votes counted’ rather than questioning the legitimacy of this.” But that attitude may not hold statewide once the winners—and losers—are declared. State lawmakers are already planning hearings to look at what went wrong, and don’t be surprised if at least one thwarted contender challenges the outcome because of Mr. Wolf’s executive order.

All of this bodes ill for the general election. Donald Trump won Pennsylvania in 2016, but Joe Biden is leading in the polls in this critical swing state. The public needs confidence in the electoral process. The last thing a divided America needs is a mail-in morass in Pennsylvania in November.

Title: CIA's Mike Morell on foreign threats to 2020 election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 10, 2020, 03:35:15 PM

IIRC Morell had ambitions of the Dowager Empress appointing him as head of the CIA and to that end was part of the Benghazi coverup so caveat lector:

https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/cbs-radio-news/intelligence-matters/e/69949891

Title: Serious Security Issues w OmniBallot Online Voting System
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 19, 2020, 12:28:14 AM

Source: https://www.sans.org/newsletters/newsbites/xxii/46

--Researchers Find Serious Security Issues in OmniBallot Online Voting System

(June 7 & 8, 2020)

Researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and the University of Michigan have released a report detailing their findings about the security of the OmniBallot Internet voting and ballot delivery system. OnmiBallot, which is produced by Democracy Live, has been used in the past to let voters print ballots, complete them by hand, and return them by mail. For the 2020 election, the system will include online ballot return. The researchers, J. Alex Halderman and Michael Specter, write that the safest option is to avoid using OmniBallot. They note that OmniBallot is vulnerable to vote manipulation by malware on the voters device and by insiders or other attackers and that it appears not to have a privacy policy.[Editor Comments][Pescatore] Two analogies here: (1) A few years ago, I had rotator cuff surgery and the morning of the operation the surgeon came to the prep room with a black marker and wrote This arm and his signature on my right arm; (2) I have never seen, and never want to see, a traffic light that is showing green in all four directions. Errors in presidential elections are pretty much up there with operations on the wrong body part or cars colliding at intersections. There needs to be both manual mechanisms and auditing and safety interlocks built-in to any software-based voting system, just as it is built into surgical procedures even though we have Electronic Health Records, and in traffic signal controller hardware even though we have online light control systems. Every state has rigorous control of traffic lights and there are national standards for them, as well.

Since election systems are considered part of the critical national infrastructure, they should be treated just as rigorously.[Neely] If you must use OmniBallot, the most secure option for remote voting remains printing, hand marking, and then returning a paper ballot by mail. The electronic ballot return mechanisms dont include sufficient anti-tampering protections, and even when printing paper ballots, if youre using the application to mark your ballot, OmniBallot collects and sends privacy information from the voters for tabulation. As electronic voting continues to move forward, rigorous testing and validation of security is essential to election integrity and voter confidence.[Murray] There is a fundamental flaw in all such systems. If one makes the ballot unique, even though it would require collusion between the issuer and the counter of ballots, the voter cannot be sure that it cannot be identified with him.  Read more in:

Internet Policy: How to Protect Your Vote
https://internetpolicy.mit.edu/omniballot-advice/

Internet Policy: Security Analysis of the Democracy Live Online Voting System (PDF)
https://internetpolicy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/OmniBallot.pdf

Statescoop: Researchers say OmniBallot online voting platform is vulnerable to manipulation
https://statescoop.com/researchers-say-omniballot-online-voting-platform-is-vulnerable-to-manipulation/

NYT: Amid Pandemic and Upheaval, New Cyberthreats to the Presidential Election
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/us/politics/remote-voting-hacking-coronavirus.html

Title: Morris: widening gap between popular vote and electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2020, 11:59:02 AM

https://www.dickmorris.com/why-the-widening-division-between-popular-votes-electoral-college-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Title: Beware the Fall Ballot Harvest
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2020, 04:32:10 PM

Beware the Fall Ballot Harvest
Too many states aren’t preparing for a potential vote-by-mail mess.
By The Editorial Board
June 19, 2020 7:01 pm ET


When Donald Trump gripes about mail voting, Democrats see an attempt to discredit the result if he loses in November. “This president,” Joe Biden said last week, “is going to try to steal this election.” If they truly believe this, Democrats should do more to safeguard the ballot.

They’re now doing the reverse. The Democratic House passed a bill that would mandate “ballot harvesting” nationwide, letting paid activists canvass neighborhoods to collect absentee votes. The bill would also force states to count mail ballots that arrive after Election Day, as long as the postmark meets that date. In that case, the next President could be in doubt for weeks.

Trump, Dreamers And The Supreme Court


SUBSCRIBE
Local Democrats seem equally uneager to shore up the ballot box. By a 3-3 vote Wednesday, the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission failed to advance a proposal to effectively ban ballot harvesting. According to the reigning interpretation of state law, third-party ballot collection is legal. Activists wearing Trump hats or Biden shirts can knock on doors and take possession of votes.

A petition for rule-making, filed on behalf of five voters by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, claimed that this legal reading is incorrect. The law says that absentee ballots “shall be mailed by the elector, or delivered in person, to the municipal clerk.” As the petitioners said: “That statute obviously means that the elector shall mail it, or the elector shall deliver it.” They sought new rules to enforce this view.

The commissioners, three appointed from each party, split on partisan lines. Democrats argued that the proposal could penalize a husband carrying his wife’s ballot; that setting policy is the Legislature’s job; and that ballot harvesting isn’t a problem. “It’s just made-up stuff,” said Commissioner Mark Thomsen, “and we should not give any credence to it.”

Republicans countered that the number of absentee ballots in 2020 will be substantially higher than ever. Given the margin in 2016, the presidential campaigns will be jockeying for every one of them. “If you think there’s no ballot harvesting in Wisconsin,” said Commissioner Dean Knudson, “you buckle up, because there most definitely will be.” Mr. Trump won the state in 2016 by a mere 22,748 votes.

It’s a possibility elsewhere, too. In 2016 Florida’s Division of Elections offered this guidance: “Any person can collect and return other voters’ voted absentee ballots to the Supervisor of Elections. No limit exists.” A small stipulation: There’s a “criminal offense for pecuniary or other beneficial exchange,” meaning apparently that harvesters must volunteer.

In 2017 the Palm Beach Post reported that two local candidates “took advantage of gaping holes in Florida’s vote-by-mail laws to pressure and cajole voters in their living rooms.” In canvassed neighborhoods, “where nearly every resident voted absentee,” reporters found a woman who said she felt “forced” to vote, as well as a blind Creole-speaking man who said the candidate filled out his ballot.

A day before Pennsylvania’s June 2 primary, Governor Tom Wolf signed an order extending the ballot deadline in six counties. As long as mail votes were postmarked by Election Day, they could arrive on June 9 and be counted. What followed did not inspire confidence. Nine days after the election, Philadelphia said it had 42,255 ballots untallied. Mr. Trump won the state in 2016 by 44,292 votes.

On Thursday Mr. Wolf signed a bill to perform an autopsy of the primary, which his office said “will help identify any necessary changes to the Pennsylvania Election Code before the general election.” Are they paying attention next door in Ohio? Ballots there can be counted if they arrive 10 days late, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Even if the voter gets to the mailbox in time, there’s a risk of tardiness. In 2018 the U.S. Postal Service delivered 95.6% of election and political mail on schedule, according to an audit by the inspector general. The score was 86.6% for a processing facility in Wisconsin, 79.4% for one in Ohio, and 75.7% for one in Florida. Last month in Butler County, Ohio, some 300 mail ballots were delivered 13 days after the election, thanks to an “unintentional missort.”

Ballot access is important, but so is ballot integrity. In exchange for the convenience, mail votes should have to be postmarked several days in advance of the election. Democrats ought to act in their own self-interest: If they really fear that Donald Trump will try to delegitimize November’s result, why not deny him material by buttoning things up now?

Title: Gatestone: Vote by Mail
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 25, 2020, 12:43:24 PM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16117/vote-by-mail

Title: from gatestone above
Post by: ccp on June 25, 2020, 01:46:17 PM

Chris IAP Cuomo would scream with face an inch from the screen and right in our faces  - so "where is the proof" of election fraud?

So where is 95 yo James Earle Carter - who supposedly has a special interest in election fraud all around the world.
Except for democrat party fraud in the US.:

***************

On Vote-By-Mail
by J. Christian Adams
June 16, 2020 at 5:00 am


Vote by mail might sound good, until you look at the data. The federal election assistance commission keeps tabs. Their data show that 28 million ballots mailed since 2012 simply vanished. They were sent out, but never came back and were counted. Some say they are in landfills, others figure they are in file cabinets.

It gets worse. Hundreds of thousands came back but had defects that prevented them from being counted. The voters who sent these ballots probably do not even know that their ballot was not counted after they sent it back.

Making all of this even worse are the hundreds of millions of dollars that leftist foundations dedicate to this process fight. There is money for media outlets to publish stories that voter fraud is a myth. They even lend struggling newspapers foundation-funded "reporters" to work for free, as long as they publish stories saying voter fraud is a myth.

Mail voting also destroys the transparency of our elections. Observers from each side are unable to watch the process. Mail ballots are uniquely vulnerable to fraud because they are voted behind closed doors where third parties regularly attempt to influence the process.

It surprises people to learn that in the middle of an Ebola epidemic in 2014, Liberia conducted an in-person national election. Ebola had a fatality rate of 46%, yet people still came into polling places and voted in person. The solutions were simple -- sanitization protocols, distancing, disinfectant on surfaces.


(Image source: iStock)

Never before in the history of the country has the election process system been under greater attack. In the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic, heavily funded organizations and lawyers with fat trust deposits have been seeking to undo how we elect the President, Congress and state officials.

Like the rioters in the streets of American cities, they are taking advantage of a crisis to try to fundamentally transform American institutions.

They are seeking to throw out state laws designed to protect the integrity of American elections.

The first target of the election transformation was Congress. Soon after the pandemic reached our shores, House Democrats passed emergency legislation that would have federalized election process rules.

The Constitution decentralizes how we run elections because decentralization promotes individual liberty. When elections are decentralized, no single malevolent actor can manipulate or control the outcome.

During both the Bush and Obama administrations, I worked in the Voting Section at the United States Department of Justice. I witnessed firsthand how federal bureaucrats could manipulate, coerce and threaten state officials who did not conform to the bureaucrat's sensibilities about how elections should be run.

Naturally the federal government has a role in ensuring that elections are conducted in a way that complies with federal laws and the Constitution. For example, the 15th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 do not allow discrimination on the basis of race.

But apart from these limited federal carve-outs, the Constitution vests states with the power to run their own elections and set the qualifications to vote.

The bill that passed the House would have mandated automatic vote by mail in every state. It would have mandated same-day voter registration as well as weeks of early voting. It would have banished voter photo identification laws. It would have legalized vote harvesting in every state. Other proposals in Congress would have allowed mail ballots to be counted even if they were not postmarked by election day.

What the bills would actually do is foment chaos. The election would not be decided on election day. Millions of mail ballots would keep appearing, keep rolling in, until there were enough votes to make the difference. If there was a dispute, lawyers would steal the show, subjecting America to weeks of post-election court contests to force a particular outcome.

Making all of this even worse are the hundreds of millions of dollars that leftist foundations dedicate to this process fight. There is money for media outlets to publish stories that voter fraud is a myth. They even lend struggling newspapers foundation-funded "reporters" to work for free, as long as they publish stories saying voter fraud is a myth.

Of course, there is money for lawyers. When the House election transformation bill failed in the Senate– largely thanks to Majority Leader McConnell and Appropriations Chairman Richard Shelby (R-AL) -- those trying to transform the elections rushed to the courts. The bill would have nationalized vote by mail, banned voter ID, and mandated that every state offer a month of early voting and allow same-day registration.

Across the country there are dozens of lawsuits trying to force states to abandon state election integrity procedures. My organization has been involved in a number of them, and it is quite an eye-opener. In Virginia, for example, the League of Women Voters sued the state to force the end of the witness requirement on absentee ballots. They argued that finding a witness would be a violation of federal voting rights.

Unbelievably, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring capitulated and surrendered. The purported adversaries decided to enter into a collusive consent decree, tossing out the law.

Remember, the duly elected legislature of Virginia -- both the House and Senate -- passed a witness requirement and an elected governor signed the bill. The agreement between the plaintiffs and defendants in the case of League of Women Voters of Virginia vs. Virginia State Board of Elections erased the democratic will of the people of Virginia manifested in law.

This story is repeating itself all over the United States. Lawsuit after lawsuit is being filed to cancel state election integrity laws. One case in Texas actually claims the stamp you put on your absentee ballot is the same as a Jim Crow era poll tax.

All of this diminishes the real fight for civil rights that occurred a half century ago.

Lawyers are trying to accomplish in courts what could not be accomplished in Congress. Judges are being used as substitutes for the will of the people. People who seemingly would like to be able to manipulate election results are forum-shopping for the most sympathetic courts. And in some places, the plaintiffs and defendants are in agreement that state election laws should be struck down without contested litigation. The case is filed, and the states surrender.

When I attended law school, this is not what they taught. Laws, at least we were told, represented the will of the people. They were to be respected. Lawyers, particularly lawyers for a state attorney general, are under an ethical obligation to defend a law, even if they did not agree with it.

Yet in one hearing I attended in the Virginia litigation, the federal judge asked the Virginia Attorney General if they ever intended to file any pleading in court to contest the case. The lawyer hemmed and hawed. The answer should have been yes. Instead it was a successful attempt to obscure the answer.

Virginia's only response was a white flag.

So now the same people who support the lawsuits around the country are still trying to move elections to an all-mail election. This would put the fate of the election into the hands of the same people who regularly deliver to you and your neighbor's mail.

Vote by mail might sound good, until you look at the data. The federal election assistance commission keeps tabs. Their data show that 28 million ballots mailed since 2012 simply vanished. They were sent out, but never came back and were counted. Some say they are in landfills, others figure they are in file cabinets. The truth is, we do not know. All we know is that the mail ballots never accomplished what they were intended to accomplish.

It gets worse. Hundreds of thousands came back but had defects that prevented them from being counted. The voters who sent these ballots probably do not even know that their ballot was not counted after they sent it back.

Mail voting also destroys the transparency of our elections. Observers from each side are unable to watch the process. Mail ballots are uniquely vulnerable to fraud because they are voted behind closed doors where third parties regularly attempt to influence the process. Senior citizens already enjoy rights to request an absentee ballot in every state.

It surprises people to learn that in the middle of an Ebola epidemic in 2014, Liberia conducted an in-person national election. Ebola had a fatality rate of 46%, yet people still came into polling places and voted in person. The solutions were simple -- sanitization protocols, distancing, disinfectant on surfaces.

Putting the Presidency into the hands of the United States Postal Service would be a serious mistake. Some factions, however, do not care about mistakes. They care more about transforming an election system so they can transform a nation.

J. Christian Adams is President of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, at 501(c)(3) law firm devoted entirely to election integrity. He served on President Trump's election integrity advisory commission and in the Voting Section at the United States Department of Justice.********


The Dems will win this election - one way or another - then it will be pay back time for us .

Title: WSJ: Mail Voting Gone Wrong Again; 3 groups organize for mail-ins
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 01, 2020, 09:30:58 AM

Mail Voting Gone Wrong—Again
Fraud charges and piles of ballots thrown out in New Jersey.
By The Editorial Board
June 30, 2020 7:15 pm ET

New Jersey politics isn’t known for probity, but at least today it offers a useful warning to the nation. Four men are accused of committing fraud last month in the city of Paterson’s entirely vote-by-mail municipal elections. For one reason or another, county election officials have thrown out about 20% of the ballots submitted.

With nearly 150,000 people, Paterson is the state’s third-largest city. Its May 12 local elections were conducted wholly by mail. Governor Phil Murphy signed an executive order in March saying that ballots would be sent to “all registered voters without the need for an application.”

WSJ OPINION POTOMAC WATCH
On Abortion, The Chief Justice Rules

SUBSCRIBE
By Election Day, claims of fraud were already in the local news. The Passaic County Board of Elections disqualified about 800 ballots that “were improperly bundled in mailboxes in apparent violation of state laws,” according to the Paterson Press. A group of about 360 ballots was placed into a mailbox in Haledon, one town over. The U.S. Postal Service alerted the county to the possibility of impropriety.

As the tabulating began, 1,214 ballots were tossed due to issues with the voter’s signature. Another 1,000 ballots were rejected because the “bearer” who purportedly dropped them off did not correctly fill out the envelope to say so. New Jersey law allows people to collect and deliver up to three ballots per election, but candidates are excluded from doing so.

Last week New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal announced charges against four men, including two winning city council candidates. All are accused of illegally collecting or possessing ballots. In one case, the ballot allegedly had not been voted or sealed but was “delivered to the Board of Elections in a sealed envelope.”

At least three dead people tried to vote, the Paterson Press reported. NBC New York found a Spanish-speaking resident who’s listed in county records as having voted. “We did not receive vote by mail ballots and thus we did not vote,” she said. “This is corruption. This is fraud.” Others say they mailed their votes, yet their names are shown on the list of ballots with “bearer” problems.

Across 31 municipalities that voted May 12, “election officials did not count 9.6% of ballots sent in,” according to NJ Spotlight. The Village of Ridgewood, where tight races were decided by 137 and 127 votes, has sued the Bergen County Board of Elections for invalidating 710 ballots. Ridgewood blamed lax ballot deadlines and “the failings of the postal service.”

Democrats and the media are touting mail ballots as a panacea for voting in a pandemic, but the problems are evident, even putting fraud aside. In 2016 about 1% of absentee ballots nationwide were thrown out, and it could be much higher this year, as many people vote by mail for the first time. A study of Florida in 2018 found rejection rates of 2% for black and 2.1% for Hispanic voters. At one USPS processing facility in Florida, almost 25% of political and election mail in 2018 was delivered late.

If the country is lucky, the 2020 presidential race won’t be a photo finish. But the potential for a brawl over the winner’s legitimacy is much too close for comfort.

=========================================

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/06/23/these-3-groups-organized-to-support-mail-in-voting/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=these-3-groups-organized-to-support-mail-in-voting?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWmpBd016QTNORFJqTlRBNCIsInQiOiJ2NFpLZU5ZRWtvdXZRM0FreTZJM3NSRGlnRXhZTDI3RktGdDdIUEdkS2tndGZpNWh6XC9HUm5HaEJySkZLcVwvNWJDMXJmb3BrMCtQZjV0NnRZejZmUjExNGI3RmY5MVRrNFk3eGtUZVB3TE1MTk9pZnFtbDZnOE1WN1dQUE5pcGdmIn0%3D

Title: SC mail in ballots found in MD
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 03, 2020, 12:10:44 PM

https://cnsnews.com/blog/melanie-arter/absentee-ballots-south-carolina-found-maryland

Title: Can our ballots be both secret and secure?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 07, 2020, 12:36:15 PM

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-future-of-democracy/can-our-ballots-be-both-secret-and-secure?utm_source=nl&utm_brand=tny&utm_mailing=TNY_Daily_070720&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_medium=email&bxid=5be9d3fa3f92a40469e2d85c&cndid=50142053&hasha=52f016547a40edbdd6de69b8a7728bbf&hashb=e02b3c0e6e0f3888e0288d6e52a57eccde1bfd75&hashc=9aab918d394ee25f13d70b69b378385abe4212016409c8a7a709eca50e71c1bc&esrc=bounceX&utm_term=TNY_Daily

Title: CA rejected 100K mail in ballots because of mistakes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 15, 2020, 11:54:58 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/california-rejected-100000-mail-in-ballots-because-of-mistakes_3423138.html?ref=brief_News

Title: JW seeks preliminary relief against Gov Newsome mail in scheme in CA; NJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2020, 05:09:49 AM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/ca-preliminary-relief/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=corruption+chronicles&utm_term=members&utm_content=20200721214410

https://www.judicialwatch.org/investigative-bulletin/mail-in-ballot-fraud-in-new-jersey-signals-national-trouble/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=corruption+chronicles&utm_term=members&utm_content=20200721214410

Title: NJ's mail in failure
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 25, 2020, 03:02:06 PM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/07/23/new-jerseys-all-mail-vote-debacle-is-a-warning-for-november/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=new-jerseys-all-mail-vote-debacle-is-a-warning-for-november?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRJeU5UWmxNRFV4TldFMCIsInQiOiJFQUdzaDhqeDVpT1M0T3FTMWpwSk02cklNQkxXR3lEZUE1RUdueWo4MkRWMElFVVhXQkxcL1FEd01yOHhHa0JMdWk3dFRBYzZSOHFydXJMT2FcL2YrMUJZMjY1NjBQOHZaTmJ0dVYrWDY2SWh2eUtZRUs0bGZuMjJld1wvZnBhTEFIdSJ9

Title: JW: These recent cases prove there is voter fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 28, 2020, 04:35:54 PM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/yes-america-there-voter-fraud-these-recent-cases-prove-it?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20200728180310

Title: The South Korean example
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 29, 2020, 06:23:42 AM

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-asia-52275993?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR3axpaYzIQqTQvOqvSjxbJx3bw11VP1segOgm90vXCzovGNk7XmtVg_gp4

Title: NJ AG announces voting fraud charges
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 01, 2020, 05:53:41 PM

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/25/politics/new-jersey-attorney-general-announces-voting-fraud-charges/index.html

Title: WSJ: Madison warned about Sanctuary States
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 03, 2020, 08:24:58 AM

Madison Warned About ‘Sanctuary’ States
He foretold their interest in ‘exaggerating their inhabitants’ to ‘swell’ their numbers in Congress.
By David B. Rivkin Jr. and John S. Baker Jr.
Aug. 2, 2020 3:32 pm ET

President Trump met wide derision last month when he issued an executive order excluding illegal aliens from the census numbers used for apportioning House seats. “Persons means persons,” Thomas Wolf of the Brennan Center for Justice told a reporter. “Everyone must be counted.” But counting is different from allocating political power, and Mr. Trump has the better constitutional argument.

Section 2 of the 14th Amendment provides: “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.” This revises a provision in Article I that uses similar language but also includes the infamous Three Fifths Clause.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
Nuke The Filibuster? Delay The Election?


SUBSCRIBE
When voting on the latter provision, the Constitutional Convention used the term “number of inhabitants.” The Committee on Style shortened that to “numbers,” but that linguistic change was of no import. As Chief Justice Earl Warren noted in Powell v. McCormack (1969), the committee wasn’t authorized to make substantive changes to previously voted provisions. In Wesberry v. Sanders (1964), Justice Hugo Black wrote for the court that “the debates at the Convention make at least one fact abundantly clear: that . . . in allocating Congressmen, the number assigned to each State should be determined solely by the number of the State’s inhabitants.”

The administration argues that illegal aliens don’t qualify as inhabitants, and it’s right. The definition of “inhabitant” at the time of the Founding had an important political and economic context because of the legal responsibility of localities to care for the destitute under the 1601 Act for the Relief of the Poor. An inhabitant was a person who rightfully resided in a jurisdiction, contributing to and qualifying for available benefits. Like illegal aliens today, those whose presence was unlawful were not considered inhabitants and were subject to removal.

According to the 2018 Yale study, there are at least 16.7 million, and more likely around 22.1 million, illegal aliens in the U.S. The apportionment following the 2010 census yielded congressional districts containing roughly 710,000 people each. That means the illegal-alien population is the equivalent of around 30 districts, more than any state except California (53) or Texas (36).

States inflating census numbers has been a ever-present danger to the proper functioning of America’s federalist system. In Federalist No. 54, James Madison addressed what he called states’ “interest in exaggerating their inhabitants” to bolster their representation in Congress: “It is of great importance that the States should feel as little bias as possible, to swell or to reduce the amount of their numbers.”

Millions of illegal aliens are distributed disproportionately throughout the U.S., more than enough to cause shifts in apportionment of congressional seats, which also affect the Electoral College. In an example of the kind of swelling Madison warned about, some states and localities entice illegal aliens with “sanctuary” laws promising to shield them from federal law enforcement and provide them free health care and other benefits. In the years ahead, that could make the illegal alien population become larger and more concentrated in these states.

Yet this is not simply a blue vs. red state conflict over political power. Sanctuary state California will lose representatives if illegal aliens are excluded from apportionment, but so will Texas and Florida. It is also a Sun Belt vs. Rust Belt conflict. States like Indiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio are the ones that stand to gain (or at least not lose) in apportionment under the president’s plan.

Since only a few states lose representation after each decennial census, this gradual erosion of political power has rarely been challenged. The Supreme Court has never addressed the constitutionality of including illegal aliens in congressional apportionment and has only occasionally been asked to do so (including in a 2011 case in which we represented Louisiana). When the court rejected Mr. Trump’s proposed citizenship question on the census, it was on technical administrative procedure ground, not the merits.

That leaves it to the political branches to carry out the constitutional mandate of counting only inhabitants for reapportionment. Congress has done so, by enacting statutes giving the president wide discretion on reapportionment decisions. Mr. Trump is right to take the next step.

Mr. Rivkin practices appellate and constitutional law in Washington. He served in the White House Counsel’s Office and Justice Department under Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Mr. Baker is a visiting professor at Georgetown’s Center for the Constitution and a professor emeritus at Louisiana State University Law Center.

Title: An invitation to Election Fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 03, 2020, 08:47:50 AM

second

An Invitation in the Mail for Election Fraud
Washington state sent a ballot to my home—which is now in Texas.
By Scott Hogenson
Aug. 2, 2020 12:23 pm ET
WSJ

Uncertainties over Covid-19 have spurred significant interest in voting by mail. The process differs substantially from absentee voting, which requires a voter to file an application and creates a documented paper trail. Vote by mail is simpler: Ballots are printed and sent to registered voters, who complete and return them.

Consider Washington state. Vote by mail was required in 2011, so the government has had nearly a decade to refine the process. True to form, I received my Aug. 4 primary ballot several weeks ahead of the election date, leaving me ample time to consult my conscience and return my ballot.

The Postal Service appears to be operating fairly well. I still had plenty of time to vote because the USPS helpfully forwarded my ballot to my new address—in Texas.

Our family moved from Washington state to suburban Dallas in mid-June, but I have been invited to participate in Washington state’s August elections. So has my wife. Given that we aren’t residents of Washington, we won’t vote there. That would be fraudulent. I could probably get away with it, but the little angel on my shoulder shouted down the little devil on the other.
Therein lies but one of a cavalcade of problems with vote by mail. There’s no way of knowing how many nonresidents will receive ballots they’re not legally allowed to cast. There is no way to confirm how many eligible voters don’t receive ballots, how many dead people receive ballots, how many people receive multiple ballots, how many ballots actually make it through the mail in time, and how many ballots aren’t delivered to the place where they’re to be counted.

This anecdote isn’t unique, but you wouldn’t know that by reading the news. A Google search of “vote by mail fraud” returns articles mostly about how fraud is some sort of “myth,” a “false narrative,” something “not likely” to occur.

Even if every bureaucrat and election volunteer involved in every part of the process is honest and efficient, voting by mail is still fraught with problems. In my case, I don’t suspect malfeasance on the part of election officials. It takes time to purge voter rolls, and it’s entirely reasonable for this not to happen in the month between my move and the delivery of my ballot to Texas.

We can hope that individual voters will be honest. But passions run high in presidential election years, especially this one. Vote by mail may sound like a good idea, but it isn’t. It can’t be. It is subject to too many vagaries, too many errors, too much malevolent temptation. The American republic has done reasonably well with voting at polling places, and a radical revision of the voting process three months ahead of a presidential election would be doomed to inaccuracy and, yes, fraud.

Mr. Hogenson is president of Hogenson Communications

Title: Voter ID approved
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 03, 2020, 03:04:37 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/victory-alabama/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members&utm_content=20200803214603

Title: 2012: Pravda on the Hudson against absentee ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 05, 2020, 01:40:55 PM

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/us/politics/as-more-vote-by-mail-faulty-ballots-could-impact-elections.html

Title: $10,000,000 bounty to anyone who has info. on election hackers
Post by: ccp on August 05, 2020, 06:05:27 PM

https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/u-s-puts-10-million-bounty-on-2020-election-hackers/

Title: Dem Voter Fraud attempt on voter registration
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 08, 2020, 11:13:23 AM

https://www.courierpress.com/story/news/2020/07/31/janet-reed-voter-fraud-democrat-arrest/5557412002/

Title: Fraud not necessary for massive fukkup, the govt and the PO can do it themselves
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 08, 2020, 01:29:03 PM

second post

An Autopsy of New York’s Mail-Vote Mess
Lax deadlines. Late ballots. Carelessness. Missing postmarks. And a warning for Nov. 3.
By The WSJ Editorial Board
Aug. 7, 2020 6:58 pm ET

Six weeks after New York’s primary elections on June 23, the final vote tally in the 12th Congressional District remains a mystery. On Monday a federal judge ordered the counting of certain mail ballots that arrived after Election Day but without a postmark to prove when they were sent. Imagine this kind of mess 45 days following Nov. 3.

After primary day, an initial count of 40,000 ballots had Rep. Carolyn Maloney beating progressive challenger Suraj Patel by 648 votes. The canvassing of some 65,000 absentee ballots didn’t start until July 8, but unofficial data last month showed a preliminary rejection rate of 28% in Brooklyn. Mr. Patel joined a federal lawsuit, and Judge Analisa Torres held two days of hearings last week. The court transcript is a bracing read.

How Much Mail Arrives Late?

The share of election and political mail that was delivered on time during the 2018 elections. Shown below are the USPS's seven lowest-performing processing and distribution centers.
SITE   PERCENT ON TIME
Anaheim, Calif.   83.8
Cleveland, Ohio   79.4
Dominick V. Daniels, N.J.   90.9
Eau Claire, Wis.   86.6
Fox Valley, Ill.   88.8
Royal Palm, Fla.   75.7
Suburban, Md.   84.2
Average   84.2
Source: USPS Inspector General's audit, Nov. 4, 2019

City officials were deluged. Eleven days before the election, “the Manhattan borough office had something like 30 or 40,000 pending applications for absentee ballots, and I was told that they could only process 5,000 per day,” testified Douglas Kellner, the co-chair of the New York State Board of Elections. “Basically my view is that they threw up their hands and said, ‘Well, there’s nothing more that we can do.’”

As a result, many ballots were sent to voters late. Allen Tanko, a marketing manager with the U.S. Postal Service, said that one day before the voting, on June 22, the city Board of Elections dropped 34,359 items, presumably ballots, into the mail stream. Postal workers tried to expedite them, but some of these ballots were sent to New Yorkers temporarily out of state, who could not possibly have received them in time.

New York lets voters request an absentee ballot with a mail application, which can be postmarked a mere seven days before the election. “The state Board of Elections has repeatedly advised the legislature and the executive chamber that that date is unrealistic,” Mr. Kellner said. Fourteen days would be better, he added, but New York’s political leaders “have rejected that because they don’t want to be perceived as doing something that’s not voter friendly.” For the record, the USPS suggests that voters allow seven days for mailing their completed ballots.

The USPS’s policy is to postmark all ballots, and the city was assured it would happen. What went wrong? Testimony by Michael Calabrese, a manager at a New York postal processing facility, offered two possibilities. First, postmarking machines can reject mail if, for example, it isn’t “folded over properly.” On Election Day, USPS staff were ready to grab bypassed ballots and postmark them by hand. “We were doing so for thousands of ballots,” Mr. Calabrese said. He wasn’t sure, however, if this happened before June 23: “That’s the only day I recall doing so with a hundred percent certainty.”

Second, most prepaid mail usually skips postmarking altogether and goes “directly to a sortation machine,” Mr. Calabrese said. On Election Day, USPS staff overrode that procedure and forced everything through the postmarking system. But again, he wasn’t sure about before June 23, saying it was “very possible” that some ballots went straight to sorting.

Stranger mishaps suggest carelessness. Raymond Riley, the chief clerk at the Kings County Board of Elections, testified that someone on his staff went to a local USPS office to drop mail, and postal workers unexpectedly gave over “a hand cart of ballots.” His office then complained to the USPS: “Obviously, staff safety was my biggest concern.”

Another incident: In the spring of 2018, Mr. Riley said, the USPS delivered “several hundred absentee ballots from the previous November.” Many of these votes were valid, except “this was five months after Election Day.”

Under oath, the skepticism of the USPS was broad and deep. “We certainly did alert the governor’s office to the fact that partnering with the U.S. Postal Service in running an election has a lot of risks,” Mr. Kellner said. Later he was more direct: “I don’t have a great deal of confidence in the U.S. Postal Service.”

Emily Gallagher, a Democratic candidate for state Assembly, testified: “I myself had an absentee ballot and went and voted in person because I had a sense of distrust of what would happen with my ballot once I mailed it in.” City attorney Stephen Kitzinger, in his closing argument, said that if voters dropped their ballots in a mailbox, “they bore the risk of it not being postal marked, timely or otherwise, if they relied on the postal service for delivery.”

Judge Torres issued a preliminary injunction on Monday. Because the USPS’s delivery process takes two days, she said, it’s a “virtual certainty” that any ballots received by election officials on June 24 or 25 were in fact mailed by Election Day, even if they don’t have any postmark saying so. Judge Torres therefore ruled that all such ballots, statewide, must be counted.

On Tuesday the city certified Ms. Maloney as the victor, up by about 3,500 votes, not including the ballots Judge Torres ordered counted. New York state officials plan to appeal her ruling. Mr. Patel is refusing to concede.

Whose Mail Votes Are Rejected?
Rates of ballot rejection during Florida's 2018 elections, by voter group.
RACE/ETHNICITY   TOTAL BALLOTS   REJECTED BALLOTS   PERCENT REJECTED
Black   240,254   4,713   2.0
Hispanic   356,917   7,325   2.1
White   1,926,619   17,340   0.9
Other   148,196   3,055   2.1
Total   2,671,986   32,433   1.2
Source: ACLU Florida: Report on Vote-by-Mail Ballots in the 2018 General Election

What a fiasco. Meantime, the national debate over mass mail voting proceeds like two postcards passing in the night. President Trump uses the word “fraud.” The factotums of conventional wisdom hit their computer hotkeys for phrases like “no evidence” of “widespread fraud.” Why focus on criminality? Old-fashioned government incompetence is clearly sufficient to create a mail-vote debacle the country might come to regret in November.

Title: 884k+ votes disqualified in NYC primary
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 08, 2020, 03:49:37 PM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/more-84000-mail-ballots-disqualified-new-york-city-primary

Title: VA: Whoops!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 09, 2020, 03:57:07 PM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/virginia-absentee-ballot-applications-sent-dead-people-and-wrong

Title: Bush, Trump, and the Post Office
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 09, 2020, 04:09:57 PM

https://theweek.com/articles/767184/how-george-bush-broke-post-office

Title: WSJ: Mail-in Voting; national implications of NY experience
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 10, 2020, 11:55:57 AM

An Autopsy of New York’s Mail-Vote Mess
Lax deadlines. Late ballots. Carelessness. Missing postmarks. And a warning for Nov. 3.
By The Editorial Board
Aug. 7, 2020 6:58 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
972

PHOTO: GLEN STUBBE/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Six weeks after New York’s primary elections on June 23, the final vote tally in the 12th Congressional District remains a mystery. On Monday a federal judge ordered the counting of certain mail ballots that arrived after Election Day but without a postmark to prove when they were sent. Imagine this kind of mess 45 days following Nov. 3.

After primary day, an initial count of 40,000 ballots had Rep. Carolyn Maloney beating progressive challenger Suraj Patel by 648 votes. The canvassing of some 65,000 absentee ballots didn’t start until July 8, but unofficial data last month showed a preliminary rejection rate of 28% in Brooklyn. Mr. Patel joined a federal lawsuit, and Judge Analisa Torres held two days of hearings last week. The court transcript is a bracing read.

How Much Mail Arrives Late?

The share of election and political mail that was delivered on time during the 2018 elections. Shown below are the USPS's seven lowest-performing processing and distribution centers.

SITE   PERCENT ON TIME

Anaheim, Calif.   83.8
Cleveland, Ohio   79.4
Dominick V. Daniels, N.J.   90.9
Eau Claire, Wis.   86.6
Fox Valley, Ill.   88.8
Royal Palm, Fla.   75.7
Suburban, Md.   84.2
Average   84.2
Source: USPS Inspector General's audit, Nov. 4, 2019

City officials were deluged. Eleven days before the election, “the Manhattan borough office had something like 30 or 40,000 pending applications for absentee ballots, and I was told that they could only process 5,000 per day,” testified Douglas Kellner, the co-chair of the New York State Board of Elections. “Basically my view is that they threw up their hands and said, ‘Well, there’s nothing more that we can do.’”

As a result, many ballots were sent to voters late. Allen Tanko, a marketing manager with the U.S. Postal Service, said that one day before the voting, on June 22, the city Board of Elections dropped 34,359 items, presumably ballots, into the mail stream. Postal workers tried to expedite them, but some of these ballots were sent to New Yorkers temporarily out of state, who could not possibly have received them in time.

New York lets voters request an absentee ballot with a mail application, which can be postmarked a mere seven days before the election. “The state Board of Elections has repeatedly advised the legislature and the executive chamber that that date is unrealistic,” Mr. Kellner said. Fourteen days would be better, he added, but New York’s political leaders “have rejected that because they don’t want to be perceived as doing something that’s not voter friendly.” For the record, the USPS suggests that voters allow seven days for mailing their completed ballots.

The USPS’s policy is to postmark all ballots, and the city was assured it would happen. What went wrong? Testimony by Michael Calabrese, a manager at a New York postal processing facility, offered two possibilities. First, postmarking machines can reject mail if, for example, it isn’t “folded over properly.” On Election Day, USPS staff were ready to grab bypassed ballots and postmark them by hand. “We were doing so for thousands of ballots,” Mr. Calabrese said. He wasn’t sure, however, if this happened before June 23: “That’s the only day I recall doing so with a hundred percent certainty.”

Second, most prepaid mail usually skips postmarking altogether and goes “directly to a sortation machine,” Mr. Calabrese said. On Election Day, USPS staff overrode that procedure and forced everything through the postmarking system. But again, he wasn’t sure about before June 23, saying it was “very possible” that some ballots went straight to sorting.

Stranger mishaps suggest carelessness. Raymond Riley, the chief clerk at the Kings County Board of Elections, testified that someone on his staff went to a local USPS office to drop mail, and postal workers unexpectedly gave over “a hand cart of ballots.” His office then complained to the USPS: “Obviously, staff safety was my biggest concern.”

Another incident: In the spring of 2018, Mr. Riley said, the USPS delivered “several hundred absentee ballots from the previous November.” Many of these votes were valid, except “this was five months after Election Day.”

Under oath, the skepticism of the USPS was broad and deep. “We certainly did alert the governor’s office to the fact that partnering with the U.S. Postal Service in running an election has a lot of risks,” Mr. Kellner said. Later he was more direct: “I don’t have a great deal of confidence in the U.S. Postal Service.”

Emily Gallagher, a Democratic candidate for state Assembly, testified: “I myself had an absentee ballot and went and voted in person because I had a sense of distrust of what would happen with my ballot once I mailed it in.” City attorney Stephen Kitzinger, in his closing argument, said that if voters dropped their ballots in a mailbox, “they bore the risk of it not being postal marked, timely or otherwise, if they relied on the postal service for delivery.”

Judge Torres issued a preliminary injunction on Monday. Because the USPS’s delivery process takes two days, she said, it’s a “virtual certainty” that any ballots received by election officials on June 24 or 25 were in fact mailed by Election Day, even if they don’t have any postmark saying so. Judge Torres therefore ruled that all such ballots, statewide, must be counted.

On Tuesday the city certified Ms. Maloney as the victor, up by about 3,500 votes, not including the ballots Judge Torres ordered counted. New York state officials plan to appeal her ruling. Mr. Patel is refusing to concede.

Whose Mail Votes Are Rejected?

Rates of ballot rejection during Florida's 2018 elections, by voter group.
RACE/ETHNICITY   TOTAL BALLOTS   REJECTED BALLOTS   PERCENT REJECTED
Black   240,254   4,713   2.0
Hispanic   356,917   7,325   2.1
White   1,926,619   17,340   0.9
Other   148,196   3,055   2.1
Total   2,671,986   32,433   1.2
Source: ACLU Florida: Report on Vote-by-Mail Ballots in the 2018 General Election

What a fiasco. Meantime, the national debate over mass mail voting proceeds like two postcards passing in the night. President Trump uses the word “fraud.” The factotums of conventional wisdom hit their computer hotkeys for phrases like “no evidence” of “widespread fraud.” Why focus on criminality? Old-fashioned government incompetence is clearly sufficient to create a mail-vote debacle the country might come to regret in November.

Title: Re: The electoral process, I voted
Post by: DougMacG on August 11, 2020, 08:05:42 AM

MN primary today (and other states).  The big one is Omar in Mpls, favored to win but facing a strong challenge.  It is all about enthusiasm, for and against, and turnout.  Many Somalis don't like her, but the hard Left of all groups does, and in Minneapolis hard Left pretty well describes it.  I won't bet against her but ready to say good riddance if there is an upset.  SOMEONE within the Left should say the Left has gone too far and is destroying

Jason Lewis for Senate!  R-MN  One surprise flip of a seat might control the direction of the country.  Consider supporting him.
https://secure.winred.com/jason-lewis-for-senate/donate
You might know him as a former fill-in host for Rush.  He is a former afternoon drive, long time, conservative radio host and former suburban congressman who got flipped in 2018.  Very well known in the metro area with conservatives.  VERY strong on constitutional issues.  Rand Paul-like on military issues (opposite of hawk}.  Great contrast with Tina Smith, former local head of the racist baby slaughterhouse group called "Planned Parenthood".  She pretends to be moderate; votes with Omar and the far Left of the Senate - as all Democrats do.

Mask was required by state law.  As I left I wondered what accommodations they make for someone who forgot theirs or doesn't have one.  Small election expense to just give them one.

My biggest gripe is local.  Hennepin County which is Minneapolis and suburbs is bigger than 8 states by my last count in population, maybe has an economy bigger than 10 states, with a multi-billion dollar budget, not counting a billion in healthcare for illegals they keep 'off-budget'.  The county commissioner election is deemed to be "non-partisan".  What an expletive-deleted joke.  In the conservative districts, that keeps the Republican endorsed candidate from getting an 'R' by his name and lets other heavily funded candidates create confusion over who stands for what.  Running a GIANT powerful government is no more non-partisan than the Trump Biden race will be.

One other point in MN will be the chance to flip the 7th district to Republican.  The incumbent Democrat there has tried to match the conservative movement of the out-state district.  He was the only Dem vote against Obamacare, but when it comes down to it, his 'D' choice could be what keeps Nancy Pelosi Speaker of a divided House and after Trump and Pence next in line for the Presidency, which could happen if the 2020 election is unresolved on inauguration day.

Title: Litigation and Mystery Ballots!
Post by: G M on August 11, 2020, 10:37:10 AM

https://saraacarter.com/fec-commissioner-substantial-chance-we-wont-know-winner-on-election-night/

Until they win.

Title: Re: Litigation and Mystery Ballots!-Coup #2
Post by: G M on August 11, 2020, 10:58:44 AM

Quote from: G M on August 11, 2020, 10:37:10 AM

https://saraacarter.com/fec-commissioner-substantial-chance-we-wont-know-winner-on-election-night/

Until they win.

How secure is mail-in balloting?  The President continues to undermine it with his words, saying that it's, you know, not accurate –

Joe Scarborough.  ‘Rigged.’

Mika Brzezinski.  – that it's easily faulted by people and, you know, can be corrupted in some way, even though most of the people in his Administration have voted by mail, including him.  And, in the interview with Chris Wallace, he did not confirm whether he would leave – whether he would accept the results of the election if he lost.  What do you make of that?

Speaker Pelosi.  Well, that's a loaded question there about coronavirus, what we do about it.  But the fact is, whether he knows it yet or not, he will be leaving.  Just because he might not want to move out of the White House doesn't mean we won't have an inauguration ceremony to inaugurate a duly-elected President of the United States and the – I just – you know, I'm second in line to the Presidency.  Just last week I had my regular continuation of government briefing.  This might interest you because I say to them, ‘This is never going to happen.  God-willing it never will.’  But there is a process.  It has nothing to do with the certain occupant of the White House doesn't feel like moving and has to be fumigated out of there because the presidency is the presidency. 
It's not geography or location.

Title: Battlefield prep
Post by: G M on August 11, 2020, 01:46:45 PM

https://issuesinsights.com/2020/08/11/democrats-found-their-scapegoat-if-biden-loses-postmaster-general-louis-dejoy/

They don't intend to lose.

Title: Re: Litigation and Mystery Ballots!-Coup #2
Post by: G M on August 12, 2020, 02:03:42 PM

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2020/08/all-enemies-foreign-and-domestic-open-letter-gen-milley/167625/

Quote from: G M on August 11, 2020, 10:58:44 AM

Quote from: G M on August 11, 2020, 10:37:10 AM

https://saraacarter.com/fec-commissioner-substantial-chance-we-wont-know-winner-on-election-night/

Until they win.

How secure is mail-in balloting?  The President continues to undermine it with his words, saying that it's, you know, not accurate –

Joe Scarborough.  ‘Rigged.’

Mika Brzezinski.  – that it's easily faulted by people and, you know, can be corrupted in some way, even though most of the people in his Administration have voted by mail, including him.  And, in the interview with Chris Wallace, he did not confirm whether he would leave – whether he would accept the results of the election if he lost.  What do you make of that?

Speaker Pelosi.  Well, that's a loaded question there about coronavirus, what we do about it.  But the fact is, whether he knows it yet or not, he will be leaving.  Just because he might not want to move out of the White House doesn't mean we won't have an inauguration ceremony to inaugurate a duly-elected President of the United States and the – I just – you know, I'm second in line to the Presidency.  Just last week I had my regular continuation of government briefing.  This might interest you because I say to them, ‘This is never going to happen.  God-willing it never will.’  But there is a process.  It has nothing to do with the certain occupant of the White House doesn't feel like moving and has to be fumigated out of there because the presidency is the presidency. 
It's not geography or location.

Title: D1: Military won't save us and you shouldn't want them to
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 12, 2020, 11:23:25 PM

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2020/08/military-wont-save-us-and-you-shouldnt-want-them/167661/

Title: St. Fauci says regular voting safe
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 14, 2020, 10:33:46 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fauci-no-reason-americans-cant-vote-in-person-november

Title: Re: St. Fauci says regular voting safe
Post by: G M on August 14, 2020, 10:41:43 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 14, 2020, 10:33:46 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fauci-no-reason-americans-cant-vote-in-person-november

What if you are dead? VOTER SUPPRESSION!!!

Title: Re: St. Fauci says regular voting safe
Post by: DougMacG on August 14, 2020, 01:22:39 PM

Quote from: G M on August 14, 2020, 10:41:43 AM

What if you are dead? VOTER SUPPRESSION!!!

Been known to happen:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_effect

Title: Not accidental
Post by: G M on August 15, 2020, 09:14:19 PM

https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/nevada-sent-more-than-200k-mail-in-primary-ballots-to-wrong-addresses/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 16, 2020, 08:30:23 AM

Dems :

there is no election fraud or very rare

Trump's decision to not pay out to the Post Office
infuriates the postal workers more
I am told by a  liberal postal worker (I don't disagree with Trump - just saying - I agree with JAred Kushner who was sabotaged by kriss teen aManPoor at end of discussion of historic UAE recognition of Israel with an attack question about Trump's reducing Post Office funding and claiming this will reduce delivery of ballots .

Jared wisely said "you can turn the argument  around " and say suddenly Dems are asking Post office to do job they are set up to do and expect them to deliver 100 million ballots in a perfect way and that frqud risk would be almost certain .

Just after Jared leaves the program well know Dem partisan aMan poor says something like "let me be clear , the elections experts all say fraud does not occur or is exceedingly rare. 

so now we have a bunch of angry democrats being responsible for seeing to it that ballots get delivered correctly and on tine

using Doug's phrase, "what could go wrong?"

and after the election we will hear screaming from the Dem mob how trump must concede immediately.

Title: no surprise here
Post by: ccp on August 16, 2020, 08:45:12 AM

https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/08/everybody-gets-a-ballot-murphy-says-nj-to-have-mostly-mail-in-voting-in-november-election-because-of-covid-19.html

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud: Vote by Mail
Post by: DougMacG on August 16, 2020, 11:22:18 AM

https://freebeacon.com/2020-election/nevada-sent-more-than-200k-mail-in-primary-ballots-to-wrong-addresses/

Title: WSJ on the Post Office issue
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 17, 2020, 12:12:55 PM

News broke Friday that the U.S. Postal Service has warned dozens of states, via letters from USPS General Counsel Thomas Marshall, that their deadlines “for requesting and casting mail-in ballots are incongruous with the Postal Service’s delivery standards.” On cue, Democrats and the press portrayed this as evidence of Trumpian sabotage and voter suppression.

In reality, it’s closer to the opposite: an attempt by the USPS to forestall state election failure. The letters were planned before the new Postmaster General, Louis DeJoy, took the reins on June 15. Mr. Marshall sent nearly identical advice to election officials in a May letter posted at USPS.com. Strange public conspiracy.



“To account for delivery standards and to allow for contingencies (e.g., weather issues or unforeseen events), voters should mail their return ballots at least 1 week prior to the due date,” Mr. Marshall wrote in May. The same rule, he added, should apply to blank ballots: “The Postal Service also recommends that state or local election officials use FirstClass Mail and allow 1 week for delivery to voters.”

These guidelines are worth reiterating, given how states have bungled their recent primary elections. New York voters can request an absentee ballot using a mail application, which is valid if postmarked a week before Election Day. As a result of this lax deadline, plus a deluge of applications, roughly 30,000 ballots weren’t mailed to voters until June 22, a day before the primary election.

That seven-day deadline “is unrealistic,” Douglas Kellner, co-chair of the New York State Board of Elections, testified in court last month. The state board has argued for moving it back to 14 days, in line with the USPS suggestion of allowing seven days for delivery each way. Is Mr. Kellner complicit in postal sabotage?

Some states have even shorter deadlines. “Requests to have an absent voter ballot mailed to you must be received by your clerk no later than 5 p.m. the Friday before the election,” says Michigan’s Secretary of State. That’s a mere four days (including a Sunday) before the voting. If a Michigander files a request on Oct. 30, how realistic is it to expect that the ballot can be processed, mailed, voted and return mailed—all by Nov. 3?

The USPS understandably does not want to be set up for failure, which is evident in the laconic comment of its spokeswoman. “The Postal Service,” she said Friday, “is asking election officials and voters to realistically consider how the mail works.”

President Trump isn’t helping Mr. DeJoy with his contradictory claims that mail voting will be “rigged,” even as he says the USPS needs more money to execute it. But Democrats are as culpable for spinning post-office conspiracies without evidence. Barack Obama fed the political misinformation feedback loop on a podcast Friday by saying President Trump is trying to “actively kneecap the Postal Service.” On Saturday morning, protesters followed the former President’s lead and banged pots and pans outside Mr. DeJoy’s Washington, D.C., condo.

The people who really need a wake-up call are election officials in states like Michigan and New York, and the media are giving them a pass.

Title: Colorado's Mail In Voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 17, 2020, 10:16:07 PM

https://www.5280.com/2020/05/no-fraud-isnt-rampant-in-colorados-mail-in-voting-system/

Title: PA: Team Trump with egg on face?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 20, 2020, 10:54:50 PM

https://theintercept.com/2020/08/20/trump-election-fraud-pennsylvania-court/

Title: Re: PA: Team Trump with egg on face?
Post by: DougMacG on August 21, 2020, 09:25:21 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 20, 2020, 10:54:50 PM

https://theintercept.com/2020/08/20/trump-election-fraud-pennsylvania-court/

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1296601698891374593

51 million ballots sent to people who didn't request a ballot.

I don't know the criteria of this court.  Show actual fraud when none is investigated and when these states refused to send their data to the Feds to be investigated?  Are we looking for proven fraud specifically or just general bungling?  Vote by mail has PLENTY of problems including the sending of ballots and invitations to vote to illegals, ineligible voters, the dead, and people who moved.  We are sending out invitations to commit fraud and invalidate and de-legitimize our elections.  This is unprecedented and everyone knows it, so why do we look for precedent?  Where is the paper trail? Who witnesses the mailing the way an election judge witnesses your sign in to vote at the poll.  What killed it for me was when they set fire to the Post Office on Lake Street in Minneapolis and watched it burn.  How are THOSE ballots doing?  Then they follow that by not allowing feds to protect federal buildings in other cities.  This will be different?  How?  Why?  The same people are still in charge, and for some reason all the fraud happens in Democrat-run districts.

A mask is good enough for a protest in favor of mail-in voting, but not good enough to vote.

Title: Re: PA: Team Trump with egg on face?
Post by: G M on August 21, 2020, 02:54:52 PM

Yes. It's amazing how little crime you find when you don't actually look for it, or actively avoid trying to see it.

Quote from: DougMacG on August 21, 2020, 09:25:21 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 20, 2020, 10:54:50 PM

https://theintercept.com/2020/08/20/trump-election-fraud-pennsylvania-court/

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1296601698891374593

51 million ballots sent to people who didn't request a ballot.

I don't know the criteria of this court.  Show actual fraud when none is investigated and when these states refused to send their data to the Feds to be investigated?  Are we looking for proven fraud specifically or just general bungling?  Vote by mail has PLENTY of problems including the sending of ballots and invitations to vote to illegals, ineligible voters, the dead, and people who moved.  We are sending out invitations to commit fraud and invalidate and de-legitimize our elections.  This is unprecedented and everyone knows it, so why do we look for precedent?  Where is the paper trail? Who witnesses the mailing the way an election judge witnesses your sign in to vote at the poll.  What killed it for me was when they set fire to the Post Office on Lake Street in Minneapolis and watched it burn.  How are THOSE ballots doing?  Then they follow that by not allowing feds to protect federal buildings in other cities.  This will be different?  How?  Why?  The same people are still in charge, and for some reason all the fraud happens in Democrat-run districts.

A mask is good enough for a protest in favor of mail-in voting, but not good enough to vote.

Title: Just 20%
Post by: G M on August 21, 2020, 02:55:54 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/389757.php

Good thing they wouldn't do this in November!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 21, 2020, 03:06:03 PM

".Good thing they wouldn't do this in November!"

Biden 's handlers have already hired a virtual army of attorneys to cover this up.

and FB as you may have seen is already to bury the fraud accusations off of face book

As GM puts it, the fix , "coup 2.0" is in.  (just in case)

Title: Vote by Junk Mail
Post by: DougMacG on August 22, 2020, 08:24:18 AM

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/08/count-some-of-the-votes.php

"Democrats are relentlessly promoting voting by junk mail, where state governments mail out hundreds of thousands of ballots to names and addresses that don’t correspond to actual, living and legal voters who live at those addresses, hoping that thousands of those blank ballots will come back, filled out in favor of Democratic candidates by party loyalists into whose hands they fall."

Title: Minnesota may be close
Post by: ccp on August 22, 2020, 08:52:23 AM

but we all know there is back up plan
and reason why close races we always find the dems running around like fleas on.a dog
drumming up phony votes .

well all these people could be told to write down the latest street they crashed
given 15$ to allow the good samaritan to help them fill out a ballot (with check mark in Dem box of course)
and drop into box:

https://www.usich.gov/homelessness-statistics/mn/#:~:text=Minnesota%20Homelessness%20Statistics,and%20Urban%20Development%20(HUD).

Title: Mail in fraud cancels election, Paterson NJ
Post by: DougMacG on August 22, 2020, 10:39:20 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/paterson-new-jersey-voter-fraud-new-election-city-council-race

PATERSON, N.J. – A judge has ruled that a new election will be held in November for a disputed Paterson City Council seat, just weeks after the race's apparent winner and a sitting councilman were charged with voter fraud.

State Superior Court Judge Ernest Caposela issued his ruling Wednesday.

Alex Mendez had won a special election on May 12 to fill the seat, but claims of voter fraud were soon raised. An investigation was then launched after the U.S. Postal Service's law enforcement arm told the state attorney general's office about hundreds of mail-in ballots located in a mailbox in Paterson, along with more found in nearby Haledon.

----------------------------------------------
"In Paterson, that's just the way things go..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpZvg_FjL3Q

Title: Paterson NJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 22, 2020, 12:46:50 PM

What could go wrong?
A Mail-Voting Redo in New Jersey
Paterson will get a new election, but the stakes are higher in the Nov. 3 presidential race.
By The Editorial Board
Aug. 21, 2020 6:59 pm ET

New Jersey’s judiciary is calling an electoral mulligan. The state’s third-biggest city, Paterson, held a municipal election by mail in May, but the results fell into doubt after a startling percentage of the ballots were tossed out. Four men, including a city councilman and a councilman-elect, were charged with vote fraud.

On Wednesday a state court found that the election in the city’s third ward “was rife with mail in vote procedural violations,” and therefore it “was not the fair, free and full expression of the intent of the voters.” A redo will be held Nov. 3. “Of all ballots cast in the Third Ward City Council election,” Judge Ernest Caposela wrote, “24.29% were rejected.” By comparison, he said that in 31 municipal elections held the same day across New Jersey, the overall ballot-rejection rate was “only 9.6%.” For democratic legitimacy, that’s an alarming “only.”

At a Paterson apartment building, the U.S. Postal Service didn’t place blank ballots into individual mailboxes, the judge wrote. Instead “a substantial number” were “left in bulk in the foyer.”

Court filings cite people who said they didn’t vote, yet ballots were sent in under their names. About 200 ballots were found in a mailbox in Haledon, N.J., an adjacent town. Three voters, the local news said, strangely did not list their addresses as any local cemetery, despite their being dead.

On the fraud claims, Judge Caposela deferred to prosecutors. But New Jersey’s Attorney General has alleged that the indicted city councilmen obtained at least one unvoted ballot, which was then “delivered to the Board of Elections.”

Whenever Donald Trump brings up Paterson, Democrats say it’s proof that fraud in mail voting can be detected and policed. “I view that as a positive data point,” New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy said last Sunday. “Some guys tried to screw around with the system. They got caught by law enforcement. They’ve been indicted. They’ll pay a price.”

That last bit might be true, thanks in part to New Jersey’s legal restrictions on ballot harvesting.

(MARC:  I have been pounding the table on the matter of ballot harvesting!!!)

But Mr. Murphy is wrong to say that bad actors merely “tried to screw around with the system.” Although they were caught, they succeeded. An election has been invalidated, and Paterson will hold another vote.

For a city council, this isn’t the end of the world. But at the top of the Nov. 3 ballot, the stakes are higher. There aren’t do-overs for presidential elections. The answer is for state and local officials to stop blaming the post office and start implementing an election process that voters can trust.

Title: Re: Paterson NJ
Post by: G M on August 22, 2020, 01:07:59 PM

1. Massive mail-in vote fraud.
2. Dems litigate to fight any attempts to discard fake votes.
3. Drag out election results though the end of Trump's term.
4. Acting President Pelosi/military coup

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 22, 2020, 12:46:50 PM

What could go wrong?
A Mail-Voting Redo in New Jersey
Paterson will get a new election, but the stakes are higher in the Nov. 3 presidential race.
By The Editorial Board
Aug. 21, 2020 6:59 pm ET

New Jersey’s judiciary is calling an electoral mulligan. The state’s third-biggest city, Paterson, held a municipal election by mail in May, but the results fell into doubt after a startling percentage of the ballots were tossed out. Four men, including a city councilman and a councilman-elect, were charged with vote fraud.

On Wednesday a state court found that the election in the city’s third ward “was rife with mail in vote procedural violations,” and therefore it “was not the fair, free and full expression of the intent of the voters.” A redo will be held Nov. 3. “Of all ballots cast in the Third Ward City Council election,” Judge Ernest Caposela wrote, “24.29% were rejected.” By comparison, he said that in 31 municipal elections held the same day across New Jersey, the overall ballot-rejection rate was “only 9.6%.” For democratic legitimacy, that’s an alarming “only.”

At a Paterson apartment building, the U.S. Postal Service didn’t place blank ballots into individual mailboxes, the judge wrote. Instead “a substantial number” were “left in bulk in the foyer.”

Court filings cite people who said they didn’t vote, yet ballots were sent in under their names. About 200 ballots were found in a mailbox in Haledon, N.J., an adjacent town. Three voters, the local news said, strangely did not list their addresses as any local cemetery, despite their being dead.

On the fraud claims, Judge Caposela deferred to prosecutors. But New Jersey’s Attorney General has alleged that the indicted city councilmen obtained at least one unvoted ballot, which was then “delivered to the Board of Elections.”

Whenever Donald Trump brings up Paterson, Democrats say it’s proof that fraud in mail voting can be detected and policed. “I view that as a positive data point,” New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy said last Sunday. “Some guys tried to screw around with the system. They got caught by law enforcement. They’ve been indicted. They’ll pay a price.”

That last bit might be true, thanks in part to New Jersey’s legal restrictions on ballot harvesting.

(MARC:  I have been pounding the table on the matter of ballot harvesting!!!)

But Mr. Murphy is wrong to say that bad actors merely “tried to screw around with the system.” Although they were caught, they succeeded. An election has been invalidated, and Paterson will hold another vote.

For a city council, this isn’t the end of the world. But at the top of the Nov. 3 ballot, the stakes are higher. There aren’t do-overs for presidential elections. The answer is for state and local officials to stop blaming the post office and start implementing an election process that voters can trust.

Title: Re: Paterson NJ
Post by: G M on August 22, 2020, 01:35:24 PM

Quote from: G M on August 22, 2020, 01:07:59 PM

1. Massive mail-in vote fraud.
2. Dems litigate to fight any attempts to discard fake votes.
3. Drag out election results though the end of Trump's term.
4. Acting President Pelosi/military coup

(https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2020/08/IMG_2453.jpg?resize=505%2C600&ssl=1)

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 22, 2020, 12:46:50 PM

What could go wrong?
A Mail-Voting Redo in New Jersey
Paterson will get a new election, but the stakes are higher in the Nov. 3 presidential race.
By The Editorial Board
Aug. 21, 2020 6:59 pm ET

New Jersey’s judiciary is calling an electoral mulligan. The state’s third-biggest city, Paterson, held a municipal election by mail in May, but the results fell into doubt after a startling percentage of the ballots were tossed out. Four men, including a city councilman and a councilman-elect, were charged with vote fraud.

On Wednesday a state court found that the election in the city’s third ward “was rife with mail in vote procedural violations,” and therefore it “was not the fair, free and full expression of the intent of the voters.” A redo will be held Nov. 3. “Of all ballots cast in the Third Ward City Council election,” Judge Ernest Caposela wrote, “24.29% were rejected.” By comparison, he said that in 31 municipal elections held the same day across New Jersey, the overall ballot-rejection rate was “only 9.6%.” For democratic legitimacy, that’s an alarming “only.”

At a Paterson apartment building, the U.S. Postal Service didn’t place blank ballots into individual mailboxes, the judge wrote. Instead “a substantial number” were “left in bulk in the foyer.”

Court filings cite people who said they didn’t vote, yet ballots were sent in under their names. About 200 ballots were found in a mailbox in Haledon, N.J., an adjacent town. Three voters, the local news said, strangely did not list their addresses as any local cemetery, despite their being dead.

On the fraud claims, Judge Caposela deferred to prosecutors. But New Jersey’s Attorney General has alleged that the indicted city councilmen obtained at least one unvoted ballot, which was then “delivered to the Board of Elections.”

Whenever Donald Trump brings up Paterson, Democrats say it’s proof that fraud in mail voting can be detected and policed. “I view that as a positive data point,” New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy said last Sunday. “Some guys tried to screw around with the system. They got caught by law enforcement. They’ve been indicted. They’ll pay a price.”

That last bit might be true, thanks in part to New Jersey’s legal restrictions on ballot harvesting.

(MARC:  I have been pounding the table on the matter of ballot harvesting!!!)

But Mr. Murphy is wrong to say that bad actors merely “tried to screw around with the system.” Although they were caught, they succeeded. An election has been invalidated, and Paterson will hold another vote.

For a city council, this isn’t the end of the world. But at the top of the Nov. 3 ballot, the stakes are higher. There aren’t do-overs for presidential elections. The answer is for state and local officials to stop blaming the post office and start implementing an election process that voters can trust.

Title: The Twelth Amendment
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 22, 2020, 08:36:17 PM

https://history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Electoral-College/

Title: More Than 550,000 Primary Absentee Ballots Rejected In 2020, Far Outpacing 2016
Post by: DougMacG on August 23, 2020, 07:28:18 PM

https://www.npr.org/2020/08/22/904693468/more-than-550-000-primary-absentee-ballots-rejected-in-2020-far-outpacing-2016

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, reported by Judicial Watch
Post by: DougMacG on August 24, 2020, 07:28:36 PM

Voter Fraud: Man Arrested in L.A. for Voting 3 Times as His Dead Mother
A man from Norwalk, California, in Los Angeles County was arrested and charged last month for voting three times as his dead mother, as well as voting for himself, the Los Angeles District Attorney announced in a statement on Tuesday.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/in-the-news/la-man-votes-3-times/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members&utm_content=20200824213928
----------------------------------------
Adding this:
We Have All The Evidence We Need That Universal Mail-In Voting Would Be a Disaster
BY MATT MARGOLIS AUG 24, 2020
https://pjmedia.com/election/matt-margolis/2020/08/24/we-have-all-the-evidence-we-need-that-universal-mail-in-voting-would-be-a-disaster-n832502

Title: WSJ: The Post Office brouhaha is a joke
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 24, 2020, 11:59:25 PM

The Phony Post Office War
Democrats are blaming the mailman for their own ballot blunders.
By The Editorial Board
Aug. 23, 2020 5:41 pm ET


House Democrats on Saturday returned to Washington to continue their political theater over the non-scandal of the U.S. Postal Service and the election. Speaker Nancy Pelosi whooped through a bill handing the post office $25 billion in the name of getting a trustworthy result on Nov. 3.


Even by Washington standards, this is a joke. New Postmaster General Louis DeJoy testified last week that the post office has enough money to deliver mail-in ballots, and his operation can’t possibly spend $25 billion that quickly in any case. Democrats voted for so much money as a bailout for the letter-carriers union that endorsed Joe Biden this month.

They want the money with no reform strings attached, though the Postal Service has lost $78 billion since 2007. The post office has been taking out underutilized equipment for years, but last week Mr. DeJoy suspended those efforts through the election after Democratic protests. He also said the post office will prioritize ballots over other kinds of first-class mail.

This should put the onus on state and local officials to establish adequate rules and deadlines for mail ballots. States like Michigan and New York have deadlines that are simply too late to process the ballots without delays and controversy. That’s the real Nov. 3 scandal to worry about.

Title: PJMedia: Evidence!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 25, 2020, 08:02:56 AM

https://pjmedia.com/election/matt-margolis/2020/08/24/we-have-all-the-evidence-we-need-that-universal-mail-in-voting-would-be-a-disaster-n832502

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 25, 2020, 09:11:23 AM

the CNN libs keep asking

"where it the evidence "

and the republican always seems to be *unable* to offer these examples.    :x

just saw that 1 to 2 days ago

Title: Democrat adits to teams of operatives committing to fraud
Post by: ccp on August 31, 2020, 05:19:54 AM

and , surprise surprise surprise

postal workers would be in on it.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/08/30/democratic-operative-for-decades-i-manipulated-mail-in-ballots-n2575310

How many postal workers would be Republican ~ 10% , maybe ?

just had political discussion with one recently who is rabid democrat   
anything democrat is good
anything republican is bad

calls Kavanaugh and Clarence Thomas rapists

when I bring up Joe , " nice guy" Biden on tape clearly lying about his law school achievements his response :

that was decades ago .

he says he takes mail delivery seriously - and he probably does
but  he sure has motivation to see to it the Dem votes get delivered more than the Republican

Title: risk of mail in voting
Post by: ccp on August 31, 2020, 03:23:30 PM

https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/the-risks-mail-voting

most importantly dems can't cheat.........
which we know they do

that is why they want the mail in s

using corona for excuse

Title: Dems unveil their voter fraud plans
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 02, 2020, 10:20:08 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/73160-democrats-unveil-their-voter-fraud-plans-2020-09-02?mailing_id=5282&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.5282&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: Watch for Iran, China, and Russia meddling
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 02, 2020, 10:21:51 AM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16403/us-election-interference

Title: fraud of absentee ballots traced back to first American Civil War
Post by: ccp on September 02, 2020, 05:02:12 PM

you guessed it
it was crooks trying to  help   McCellan

the criminals were given life in prison
.
https://dailycaller.com/2020/08/31/farrell-mail-in-voting-fraud-is-growing-but-not-new/

Title: Operation Red Mirage
Post by: G M on September 04, 2020, 12:35:00 PM

https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/058/064/045/original/7b812c0898f10a0c.png?1599175847

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/058/064/045/original/7b812c0898f10a0c.png?1599175847)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 04, 2020, 02:03:35 PM

Operation Red Mirage

or Blue theft

and Jimmy Carter will say it is all legit.

Title: Ballot rejections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2020, 10:17:27 AM

https://apnews.com/881c098ab2847dea9d87604bab9568d6?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=13507

Title: WSJ: Will the Courts Pick the Next President?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2020, 01:48:40 PM

second

Will Courts Pick the Next President?
If the election is close, the fallout could make Bush v. Gore look like an ice-cream social.
By The Editorial Board
Sept. 7, 2020 6:44 pm ET


Georgia’s voting deadline is unambiguous: Absentee ballots are due when the polls close on Election Day. Late arrivals are meant to be set aside, stored, and eventually destroyed without being opened. That’s what state law says, and the way to protect democratic legitimacy in an anxious age is to run elections by the book.

But in the Twilight Zone of 2020, everything is apparently up for grabs. Last Monday a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that orders Georgia officials to count all ballots postmarked by Election Day, even if they don’t show up until three days later. The suit was filed by the New Georgia Project, a group founded by Democrat Stacey Abrams. The judge expressed a reluctance to “interfere with Georgia’s statutory election machinery,” but she concluded that “the risk of disenfranchisement is great.”


Similar litigation is taking place across the country. Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court last Tuesday accepted a lawsuit filed by the state Democratic Party, and officials suggested last month in a separate case that ballots be counted if they arrive by Nov. 6, even if the postmark is missing or illegible. In Ohio, the League of Women Voters is challenging the process for verifying signatures. Minnesota has waived its rule that absentee ballots must be signed by a witness, and the state Supreme Court is weighing an appeal of that suspension, brought by President Trump’s campaign.

If the presidential election is decided by a whisker, with Donald Trump or Joe Biden leading by some thousands of votes in a few states, a court ruling could prove decisive. The pivotal jurisdictions will be flooded with Republican and Democratic lawyers, and the resulting chaos could resemble the 2000 Florida recount, with smudged postmarks as the new hanging chads.


The simple fact is that mass mail voting introduces slack into the election system. Unrealistic deadlines are one problem. For an election held on Nov. 3, voters in 10 states can request an absentee ballot on Nov. 2, according to a report last week by the U.S. Postal Service’s inspector general. During this year’s primary season, the audit says, more than a million ballots were sent to voters in the seven days before an election, placing them “at high risk” of tardiness.

The Postal Service audit describes how seven USPS processing centers performed from April through June. About 8% of identifiable election and political mail, or 1.6 million pieces, was delivered late. Don’t blame the new Postmaster General, Louis DeJoy: He took over June 15.

Some states try to factor in delays by counting ballot stragglers, up to 10 days late in Ohio, as long as they’re postmarked by Election Day. Alas, the audit finds that “ballots are not always being postmarked as required.” Other hangups abound: A Michigan voting envelope was printed without an address for the correct elections office, which “caused the ballot to be returned to the voter.” Ballots can also be rejected by local workers, who eyeball a voter’s signature to see if it matches the version on file.

In this year’s primaries, according to a tally by NPR, 558,032 absentee votes were tossed out. Al Gore won the nationwide popular vote in 2000 by 543,895. The discarded ballots this spring included 23,196 in Wisconsin, a state Mr. Trump won last time by 22,748. Some states give voters a week, or 14 days in Illinois, to “cure” bad signatures. Yet a study of Florida in 2018 found that mail-vote rejection rates were twice as high for black as for white voters.

The finagling over late ballots and messy signatures might stall the reporting of credible results. About a dozen states, including Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, don’t begin processing absentee votes until Election Day, per the National Conference of State Legislatures. In the absence of a partisan skew, this might not matter. But a recent Journal poll says that 66% of Trump supporters intend to vote in person, compared with 26% of Biden backers.

***
On election night, the electoral map might suggest a solid lead for Mr. Trump that is eroded as mail ballots are canvassed. What if Mr. Trump reprises his tweet from six days after Florida’s 2018 elections? “An honest vote count is no longer possible—ballots massively infected. Must go with Election Night!” Remember Hillary Clinton’s advice this summer: “Joe Biden should not concede under any circumstances, because I think this is going to drag out.”

The fight would probably drag out in the courts. Say it’s mid-November, and absentee ballots are being counted in a key state. Although Mr. Trump retains a modest lead, mail votes are breaking 3 to 1 for Mr. Biden. Perhaps the law in this jurisdiction requires ballots to arrive by Election Day, so there’s a pile to the side of thousands of late deliveries. Some are missing postmarks, and it’s not clear when they were mailed. Thousands more have been discarded for suspect signatures, but the rejection rates are higher in urban areas.

The best way to prevent this democratic debacle is to act before things get that far. If states tighten ballot deadlines now and prepare to process mail votes before Election Day, it would cut the risk of an outcome that causes half the country to claim it’s illegitimate. With each lawsuit that puts the count into the hands of judges, this nightmare gets more likely.

Title: Coup 2.0
Post by: G M on September 08, 2020, 02:56:28 PM

https://nypost.com/2020/09/06/antifa-riots-could-be-part-of-democrat-power-grab-devine/

Antifa riots may be part of Democrat power grab: Devine
By Miranda Devine September 6, 2020 | 10:39pm | Updated

Imagine you were at a restaurant and BLM-Antifa protesters descended on you, threw your food on the ground, broke plates, overturned chairs, tossed a potted plant into your oyster platter and forced you to leave.

That’s what happened in upstate Rochester Friday night at the Ox and Stone, and across the road at Swan Dive, when hundreds of protesters chanting “Black lives matter” chased off frightened diners.

“We’re shutting your party down,” a woman shouts in footage aired by FreedomNews TV.

The oyster-platter incident reportedly occurred at Korean steakhouse Cote in the Flatiron District. Protesters brandishing a “Death to America” anarchist banner and chanting “Every city, every town, burn the precinct to the ground” left a trail of destruction in the city Friday night.

One of those arrested for felony rioting was wealthy Upper East Side college student Clara Kraebber, 20, a member of the Young Democrats.

Whether or not all rioters are Democratic voters, they increasingly are associated with Joe Biden’s campaign in the minds of voters who fear violence is coming to their suburb.

This rolling campaign of anti-police street violence is killing Biden’s bid for the presidency — just look at private polling in crucial swing states such as Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where law and order has become a decisive issue.

So why don’t Democratic leaders do more to condemn the violence and call for calm?

To understand their inaction, you need to step back and see street violence as one element of a coordinated “playbook” to dislodge President Trump, regardless of the outcome of the election.

This is the thesis of political theorist Dr. Darren Beattie, a former Duke University professor and White House official.

The playbook is straight from the strategies the US government has deployed in so-called “Color Revolutions” in Eastern European countries, such as Ukraine or Belarus, to remove “authoritarian” leaders deemed hostile to American interests.

In a series of articles at Revolver.news, Beattie’s thesis provides a compelling comparison between Deep State efforts to remove President Trump and techniques used by the State Department, covert agencies and allied NGOs to influence, or overturn, elections in foreign countries.

BLM-Antifa’s “mostly peaceful protests” are America’s version of Ukraine’s Orange Revolution, where civil unrest was fomented on the streets to oust a Kremlin-backed authoritarian.

In an interview, Beattie noted “strong parallels” between “color revolutions” overseas and the “sustained coordinated coup against Trump” — from the Russia collusion hoax to his impeachment over Ukraine.

“The very same regime change professionals … assigned to overthrow ‘authoritarians’ in Eastern Europe are the ones running this operation against Trump. It is the same playbook run by the same people.”

The Color Revolution playbook starts by creating the narrative of an authoritarian, illegitimate leader. Then you foment unrest on the streets, aimed at provoking an authoritarian crackdown that can be used to mobilize further unrest.

You undermine people’s faith in the election process, setting up a contested outcome that turns into street fighting.

At the same time, you wage relentless “lawfare” to contest ballots. Ultimately the military may be called upon to dislodge the incumbent.

An added twist for America is that Democrats have used the pandemic to institute mass, unsolicited mail-in ballots, which historically are open to fraud and coercion, an experiment which will leave the election result undecided on Nov. 3.

It would be easy to dismiss Beattie’s idea as a wild conspiracy theory, except anti-Trump forces are doing their best to play along.

Take the Transition Integrity Project, a bipartisan war-gaming exercise created by academics, former Clinton and Obama operatives, never-Trumper Republicans, journalists and diplomats, “out of concern that the Trump administration may seek to manipulate, ignore, undermine or disrupt the 2020 presidential election and transition process.”

Project co-founder Rosa Brooks, former special counsel at the George Soros-linked Open Society Foundations in New York, laid out four scenarios for the election: a big Biden win; a narrow Biden win; a period of extended uncertainty as in 2000; and a Trump Electoral College win but popular vote loss, as in 2016.

SEE ALSO

Democrats determined to treat November's election as illegitimate — unless they win
Only with the scenario in which Biden wins an overwhelming victory is there a “relatively orderly transfer of power,” Brooks wrote last week in the Washington Post.

“Every other scenario we looked at involved street-level violence and political crisis … massive disinformation campaigns, violence in the streets and a constitutional impasse.”

Straight out of the Color Revolution playbook.

The aim is to lay the groundwork to reject the election results if Trump wins, with the expectation that he will not concede defeat and will have to be dislodged by military means.

Again, this sounds insane, I know.

But this is the scenario posed by two retired Army officers, John Nagl and Paul Yingling, in a respectable military publication, Defense One, last month. In an open letter to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, they suggested the 82nd Airborne could be used to remove Trump “by force” from the White House in January.

Hillary Clinton echoed the sentiment: “Biden should not concede under any circumstances.” Biden has said he is “absolutely convinced” the military would “escort” Trump from the White House if he refused to leave office.

The narrative grew so persistent that Milley felt compelled to issue a letter to Congress declaring the military will not help settle disputes if the election results are contested.

Attorney General Bill Barr warned on CNN last week that the Democrats’ push for unsolicited mail-in ballots is “playing with fire” in our divided country.

To put it mildly.

But, apart from complaining, what is the government going to do about it?

Title: Biden stronger than Hillary was in WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2020, 06:00:52 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/biden-2020-looks-stronger-than-clinton-2016-in-wisconsin/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-09-08&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Title: Re: Biden stronger than Hillary was in WI
Post by: DougMacG on September 09, 2020, 06:37:53 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2020, 06:00:52 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/biden-2020-looks-stronger-than-clinton-2016-in-wisconsin/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-09-08&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Biden, as he was, is a better fit for Wisconsin than Hillary.   Now this is a guy who answers questions with a teleprompter and has his wavering statements controlled by conflicted handlers.  Is this the Joe Biden who favored the violence or the one who opposes it?  Is this the one who wrote the crime bill or who is letting them out?  Is this Biden the moderate or the one who sides with Bernie Sanders and AOC on banning all fossil fuels, supporting Green New Deal and hating capitalism?  Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have 6 hours of debate time coming up to clarify (or muddle) how they would govern.

Wisconsin is a strange place politically. Madison is far Left.  Milwaukee has large city characteristics.  Most of the rest is beautiful countryside with small towns, that now lean right.   

Does anyone remember Sen Bill Proxmire and the Golden Fleece awards for most flagrant waste of taxpayer funds?  That fiscal conservative was a Democrat from Wisconsin, who made a trademark out of being a watchdog for the taxpayer.  Wisconsin elected and rejected Russ Feingold, as left as they come.  Wisconsin elected and reelected conservative governor Scott Walker, then voted him out.  Current Senators Ron Johnson and Tammy Baldwin are polar opposites elected in different years.  Anyone who says they know which way Wisconsin will go this year lies.  All sides agree, Wisconsin is in play. 

Hillary never went there to campaign in 2016.  Wisconsin was safely behind the Blue Wall, her handlers told her.  Biden and Harris both went there already - to honor a rapist.  What say these two about school choice?  Economic growth?  Energy prices?  The threat of China?  Is it all "social justice" and "Green New Deal"??  That is not where Joe Biden built his reputation as an old school Democrat.

WI Dem primary April 7, 2020:  Joe Biden  63%,  Bernie Sanders 32%, after the nomination was essentially clinched. 

Joe Biden has a needle to thread.  He needs the far Left consolidated and motivated and he also needs his steady, moderate image intact to win the middle.  But when he talks to the Left, he loses the middle. 

He needs to look ready to do the job during the next two months of exposure.  If yesterday is any indication, that is not possible.

Title: Electoral process, NYT: The Electoral College Will Destroy America
Post by: DougMacG on September 09, 2020, 07:50:48 AM

Why not title it, NY Time hates the constitution?  Burn it up, go with mob rule.  The Founders were wrong.  Today's Left are SO much smarter.  Majority should rules.  Anyone can see that.  This is not a union of states - in the view of these wise men.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/08/opinion/electoral-college-trump-biden.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

"The Electoral College as it functions today is the most glaring reminder of many that our democracy is not fair, not equal and not representative."

   - It's not a democracy, it's a constitutional republic.

"No other advanced democracy in the world uses anything like it, and for good reason."

   - Please name those countries governed netter than the USA.

"The election, as Mr. Trump would say — though not for the right reasons — is rigged."

    - Yes.  Rigged very carefully by the constitution against oppressive rule by either the whim or the force of a simple majority.

Funny liberals loved it, owned it and named it, the Blue Wall, when it favored them.  Which means this is all about losing. 

How about instead following it instead of fighting it?  Unite us instead of divide us to win.  Construct a message that appeals to a majority of electoral votes represented by different people in different states in different regions with different economic, social and other needs and interests.

Odd that part of the author's argument

If wrong, all of this is easy to fix within the constitutional framework, if you believe in the constitution.  Simply pass your amendment with 2/3 vote of the House, 2/3 of the Senate and 3/4th of the state legislatures.

"get rid of statewide winner-take-all laws"??  Great.  Governor elections too?  Doesn't that too 'disenfranchise' those who voted for second place? Will a Rhode Island's Senate seat be listed as 60/40 Democrat then, or will they just seat the Democrat?  Oh he meant just for the Presidency and just for this time that the EC allegedly favors Republicans.  And it's all because of a projection from Nate Silver at 538, whose forecasts have  been right on exactly zero Presidential elections in a row.

Instead he argues that states should disenfranchise ALL of their own statewide votes and forfeit their state's electoral votes to the candidate who wins everywhere else.

THAT better exemplifies consent of the governed?  I don't think so.

Title: The Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 09, 2020, 08:43:13 AM

https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2020/Events/2020_08_0201_EssentialElectoralCollege_Ebook.pdf?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTVRJNE1EUXdOakEyTjJVeCIsInQiOiJGUDBmZ3B3RTNzbXJcL2loV2ozK1BqSmdmSTlXcVd6T1wvWHhhc2pTVGJueGE0MTRneWloU2RDK3RYQnVkOGltc3pkbHJDVytqU0JEamVvSnhCN0FKeGNycjNKMlYxOHFsMXpPOXkxNzNTaHFtZHVXcFJoYUxGYXZSUmEzQUJWblUyIn0%3D

Title: Now, why would the Dems do that?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 11, 2020, 07:43:35 PM

A Trump-Biden Niagara Fall
How the pandemic and protests are floating the U.S. into a political crisis.

By Daniel Henninger
Sept. 9, 2020 7:10 pm ET
WSJ Opinion: A Trump-Biden Niagara Fall

Wonder Land: How the pandemic and protests are floating the U.S. into a political crisis. Images: AFP/Getty Images Composite: Mark Kelly

Niagara Falls is a wonder of the world in part because when staring at its vast, churning expanse, what comes to mind is: I wouldn’t want to be swept over those falls. Welcome to the 2020 presidential election. Some 120 million voters are in the same boat, heading for a political crackup on Nov. 3. But hey, we don’t arrive at the top of the falls for two months. Why worry?

On Tuesday, this newspaper’s opinion columns carried a bracing editorial—“Will Courts Pick the Next President?”—on the impending mail-in voting fiasco. Read it and weep. The gist of the situation is that some states, oblivious to the laws of postal-delivery gravity, are allowing ballots to be put in the mail just days before Nov. 3. They may or may not show up by Election Day, but so what?

Postal service experts have warned of the risks of mailing ballots within seven days of Nov. 3. But hardly anyone is listening to them. Amid the maelstrom of state voting procedures, lawsuits are being filed to challenge existing deadlines. A federal judge told Georgia that if a ballot is postmarked before Election Day, it has to be counted whenever it shows up.

In Pennsylvania, some officials want ballots counted even if a postmark is missing. State election officials are going to eyeball signatures on mailed ballots to see if they match what’s on file. Close doesn’t count only in horseshoes and hand grenades.

Ohio’s League of (Democratic) Women Voters is already challenging the verification process. A long two months remain to throw other legal monkey wrenches into what’s left of the election system.

But here’s the really dynamite mail-in metric: Polling done by The Wall Street Journal suggests 66% of Trump voters plan to vote in person, but nearly 75% of Biden voters say they’ll mail it in. Arguably, we are going to have parallel elections for the same office. Not even close to arguable is that both Donald Trump and Joe Biden will claim each won his election. Dueling inaugurations, anyone? Portland’s permanent political street-fighting could be coming to a neighborhood near you.

The excuse for rolling the election helplessly onto the rocks is, of course . . . the pandemic.

It’s worth noting how much of essential America is being subsumed beneath the pandemic’s unchanging conventional wisdom.

Schools, universities, urban economies, industries and now a national election must stumble forward as if nothing we know about the virus’s virulence or transmission has changed since March. At institution after institution, leadership has ceded decision-making responsibility to an amorphous power called “science.” That statement requires an apology to the scientists who world-wide have been conducting debate and discussion about the virus’s threat today versus the need to resume normal human life.

Are we really going to allow a national political crisis caused by a demonstrably flawed voting system to just, you know, sort of happen? A half year on, the pandemic has short-circuited independent or helpful input from much of the nation’s leadership on protecting the election.

Several reasons may explain the national outbreak of nonfeasance.

One is “Trump.” After marinating for three years in antipathy for “Trump,” many elites—in business, academia and the media—are willing to let the system rip to get rid of him. In turn, he’s happy to oblige the rancor. In the Cold War, this was called mutual assured destruction.

More intriguing is how racial issues that emerged after May 25 have suppressed normal political instincts and comment. The idea of Black Lives Matter has become a kind of alternative reality in which racialism informs everything, starting with that long list of torn-down monuments to such notorious racists as Ulysses S. Grant.

This presidential election was going to be difficult enough without the new element of racially motivated mob rage and one major party locked up over its historic ties to the civil-rights movement and the current movement’s street protests and violence. The BLM goal is to conform opinion. The result is that people who normally would speak up no longer do—about anything.

Last month, Seattle’s Police Chief Carmen Best, a black woman, was forced to resign. This week, Rochester, N.Y., Police Chief La’Ron Singletary, also black, resigned with a bitter statement: “As a man of integrity, I will not sit idly by while outside entities attempt to destroy my character.”

Their careers, a testament to racial advancement, are collateral damage, tossed away in a day without defense from anyone. The complexities of their jobs aren’t discussable. Instead, liberals and many others—in and out of politics—hide behind the virtue of the moment, intimidated by social media and the social-justice sentiments of millennials.

Between the pandemic and protests, we have fallen into a culture of silence this year. Now it looks as if we will nonchalantly let the mail-in vote mess float a presidential election over the falls into a political crisis. Stock up on water wings.

Write henninger@wsj.com.

Title: WSJ Impending PA Fustercluck could be cured if only
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 12, 2020, 10:25:38 AM

Pennsylvania has already suffered one interminable mail-vote delay in 2020, and a repeat in November could draw the entire country into a legal brawl, while putting the result of the presidential election into serious doubt. How about heading off this too-predictable debacle before it happens?

A week after the June 2 primary, about half the counties in the Keystone State were still tallying ballots. On June 11, Philadelphia alone had 42,255 votes uncounted. President Trump won Pennsylvania in 2016 by 44,292.


If Mr. Trump and Joe Biden run neck and neck in November, how long might Pennsylvania keep the Electoral College hanging? In the campaign’s closing weeks, arriving mail votes will pile up in local offices, but state law says they can’t be processed until 7 a.m. on Election Day. This wasn’t enough preparation to give timely results when 1.5 million residents voted absentee in June, and it won’t be in November.

Tight deadlines are another problem. Pennsylvanians can request a mail ballot as late as 5 p.m. on Oct. 27. For votes to count, they must arrive at local election offices by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. That leaves seven days, including a Sunday, for applications to be handled, blank ballots delivered, and votes dropped off or return mailed. The U.S. Postal Service says such a turnaround is unrealistic and creates a high risk of tardiness. America’s first postmaster general, Ben Franklin, would be unhappy to see his Pennsylvania setting up the USPS for failure.


In some states, straggling ballots are valid if they’re postmarked by Election Day. Pennsylvania law has no similar provision, but Democrats are asking the state Supreme Court to conjure one. Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, wants to count votes arriving by Nov. 6. Pennsylvania also lacks a way for voters to fix ballots that are rejected for suspect signatures. This is a recipe for extended legal mischief and for judges to determine which votes are counted. With the state Supreme Court controlled by Democrats, that could be what Mr. Wolf has in mind.

The state Legislature, run by Republicans, is moving a bill with fixes. Under the House proposal, which passed 112-90 last week, the deadline to request mail ballots would jump to a comfortable 15 days before the election, as the USPS suggests. Absentee votes could be pre-processed beginning the Saturday before Nov. 3. Voters with suspect signatures would be given a chance to prove their identities.

Mr. Wolf plans to veto the bill “for a multitude of reasons,” his spokeswoman says. One objection is that it “seeks to eliminate the use of drop boxes.” True enough, although it would also authorize Pennsylvanians to drop off voted mail ballots at their polling places. Mr. Wolf wants a longer period of pre-processing for mail votes: three weeks, not three days.

The tragedy would be for Republicans to pass a bill, Mr. Wolf to veto it, and Pennsylvania to barrel toward a foreseeable crash. Maybe three days of pre-processing is too little, given the busyness of Nov. 1 and 2. Maybe three weeks is too much. Mr. Wolf’s office didn’t reply Thursday to a query on the potential for compromise. “We continue to be open to negotiations,” says a spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, “and hope that the Governor would meet with Republican legislative leaders.”

The same should be happening beyond Harrisburg. About a dozen states, including Wisconsin and Michigan, don’t process ballots until Election Day. Minnesotans can request a mail ballot on Nov. 2. Smells like more lawsuits.

Some analysts in Washington are so alarmed about delayed presidential results that they’re calling to delay the date of the Electoral College vote, which can be changed with an act of Congress. Inauguration Day is fixed in the Constitution as Jan. 20.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has a bill to bump the meeting of electors from Dec. 14 to Jan. 2. So Americans can spend Christmas wondering who their next President will be? There’s still time to avoid that outcome.

States shouldn’t be let off the hook. If Mr. Wolf and Pennsylvania’s legislators get together now to fix their shortsighted and potentially destructive election laws, and if other states follow, then with any luck Mr. Rubio’s bill will never be needed.

But on present trend, in a close presidential race, we are headed toward a vote-counting mess in which both sides claim victory. Don’t rule out furious supporters of the candidates battling in the street. If you think this isn’t possible in America, you haven’t been paying attention to this year’s “summer of love.”

Title: Re: WSJ Impending PA Fustercluck could be cured if only
Post by: G M on September 12, 2020, 04:22:12 PM

The fustercluck is part of the left's plan.

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 12, 2020, 10:25:38 AM

Pennsylvania has already suffered one interminable mail-vote delay in 2020, and a repeat in November could draw the entire country into a legal brawl, while putting the result of the presidential election into serious doubt. How about heading off this too-predictable debacle before it happens?

A week after the June 2 primary, about half the counties in the Keystone State were still tallying ballots. On June 11, Philadelphia alone had 42,255 votes uncounted. President Trump won Pennsylvania in 2016 by 44,292.


If Mr. Trump and Joe Biden run neck and neck in November, how long might Pennsylvania keep the Electoral College hanging? In the campaign’s closing weeks, arriving mail votes will pile up in local offices, but state law says they can’t be processed until 7 a.m. on Election Day. This wasn’t enough preparation to give timely results when 1.5 million residents voted absentee in June, and it won’t be in November.

Tight deadlines are another problem. Pennsylvanians can request a mail ballot as late as 5 p.m. on Oct. 27. For votes to count, they must arrive at local election offices by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. That leaves seven days, including a Sunday, for applications to be handled, blank ballots delivered, and votes dropped off or return mailed. The U.S. Postal Service says such a turnaround is unrealistic and creates a high risk of tardiness. America’s first postmaster general, Ben Franklin, would be unhappy to see his Pennsylvania setting up the USPS for failure.


In some states, straggling ballots are valid if they’re postmarked by Election Day. Pennsylvania law has no similar provision, but Democrats are asking the state Supreme Court to conjure one. Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, wants to count votes arriving by Nov. 6. Pennsylvania also lacks a way for voters to fix ballots that are rejected for suspect signatures. This is a recipe for extended legal mischief and for judges to determine which votes are counted. With the state Supreme Court controlled by Democrats, that could be what Mr. Wolf has in mind.

The state Legislature, run by Republicans, is moving a bill with fixes. Under the House proposal, which passed 112-90 last week, the deadline to request mail ballots would jump to a comfortable 15 days before the election, as the USPS suggests. Absentee votes could be pre-processed beginning the Saturday before Nov. 3. Voters with suspect signatures would be given a chance to prove their identities.

Mr. Wolf plans to veto the bill “for a multitude of reasons,” his spokeswoman says. One objection is that it “seeks to eliminate the use of drop boxes.” True enough, although it would also authorize Pennsylvanians to drop off voted mail ballots at their polling places. Mr. Wolf wants a longer period of pre-processing for mail votes: three weeks, not three days.

The tragedy would be for Republicans to pass a bill, Mr. Wolf to veto it, and Pennsylvania to barrel toward a foreseeable crash. Maybe three days of pre-processing is too little, given the busyness of Nov. 1 and 2. Maybe three weeks is too much. Mr. Wolf’s office didn’t reply Thursday to a query on the potential for compromise. “We continue to be open to negotiations,” says a spokeswoman for Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, “and hope that the Governor would meet with Republican legislative leaders.”

The same should be happening beyond Harrisburg. About a dozen states, including Wisconsin and Michigan, don’t process ballots until Election Day. Minnesotans can request a mail ballot on Nov. 2. Smells like more lawsuits.

Some analysts in Washington are so alarmed about delayed presidential results that they’re calling to delay the date of the Electoral College vote, which can be changed with an act of Congress. Inauguration Day is fixed in the Constitution as Jan. 20.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio has a bill to bump the meeting of electors from Dec. 14 to Jan. 2. So Americans can spend Christmas wondering who their next President will be? There’s still time to avoid that outcome.

States shouldn’t be let off the hook. If Mr. Wolf and Pennsylvania’s legislators get together now to fix their shortsighted and potentially destructive election laws, and if other states follow, then with any luck Mr. Rubio’s bill will never be needed.

But on present trend, in a close presidential race, we are headed toward a vote-counting mess in which both sides claim victory. Don’t rule out furious supporters of the candidates battling in the street. If you think this isn’t possible in America, you haven’t been paying attention to this year’s “summer of love.”

Title: Now where did they come from?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 18, 2020, 06:26:13 AM

https://www.wsj.com/articles/whoopswe-found-1-666-ballots-11600384516?mod=MorningEditorialReport&mod=djemMER_h

Title: WSJ: PA Supreme Court moves goal posts
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 21, 2020, 11:28:25 PM

Supreme Chaos in Pennsylvania Voting
The state’s high court rewrites the law to extend ballot counting.
By The Editorial Board
Sept. 18, 2020 6:46 pm ET
SAVE
PRINT
TEXT
474




A mancasts his ballot in the primary election in Philadelphia, June 2, 2020.
PHOTO: JOSHUA ROBERTS/REUTERS
Three days late, and no postmark needed: That’s the ruling on mail votes from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. State law clearly says absentee ballots must be received by 8 p.m. on Election Day. But on Thursday the court controlled by Democrats, in a case filed by Democrats, rewrote the law in a 4-3 vote, with four Democrats in the majority, 47 days before Nov. 3.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
'Patriotic Education' and Bill Barr's Speech


SUBSCRIBE
“There is no ambiguity regarding the deadline set by the General Assembly,” the court’s majority admits. To overturn it, they cite a line in Pennsylvania’s constitution: “Elections shall be free and equal; and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.” How does that language empower judges to ignore the ballot deadline? We’ll wait while readers search for emanations and penumbras.

Pennsylvania’s election laws are flawed. Voters can request an absentee ballot as late as 5 p.m. on Oct. 27, seven days before the votes are due. The majority opinion calls this “an extremely condensed timeline” that “will unquestionably fail under the strain of COVID-19 and the 2020 Presidential Election, resulting in the disenfranchisement of voters.”

Before the state’s June 2 primary, a crush of applications meant that many ballots went out late. “An elector cannot exercise the franchise,” the majority says, “while her ballot application is awaiting processing in a county election board nor when her ballot is sitting in a USPS facility.” Thus the court orders that ballots be counted if they arrive by Nov. 6. If their postmarks are missing or illegible, they will be “presumed to have been mailed by Election Day” unless evidence shows otherwise.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Opinion: Morning Editorial Report
All the day's Opinion headlines.

PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBED
The court’s feigned modesty elsewhere in the ruling is hilarious by comparison. Pennsylvania lacks a requirement that voters be notified about defects in their mail ballots, such as faulty signatures. The Supreme Court declined to fabricate one, “particularly in light of the open policy questions attendant to that decision.”

It also declined to order the counting of “naked” ballots, those returned without a secrecy envelope: “We conclude that the Legislature intended for the secrecy envelope provision to be mandatory.” Yet the majority has no qualms about voiding the Nov. 3 ballot deadline, which the Legislature obviously meant to be mandatory.

The effects could be dire. Two weeks ago the state House, which is controlled by Republicans, passed a bill that would set an earlier deadline to request a mail ballot, 15 days before the election. On Tuesday Democratic Governor Tom Wolf had renewed his call for legislative action to count ballots that arrive by Nov. 6, if they’re postmarked. The Legislature is the proper place for that debate, but the court’s ruling means that Mr. Wolf now has little incentive to negotiate.

This also increases the chances that the courts will decide who wins Pennsylvania, and maybe the Presidency. If the race between Donald Trump and Joe Biden is close, the Electoral College could come down to the Keystone State. Thanks to the Pennsylvania court, thousands of voters might not mail their ballots until Nov. 3, possibly meaning no winner for days.

At the margin, the ruling could help Mr. Biden. About 20,000 ballots were rejected in Pennsylvania’s June primary, even after the deadline was extended in some counties. If the polls are right that Biden supporters are much more likely to vote by mail, the new leeway on absentees could redound to his benefit. If ballots are disputed, lawsuits will send vote counting into the courts. Any doubt which candidate the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will favor?

Justices in Pennsylvania run in partisan elections. And the ones who moved the voting deadline on Thursday are Democrats. The two Republicans dissented on that question, as did one independent-minded Democrat. If a close Pennsylvania election ends in rancor, and the result is a winner that one side or the other claims is illegitimate, the four Keystone State Justices will deserve top billing as culprits.

Title: Vote Fraud 2020
Post by: G M on September 22, 2020, 01:56:27 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/09/breaking-north-carolina-joins-michigan-pennsylvania-will-accept-late-ballots-9-days-election-ballot-harvesting/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 22, 2020, 02:18:47 PM

Fk.

Title: WI court changes the rules
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 22, 2020, 06:09:06 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/22/wisconsin-ruling-allows-mail-in-ballots-to-be-counted-without-definitive-postmarks/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20200922

Title: Soros and Zuckerberg working together
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 22, 2020, 06:35:21 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/corruption-chronicles/most-of-facebook-censorship-board-has-ties-to-leftwing-billionaire-george-soros/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members&utm_content=20200922151443

Title: This is getting pretty hairy , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 23, 2020, 07:17:40 PM

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/09/23/report-trump-campaign-actively-discussing-radical-measures-to-bypass-election-results/amp/

Title: JW vs. IL on voter roll data
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 23, 2020, 07:21:14 PM

second

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/illinois-refuses-voter-roll-data/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=corruption+chronicles&utm_term=members&utm_content=20200923191539

Title: FL election and felons
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 24, 2020, 10:19:00 AM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16541/florida-election-felons

Title: bloomberg
Post by: ccp on September 24, 2020, 02:50:59 PM

protecting his Chinese investments

little Napoleon

Title: nice summary of Dem strategy to swipe election
Post by: ccp on September 25, 2020, 12:42:23 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/09/25/mansour-and-pinkerton-the-democrats-7-step-strategy-to-win-the-election-using-vote-by-mail-chaos/

Title: Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 26, 2020, 05:13:14 PM

https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2020/Events/2020_08_0201_EssentialElectoralCollege_Ebook.pdf?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTVRJNE1EUXdOakEyTjJVeCIsInQiOiJGUDBmZ3B3RTNzbXJcL2loV2ozK1BqSmdmSTlXcVd6T1wvWHhhc2pTVGJueGE0MTRneWloU2RDK3RYQnVkOGltc3pkbHJDVytqU0JEamVvSnhCN0FKeGNycjNKMlYxOHFsMXpPOXkxNzNTaHFtZHVXcFJoYUxGYXZSUmEzQUJWblUyIn0%3D

Title: Ilhan Omar election fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 28, 2020, 06:13:11 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/new-project-veritas-video-voter-fraud-in-ilhan-omars-district/

Title: whistle blower on ballot scams
Post by: ccp on September 29, 2020, 05:06:08 AM

"a whole industry"

isn't this obvious when near the end of every close election
the vote counting  in the Democrat bastions is always delayed as long as possible.

Like Florida's southeast counties
or big cites precincts where they try to find enough votes to overturn the REpublican lead in a state wide race:

https://pjmedia.com/election/tyler-o-neil/2020/09/28/2000-bush-v-gore-lawyer-exposes-the-underworld-that-trades-on-ballots-and-forgeries-n982006

Title: WSJ: What is the ballot deadline? Who knows?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 02, 2020, 02:26:58 PM

What’s the Ballot Deadline? Who Knows
A month before Nov. 3, the election’s rules are being set by lawsuit.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 1, 2020 7:27 pm ET

Barely a month is left before Election Day, yet voting rules in pivotal states are still being litigated. This week Pennsylvania Republicans asked the U.S. Supreme Court to halt a state judicial ruling that says late ballots must be counted, even if they lack postmarks and arrive three days after the statutory deadline.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, controlled by Democratic justices who are chosen in partisan elections, issued that order Sept. 17 in a 4-3 vote. State law says valid ballots must arrive by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. The court unilaterally pushed it to Nov. 6. If a postmark is missing or illegible, officials are told to presume that the ballot was mailed on time.


“This is an open invitation to voters to cast their ballots after Election Day,” say Republican leaders of the Pennsylvania Senate, in their filing to the U.S. Supreme Court. They add that by extending the ballot deadline, the state jurists “usurped” the Legislature’s authority over elections under the U.S. Constitution.

Similar arguments appear in a separate application to the U.S. Supreme Court from the Pennsylvania Republican Party. “This Court should intervene now,” it argues, “to provide guidance to lower courts before the rapidly approaching federal general election.” Justice Samuel Alito, who handles emergency appeals from that region, has asked for a response to the GOP briefs by Monday at 3 p.m. But it’s certainly true that, left to their own devices, judges across the country are making it up as they go.

In Wisconsin last week, a federal judge said ballots postmarked by Election Day could arrive by Nov. 9. State lawmakers and the Republican Party sought a stay. On Tuesday the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the request, saying the GOP hadn’t “suffered an injury” and the Legislature wasn’t “entitled to represent Wisconsin’s interests as a polity.” The mistake was not having a citizen or elector as a co-litigant. But a request for an en banc rehearing has been filed.

In Georgia, a federal judge ordered late-arriving ballots to be counted until Nov. 6. State officials have a stay application pending at the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. “Voters will be confused: ballots already have preprinted instructions that refer to the Election Day Deadline,” it says. Also: “Deciphering whether a ballot has a valid and timely postmark pursuant to the order inserts new subjective considerations.”

In Minnesota a lawsuit filed last week in district court challenges a consent decree agreed to by a Democratic state leader, which says mail votes are valid through Nov. 10, even if they lack postmarks. In Michigan the GOP sued in state court, seeking to overturn a judge’s order that straggling ballots, if mailed by Nov. 2, could arrive as late as Nov. 17.

A lawsuit in North Carolina federal court seeks to kill a legal settlement entered into by the state Board of Elections, which would count postmarked ballots through Nov. 12. Republican lawmakers argue that the U.S. Constitution explicitly empowers the Legislature to set voting rules, meaning the Board of Elections can’t huddle with private litigants to “usurp the General Assembly’s sole authority.”

In Arizona state officials want to stay a federal judge’s order that voters be permitted to fix ballots with missing signatures until “the fifth business day” after Nov. 3. Arizona provides that opportunity if a faulty signature is rejected, but the law says people who outright neglect to sign a ballot must do so by Election Day. “There are entirely reasonable bases to distinguish between signature mismatches and non-signatures,” says the filing at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Specifically, there’s little risk of error in throwing out unsigned ballots, which are “the exclusive fault of the voter.”

***
The U.S. Supreme Court might be hesitant to intervene, but the Pennsylvania appeal has already reached its chambers, and others could get there before Nov. 3. If the Justices don’t step in to stop this chaotic, last-minute judicial law-writing before the election, they might have to do so afterward, at far greater political cost to themselves and the country.

The way to protect democratic confidence is to run elections by the book, not to let judges rewrite state laws willy-nilly in the weeks before Election Day.

Title: Prager: Voter fraud is real
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 04, 2020, 08:02:00 AM

https://www.prageru.com/video/is-voter-fraud-real/

Title: JW: Vote roll fraud in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2020, 03:16:16 PM

PA Counties Admit They Gave Incorrect Voter Roll Information to the Feds

Very often the real story lies behind the curtain. While the country watched the presidential debate, we were busy fighting for clean voter rolls in Pennsylvania and other states. Clean voter rolls are a foundation of honest elections.
We’ve now learned that the State of Pennsylvania and three Pennsylvania counties admitted they reported incorrect information to a federal agency concerning the removal of ineligible voters from their voter rolls. In April, we filed a lawsuit against Pennsylvania and three of its counties for failing to make reasonable efforts to remove ineligible voters from their rolls, as required by the federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) (Judicial Watch v. Pennsylvania, et al (No. 1:02-at-06000)). 
 
Federal regulations require Pennsylvania to certify to the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) the number of voter registrations removed from the rolls under the NVRA because the voter has moved out of state. According to data the State certified to the EAC in the most recent two-year reporting period: 
•   Bucks County, with about 457,000 registrations, removed a total of eight names under the relevant NVRA procedures;
•   Chester County, with about 357,000 registrations, removed five names under those procedures; and
•   Delaware County, with about 403,000 registrations, removed four names under those procedures.
In recent court filings, Pennsylvania admitted it had certified incorrect data to the EAC. The State alleged unverified, revised figures for Bucks, Chester, and Delaware counties. Those three counties also alleged their own unverified, revised figures, which differed, however, from those provided by the State. The new numbers alleged by the State and its counties are still a small fraction of the voter names likely inactive, according to our analysis provided to the court. We contend that, “even if these numbers are accurate, which we do not concede, they would still be removing too few old registrations.”

In its revised filings, the State also conceded that eighteen other Pennsylvania counties—which together contain about one quarter of Pennsylvania’s registered voters—had removed a combined total of fifteen names under the relevant NVRA procedures in the most recent two-year reporting period.

In its continuing efforts to force states and counties across the nation to comply with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), Judicial Watch filed its opposition to Pennsylvania’s move to dismiss our lawsuit, which contends that Bucks, Chester, and Delaware counties failed to conduct a reasonable program to remove ineligible registrants from their federal voter rolls as required under the NVRA. 
 
The lawsuit pointed to the abnormally low number of removals under NVRA procedures designed to identify voters who have changed residence. The lawsuit also pointed out that the Commonwealth had over 800,000 “inactive” registrations on its voter rolls. 
 
We compared registration data in the EAC’s report (which was supplied to the EAC by the counties) to publicly available data from the Census Bureau to conclude that Bucks, Chester, and Delaware Counties had total registration rates, respectively, of 96%, 97%, and 97%. Judicial Watch noted that these numbers are high, both within Pennsylvania and compared to the rest of the country, suggesting a failure to remove outdated registrations.

Other Pennsylvania counties have acted to avoid being sued by us. On January 14, 2020, CBS Pittsburgh reported that because of the threat of a Judicial Watch lawsuit, Allegheny County removed 69,000 inactive voters. David Voye, Elections Manager for the county told CBS, “I would concede that we are behind on culling our rolls,” and that this had “been put on the backburner.”

Pennsylvania’s voting rolls are such as mess that even Pennsylvania can’t tell a court the details of how dirty or clean they are. The simple solution is to follow federal law and take the necessary and simple steps to clean up their voter rolls.
As you know, we are the national leader in enforcing federal law which requires states to take reasonable steps to clean their voting rolls.

In 2018, the Supreme Court upheld a massive voter roll clean up that resulted from our settlement of a federal lawsuit with Ohio.

California also settled a similar lawsuit with us and last year began the process of removing up to 1.5 million “inactive” names from Los Angeles County voting rolls. Kentucky also began a cleanup of up to 250,00 names last year after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.

More election integrity litigation is coming next week, so stay tuned!

Title: CA-- LA County
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2020, 04:07:23 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/06/over-2000-la-county-voters-received-faulty-ballots-no-way-to-vote-president/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20201006

Title: Trump fighting voter fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2020, 04:08:53 PM

second

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/10/06/mark-w-smith-by-raising-the-alarm-on-voter-fraud-trump-avoids-committing-the-error-of-civics-for-suckers/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20201006

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/10/05/team-trump-turns-tide-in-voting-law-legal-battles/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20201006

Title: More skullduggery in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2020, 05:31:52 PM

fourth

https://www.lehighvalleylive.com/elections/2020/10/judge-of-elections-charged-in-darkening-of-ballot-choices-lehigh-county-da-says.html

Title: The electoral process NJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 07, 2020, 03:31:54 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/07/thousands-of-new-jersey-voters-receive-wrong-mail-in-ballots/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=daily&utm_campaign=20201007

Title: sounds to me like leftist fake news
Post by: ccp on October 12, 2020, 06:55:23 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-republicans-allegedly-setting-fake-043500622.html


let me get this straight
Republicans are setting up fake election boxes at THEIR locations
to block Democrat mail in ballots . 

does not compute

OTOH this news is confirmed by social media posts. says yahoo news

Title: Prager U: How to steal and election with Mail-In Ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 12, 2020, 10:50:13 AM

https://www.prageru.com/video/how-to-steal-an-election-mail-in-ballots/?utm_source=Main+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=329e782680-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_04_09_06_29_COPY_02&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_f90832343d-329e782680-180767050

Title: Right tries its hand at ballot harvesting in CA. Dems are mad.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 13, 2020, 06:26:23 AM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/10/12/hello-irony-ca-dems-are-upset-because-the-gop-is-partaking-in-ballot-harvesting-n2577932

Title: 1,000,000+ ballots will be rejected
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2020, 03:20:13 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/over-1-million-mail-in-ballots-will-be-rejected-study-predicts_3537455.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-10-14

Title: Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD)
Post by: ccp on October 17, 2020, 11:09:37 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/10/17/nolte-commission-chose-twice-registered-democrat-to-moderate-upcoming-presidential-debate/

why do we need this group?
that the Republicans on it are never trumpers is obvious

why do we need more DC "elites" insiders controlling Pres. debates?

https://www.debates.org/about-cpd/

Title: 1.8 million
Post by: G M on October 19, 2020, 03:26:33 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-data-analysis-finds-353-counties-with-1-8-million-more-registered-voters-than-residents_3543242.html

And they will all vote by mail...

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 19, 2020, 04:04:24 PM

GM

cant read article without subscribing

but the headline I presume says it all

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on October 19, 2020, 04:07:31 PM

Quote from: ccp on October 19, 2020, 04:04:24 PM

GM

cant read article without subscribing

but the headline I presume says it all

Pretty much

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 19, 2020, 04:44:48 PM

check this out from Heritage Foundation
with list of voter fraud by state

https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud/search?state=PA&combine=&year=&case_type=All&fraud_type=All&page=1

Dems:    no fraud ! folks !

      debunked

      right wing conspiracy 

      must be QAnon

      must be Russian disinformation

      already looked into and found by "experts" there is nothing to it

      Right wing conspiracy to suppress the vote - particularly of blacks!   

     

Title: rules changed by partisan debate committee, again - & of course in Biden's favor
Post by: ccp on October 20, 2020, 04:45:55 AM

https://pjmedia.com/election/matt-margolis/2020/10/19/commission-on-presidential-debates-changes-rules-will-mute-mics-at-final-debate-n1070414

DJT should just show up with blow horn

Title: Yes, we know.
Post by: G M on October 25, 2020, 02:16:39 PM

https://www.thenewneo.com/2020/10/24/in-senectus-veritas/

Title: The electoral process
Post by: DougMacG on October 26, 2020, 07:07:57 AM

Three states — Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota — allow voters to switch their votes before Election Day.
    - Business Insider

Title: Re: The electoral process
Post by: G M on October 26, 2020, 07:50:51 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on October 26, 2020, 07:07:57 AM

Three states — Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota — allow voters to switch their votes before Election Day.
    - Business Insider

Allow corrupt poll workers to switch your vote.

Title: Newsweek uncovers what Fay Wray's FBI cannot
Post by: ccp on October 26, 2020, 01:47:59 PM

https://www.newsmax.com/us/election-meddling-socialmedia-influence/2020/10/26/id/993841/

Title: Re: Newsweek uncovers what Fay Wray's FBI cannot
Post by: G M on October 26, 2020, 02:26:56 PM

Quote from: ccp on October 26, 2020, 01:47:59 PM

https://www.newsmax.com/us/election-meddling-socialmedia-influence/2020/10/26/id/993841/

It's amazing what you don't find when you don't investigate.

Title: Project Veritas in Texas
Post by: G M on October 27, 2020, 03:39:25 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/391006.php

Vote fraud operation busted in Texas.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 27, 2020, 05:19:24 PM

".Said Garza Gave Her $2,500 Gift Budget"

Who or what is Garza
I see there is a county named Garza

you mean to tell me the city is paying her to do this?

I am sure FBI is on top of this

7,000 votes from this one person?

in quick search this is being reported only on right of spectrum sites
I notice

dick heads at CNN will maybe mention in one sentence if at all and in way to make it sound like it is BS or right wing propoganda

Title: epoch Times: Ballot Harvesting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2020, 04:14:25 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/ballot-harvesting-relaxation-of-voting-rules-could-prolong-election_3554829.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-10-28

Title: Dems - now -> walk in your ballot
Post by: ccp on October 28, 2020, 08:04:44 AM

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/10/28/experts-now-saying-dont-mail-your-ballot-vote-in-person-n1102123

 :roll:

Title: South Carolina mismatched sigs OK
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 29, 2020, 04:34:12 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/federal-judge-rules-signatures-dont-have-to-match-absentee-ballots-in-south-carolina_3556018.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-10-29

Title: MI: Open carry at polling places
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 29, 2020, 04:38:40 AM

   
Judge Overturns Michigan Ban on Open Carry of Guns at Polling Places
By Jack Phillips
October 28, 2020 Updated: October 28, 2020
Print

A Michigan judge has struck down a statewide ban on openly carrying firearms at polling places or in areas where ballots are being counted.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Christopher Murray ruled that Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a Democrat, didn’t follow the appropriate process to implement a rule earlier this month.

“It is important to recognize that this case is not about whether it is a good idea to openly carry a firearm at a polling place, or whether the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prevents the secretary of state’s … directive,” Murray said in a written opinion.

“The secretary just didn’t do this in the right way and at the right time,” Murray said during a hearing on the ruling, adding that “the secretary should have done this months ago.”

Benson instituted her rule on Oct. 16, just weeks before Election Day.

“The court’s duty is not to act as an overseer of the Department of State, nor is it to impose its view on the wisdom of openly carrying firearms at polling places or other election locations,” he said, according to the Detroit Free Press. “More importantly, its constitutional role is properly limited to only declaring what the law is, not what it should be.”

Murray stipulated in his ruling that Benson should have implemented the ban on open carry under the Administrative Procedures Act, which would allow legislative and public input.

“The Legislature has said: Here are the places you cannot carry a weapon,” Murray said, as reported by the Detroit News. “The secretary has expanded that. And so how is that in accordance with state law?”

Benson and Attorney General Dana Nessel, also a Democrat, issued statements and said they would appeal Murray’s ruling.

“As the state’s chief elections officer, I have the sworn duty to protect every voter and their right to cast the ballot free from intimidation and harassment,” Benson said in her statement. “I will continue to protect that right in Michigan.”

Assistant Attorney General Heather Meingast told the Free Press that because of an alleged kidnapping plot against Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, “there are voters who are afraid … there are election workers who are afraid.”

The challenge against Benson’s order was filed by activist Robert Davis, and another was filed by three pro-gun groups: Michigan Open Carry, Inc., Michigan Gun Owners, and the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners.

Davis, in a statement, hailed Benson’s ruling as a victory “for the rule of law,” saying Benson’s ban was “an unnecessary overreach by an executive official in state government.”

The Detroit chapter of the NAACP and lawyers in the area said they would monitor polls across the state for any potential voter intimidation problems.

Title: Zuckerberg donating to election administration in democrat areas
Post by: ccp on October 29, 2020, 08:42:41 PM

another narcissist who thinks his phony self righteousness will save him:


https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/phill-kline-sounds-alarm-about-private-funding-us-election-management

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2020, 02:47:12 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/thousands-of-ballots-in-pennsylvania-may-be-missing-officials_3559107.html?utm_source=news&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2020-10-30-3

Title: PA election officials rattled by Team Trump requests
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2020, 11:53:25 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/pennsylvania-election-officials-rattled-after-trump-campaign-requests-names-ballot?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Title: PA AG calls race for Biden before election day
Post by: G M on November 02, 2020, 01:38:45 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/pennsylvania-attorney-general-states-outcome-election-predetermined-calls-election-joe-biden-election-day/

Title: Re: PA AG calls race for Biden before election day
Post by: G M on November 02, 2020, 03:44:23 PM

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 01:38:45 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/pennsylvania-attorney-general-states-outcome-election-predetermined-calls-election-joe-biden-election-day/

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/pa_attorney_general_calls_state_for_biden_11-02-2020-2.jpg)

Title: The order has gone out
Post by: G M on November 02, 2020, 06:17:16 PM

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Screen-Shot-2020-11-02-at-8.50.21-PM.png)


Operation Gaslight

Title: Voter suppression!
Post by: G M on November 02, 2020, 07:59:21 PM

https://nypost.com/2020/11/02/dead-people-caught-voting-in-nyc-elections-records-show/

Republican are just racist against dead people!

Title: Re: The order has gone out
Post by: G M on November 02, 2020, 08:54:19 PM

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 06:17:16 PM

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Screen-Shot-2020-11-02-at-8.50.21-PM.png)


Operation Gaslight

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/democrats-color-revolution-campaign-begins-biden-campaign-announces-no-winner-tomorrow-big-tech-ready-assist/

Title: Re: Voter suppression!
Post by: G M on November 03, 2020, 12:35:41 AM

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 07:59:21 PM

https://nypost.com/2020/11/02/dead-people-caught-voting-in-nyc-elections-records-show/

Republican are just racist against dead people!

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/elections/fl-ne-voter-id-fraud-broward-florida-20201030-rfwqzhgfq5fypl4632dspgla7i-story.html?int=lat_digitaladshouse_bx-modal_acquisition-subscriber_ngux_display-ad-interstitial_bx-bonus-story_______&s=09

Title: Protective measures taken
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2020, 05:49:55 AM

https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2020/11/us-elections-are-safer-foreign-interference-gaps-remain/169741/

Title: Re: The order has gone out- Operation Gaslight
Post by: G M on November 03, 2020, 06:01:02 AM

https://summit.news/2020/11/03/biden-plans-to-assert-control-as-president-elect-if-declared-winner-by-news-organizations/

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 08:54:19 PM

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 06:17:16 PM

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Screen-Shot-2020-11-02-at-8.50.21-PM.png)


Operation Gaslight

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/democrats-color-revolution-campaign-begins-biden-campaign-announces-no-winner-tomorrow-big-tech-ready-assist/

Title: Re: PA AG calls race for Biden before election day
Post by: G M on November 03, 2020, 07:52:29 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-gop-poll-watcher-denied-entry-philadelphia-days-after-state-ag-says-trump-will-lose

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 03:44:23 PM

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 01:38:45 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/pennsylvania-attorney-general-states-outcome-election-predetermined-calls-election-joe-biden-election-day/

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/pa_attorney_general_calls_state_for_biden_11-02-2020-2.jpg)

Title: Re: PA AG calls race for Biden before election day
Post by: G M on November 03, 2020, 11:03:33 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/steal-philly-man-caught-handing-democrat-literature-voters-line-vote/

Quote from: G M on November 03, 2020, 07:52:29 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-gop-poll-watcher-denied-entry-philadelphia-days-after-state-ag-says-trump-will-lose

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 03:44:23 PM

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 01:38:45 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/pennsylvania-attorney-general-states-outcome-election-predetermined-calls-election-joe-biden-election-day/

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/pa_attorney_general_calls_state_for_biden_11-02-2020-2.jpg)

Title: Re: PA AG calls race for Biden before election day
Post by: G M on November 03, 2020, 03:38:36 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/wth-unidentified-civilian-filmed-taking-official-ballot-box-away-polling-place-stuffing-car/

Quote from: G M on November 03, 2020, 11:03:33 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/steal-philly-man-caught-handing-democrat-literature-voters-line-vote/

Quote from: G M on November 03, 2020, 07:52:29 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-gop-poll-watcher-denied-entry-philadelphia-days-after-state-ag-says-trump-will-lose

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 03:44:23 PM

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2020, 01:38:45 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/pennsylvania-attorney-general-states-outcome-election-predetermined-calls-election-joe-biden-election-day/

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/pa_attorney_general_calls_state_for_biden_11-02-2020-2.jpg)

Title: hopefully a big fat referendum on the MSM etc
Post by: ccp on November 03, 2020, 08:30:23 PM

we all said this is referendum on Trump

but so far is looks more of a referendum of the MSM and elites , the techies

and all the other F's who have been shoving shit down our throats for 4 yrs

fingers crossed in NJ

Title: Psyop and fraud
Post by: G M on November 04, 2020, 02:40:25 PM

By Mark Levin on Twitter:

1. I thought about waiting until my radio show to state this, but it must be said now: All night and this morning, the media are playing with the electoral map and their declarations of who won what states, and in virtually every case it assists the Biden campaign.
2. North Carolina, Georgia, Alaska should all be called now for President Trump. There was no legitimate reason to call Arizona early for Biden with so much of the vote out. There was no reason to sit on Florida and Ohio for hours when those outcomes were quite clear.
3. The purpose is to make it appear that the President is not close to the 270 electoral vote number to win the presidency and to make it appear that the President was never going to be re-elected.
4. And you can see all the delays through the night and beyond, waiting for mail-in votes -- Philadelphia, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Detroit, etc. This is followed by commentators telling us that there's nothing unusual about all of this. Delays in counting votes happens all the time
5. Really, we've experienced this before? In all these states? Nonsense. Meanwhile, the Democrats have been litigating in states for months to change existing election laws to help Biden and the Democrats.
6. They set in place the mail-in voting chaos, some states literally a few months ago.

Title: Dick Morris reiterates Levin
Post by: ccp on November 04, 2020, 04:07:14 PM

https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/dick-morris-pollsters-setup-ballots/2020/11/04/id/995417/

This wasn't a Russian plot

it was just a Democrat MSM deep state tech plot

Title: Can't happen here!
Post by: G M on November 04, 2020, 04:29:33 PM

https://normalamerican.com/posts/2020/when-putsch-comes-to-shove/

Title: We owe them nothing
Post by: G M on November 04, 2020, 05:22:48 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/391131.php

Late ballots and other lies.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2020, 04:09:33 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/04/yes-democrats-are-trying-to-steal-the-election-in-michigan-wisconsin-and-pennsylvania/?fbclid=IwAR229g1oBJ01ePg_nPqnwlIShWXXpcVHe_UW0-V1JBh0DzLvGi_bezaAySs

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2020, 04:11:50 AM

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/11/big-2020-election-hack-never-came-heres-why/169806/

Title: they are ALWAYS voters of democrats
Post by: ccp on November 05, 2020, 08:29:52 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/names-of-non-us-citizens-increasingly-found-on-voter-rolls
https://www.fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-us-https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/01/25/texas-election-official-95-000-non-citizens-found-voter-rolls/2683399002/

Title: World's oldest voters!
Post by: G M on November 05, 2020, 11:31:27 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/seven-voters-older-oldest-human-alive-today-voted-michigan-including-one-man-born-1850/

Title: MI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2020, 12:34:32 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/nov/5/lawsuit-filed-michigan-contesting-tens-thousands-b/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=UD74duzw3FwZLpFtVnApJhug7myYf9ndCLOmqq7mPjyg7WI3sf021URKp8ulRRQ1&bt_ts=1604596023016

Title: Yes it is!
Post by: G M on November 05, 2020, 07:18:05 PM

https://monsterhunternation.com/2020/11/05/the-2020-election-fuckery-is-afoot/

Title: Re: Yes it is!
Post by: G M on November 05, 2020, 07:20:57 PM

Quote from: G M on November 05, 2020, 07:18:05 PM

https://monsterhunternation.com/2020/11/05/the-2020-election-fuckery-is-afoot/

(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/votes.jpg)

Title: DOJ says armed fed agents allowed in ballot counting locations
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2020, 05:08:30 AM

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/11/report-doj-says-armed-federal-agents-allowed-in-ballot-counting-locations/?utm_campaign=DailyEmails&utm_source=AM_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Master_List&utm_campaign=2f9cfd79b7-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_11_05_11_45&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_9c4ef113e0-2f9cfd79b7-61658629&mc_cid=2f9cfd79b7&mc_eid=295242326c

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 06, 2020, 08:10:39 AM

chris christie

where is the evidence

and don't trash the system

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/06/live-updates-day-4-2020-election-results/

what is this guy blind?
did corona screw with his brain

some extra thoughts

harvesting votes is illegal

you thing 10 s of thousands of votes showing up all for Biden in some cases are legally completed?

this guy is not naive

he just the usual Chris Christie

self serving buffoon hoping for job on CNN or playing to the winning side

he should just go away

Title: The Coup
Post by: G M on November 06, 2020, 10:19:41 AM

https://banned.video/watch?id=5fa4798d65f2d419a08ad0d0

Matt Bracken on the Coup.

Title: Wisconsin turnout nearly all registered voters?
Post by: ccp on November 06, 2020, 03:31:32 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/11/06/wsj-columnist-has-questions-about-wi-turnout-n2579488

Title: sounds like Copyright office the rare time they are caught
Post by: ccp on November 06, 2020, 05:48:19 PM

sorry just a glitch  :-D
blame it in the computer

who developed the software Soros and Zuckerberg?

https://pjmedia.com/election/carminesabia/2020/11/06/michigan-gop-says-6000-votes-in-one-county-switched-by-software-glitch-from-trump-to-biden-47-more-counties-used-same-software-n1130630

Title: On Halloween!
Post by: G M on November 06, 2020, 09:16:24 PM

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/06/nevada-records-show-deceased-voter-rose-from-the-grave-to-cast-mail-in-ballot/

Title: No kidding!
Post by: G M on November 06, 2020, 11:10:58 PM

https://thepostmillennial.com/clark-county-nevada-election-official-says-he-cannot-guarantee-fraud-free-election-results

Title: House Democrats want to solidify voting rules to ensure their power
Post by: ccp on November 07, 2020, 12:01:22 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/11/06/nancy-pelosi-vows-congress-pass-election-reform-bill-criminalized-political-speech-pre-paid-absentee-ballots/

But Jeb congratulates Biden. - not sure why anyone should give a hoot.  But we know what this means

I knew we were going to see the never trumpers jumping back in the fray

Title: law firm lobbying for voting machine company had supervisor for the account
Post by: ccp on November 07, 2020, 12:38:49 PM

same machines at center of glitches and "irregularities"

is

Ready for this:

Nancy Pelosi's former Chief of Staff:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/11/07/key-swing-states-were-utilizing-a-software-company-at-the-center-for-ballot-glitc-n2579664

if only the deep state would investigate this
I am 100% convinced they will actually find something

unlike they did with yrs etc looking for Russians under under every rock and up everyone's rear ends.

Title: Re: law firm lobbying for voting machine company had supervisor for the account
Post by: G M on November 07, 2020, 12:45:10 PM

The deep state doesn't need to investigate. Who do you think is running the coup?

Quote from: ccp on November 07, 2020, 12:38:49 PM

same machines at center of glitches and "irregularities"

is

Ready for this:

Nancy Pelosi's former Chief of Staff:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/11/07/key-swing-states-were-utilizing-a-software-company-at-the-center-for-ballot-glitc-n2579664

if only the deep state would investigate this
I am 100% convinced they will actually find something

unlike they did with yrs etc looking for Russians under under every rock and up everyone's rear ends.

Title: James Woods is correct
Post by: G M on November 08, 2020, 12:41:06 PM

James Woods
@RealJamesWoods
And just like that the rioting and looting has ceased overnight. And now the half of the country that pummeled America like a battered wife is telling her to put on sunglasses, hide her black eye, be a good girl, and “come together as one.”  Her answer? “Go fuck yourself.”

Title: Evidence
Post by: G M on November 08, 2020, 09:39:06 PM

(https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Screen-Shot-2020-11-08-at-10.17.50-PM-476x600.png)

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Screen-Shot-2020-11-08-at-10.17.50-PM-476x600.png

Evidence. Pass it around.

Title: here is one of the no doubt many countless ballot mills the Democrats ran
Post by: ccp on November 09, 2020, 09:48:18 AM

https://www.brightest.io/cause/swing-left/activity/georgia-2020-ballot-rescue-phone-bank-volunteers/

non profit (of course)

but with donations from the usual rich
Dem donors no doubt.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Tordislung on November 09, 2020, 12:32:11 PM

100% they cheated. Everybody knows it. They've had congressional hearings on the software....etc...etc....etc...

I voted Libertarian and make no apologies.... Still....

That election was rigged as s..t. But....what's anyone going to do about it?

I feel like it's the United States of Zimbabwe...because....it is.
We all know it.

Title: Even more!
Post by: G M on November 09, 2020, 04:07:39 PM

https://monsterhunternation.com/2020/11/09/election-2020-the-more-fuckery-update/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 09, 2020, 05:37:45 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2020/11/07/postman-arrested-canadian-border-allegedly-failing-deliver-mail-including-absentee-ballots/

Title: Happened in Colorado?
Post by: G M on November 09, 2020, 05:58:52 PM

https://twitter.com/fleccas/status/1325926120122880001

Ballot tampering.

Title: Sen. Graham on Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 09, 2020, 06:43:03 PM

https://www.air.tv/watch?v=bzEgdV1OTx2Q0_tWXFr3Yg

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 10, 2020, 09:13:37 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-campaign-has-come-up-with-frivolous-baseless-claims-says-nevada-ag-aaron-ford-114120527.html

The 'uhem" Aaron Ford: "noted that the Secretary of State in Nevada who oversees the election is a Republican,"

of course not mentioned by Yahoo or an MSM news outlet is this

now look at Nevada political control since 2019:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_strength_in_Nevada

Title: Affidavits showing Voter Fraud
Post by: G M on November 10, 2020, 01:56:13 PM

https://lidblog.com/sworn-affidavits-showing-voter-fraud/

Shocking!

Title: correction of my post above
Post by: ccp on November 10, 2020, 02:21:54 PM

The political control in Nevada since 2019:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_strength_in_Nevada

Title: Your totally honest and impartial Federal Investigators in action
Post by: G M on November 10, 2020, 05:38:55 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/391212.php

This is fine. Nothing to see here, move along.

Title: Re: Your totally honest and impartial Federal Investigators in action
Post by: G M on November 10, 2020, 07:26:39 PM

Quote from: G M on November 10, 2020, 05:38:55 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/391212.php

This is fine. Nothing to see here, move along.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/they-were-grilling-hell-out-me-usps-whistleblower-stands-backdated-ballot-claim-after

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 10, 2020, 09:01:37 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/election-fraud-lawsuit-alleges-backdating-of-ballots-took-place-in-michigan_3571469.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-10

Title: no question in my mind this was stolen
Post by: ccp on November 11, 2020, 06:05:27 AM

we all knew the fraud was coming

the way the dems always changed the rules in THEIR favor

the way they extended dates

the report of hiring 600 liars for hire to descend to all the battle grounds

the reports of the PA governor and DA saying they Democrats "WILL" win

they were positive of outcome

we all saw what was coming
only hoping Republicans would be able to diminish or mitigate  the level of fraud

as always the 71 million + X number of other Trump votes and million or so libertarians all get ignored and gagged

Title: postal whistle blower intimidated to recant
Post by: ccp on November 11, 2020, 07:09:06 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/postal-worker-recants-claims-fraud-024203321.html

that is what happens when you work for a government agency that is mostly full of democrats

threatened by supervisors

shunned by fellow workers who mostly vote for Dems
and the FBI threats

then the headlines - "HE RECANTS'

Title: Judicial Watch gets it right
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 12, 2020, 05:05:53 AM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/statement-presidential-election/

Title: lawyer and straight shooter Kurt Schlichter (not liar for hire)
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2020, 05:34:02 AM

yes we need to pre empt the voter fraud that will happen in Ga :

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2020/11/12/go-on-the-offensive-in-georgia-n2579878

we need people in the minority communities who will keep their eyes and ears open


the potential for "reparations" makes good incentive for fraud does it not?

Title: water main break.- ruse to stop te counting in Atlanta?
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2020, 06:01:57 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/breaking-exclusive-open-records-request-finds-no-invoices-work-orders-reported-election-day-water-main-break-atlanta-found/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 12, 2020, 07:25:43 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/pennsylvania-100000-ballots-with-implausible-return-dates_3572942.html?utm_source=morningbrief&u


https://www.theepochtimes.com/wisconsin-elections-panel-guidance-led-clerks-to-fill-out-witness-addresses-contrary-to-state-law_3573213.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-11

https://www.theepochtimes.com/new-oregon-secretary-of-state-to-examine-warnings-from-fired-elections-director_3576061.html

https://www.theepochtimes.com/media-disgrace-themselves-in-calling-election-still-being-contested_3572310.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-11

https://www.theepochtimes.com/connecticut-republican-house-lawmaker-discovered-winner-after-race-called-for-democrat_3575346.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-12

Title: is this real ?
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2020, 04:39:42 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/boom-trump-tweets-report-dominion-deleted-2-7-million-trump-votes-nationwide-data-analysis-finds-221000-pennsylvania-votes-switched-president-trump-biden/

Can't find anywhere except DJT tweet

 :-o

is he pulling our legs?

Title: Re: is this real ?
Post by: DougMacG on November 12, 2020, 05:12:17 PM

Quote from: ccp on November 12, 2020, 04:39:42 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/boom-trump-tweets-report-dominion-deleted-2-7-million-trump-votes-nationwide-data-analysis-finds-221000-pennsylvania-votes-switched-president-trump-biden/

Can't find anywhere except DJT tweet

 :-o

is he pulling our legs?

It sounds like they projected to the nation from a sample.

If true, this changes everything.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Georgia 2020
Post by: DougMacG on November 13, 2020, 05:59:34 AM

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/11/13/pro-biden_bug_also_suspected_in_georgias_vote-counting_software__125995.html

Title: fix was in
Post by: ccp on November 13, 2020, 06:15:45 AM

from Doug above,

"https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2020/11/13/pro-biden_bug_also_suspected_in_georgias_vote-counting_software__125995.html"

like someone told Katherine back ~ 1999 = there are 50 ways to steal songs , if someone wants them , they WILL (emphasis) get them

applied to voting

there are 50 ways to steal an election

if someone (the Dem mob) really wants them they WILL steal it .

see how an entire population of partisans can be involved in the planning conduction and later cover up

same as in the music business.

Title: Detroit judge (since 1996). no "credible evidence" of fraud
Post by: ccp on November 13, 2020, 03:11:26 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/judge-smacks-down-detroit-voter-fraud-lawsuit-rife-with-speculation/

so says the "honorable " judge

what percentage of lawyers are democrats - 70% + ?

Title: Morris recount but Republicans poll watchers can't see anything
Post by: ccp on November 14, 2020, 08:25:14 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/morris-georgia-recount/2020/11/13/id/997017/

Title: Newt
Post by: ccp on November 14, 2020, 08:54:37 AM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/11/14/democracy-institute-pollster-yes-i-think-this-election-was-stolen-n2579970


"How curious that, as Baris notes, “Trump won the largest non-white vote share for a Republican presidential candidate in 60 years. Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton in every major metro area around the country, save for Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia.  Robert Barnes, the foremost election analyst, observes in these “big cities in swing states run by Democrats…the vote even exceeded the number of registered voters.”

  "The turnout numbers are odd in some states, like Wisconsin, which hit 89 percent. Now, is that figure impossible? No. Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel did the math, but it’s highly improbable given the turnout rates in the surrounding areas. It would require 900,000 people showing up for same-day registrations. "

Title: Whoa , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 14, 2020, 04:14:37 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/us-raid-software-company-scytl-seize-servers-germany-intel-source-says-yes-happened/?fbclid=IwAR0JC-3dYzWGo5obbpNRxjYl9UwVrto0R4vd_o-agZNa8N1VJl8VFTQrnUo

Title: Just 4 cities...
Post by: G M on November 14, 2020, 05:42:35 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/11/14/democracy-institute-pollster-yes-i-think-this-election-was-stolen-n2579970

Edit from Marc inserted:  Karl Rove says this is BS.

Title: Re: Just 4 cities...
Post by: DougMacG on November 14, 2020, 07:31:40 PM

Quote from: G M on November 14, 2020, 05:42:35 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2020/11/14/democracy-institute-pollster-yes-i-think-this-election-was-stolen-n2579970

"Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia"  - Wisconsin, Michigan, Georgia, Pennsylvania.

Missing in this list are Vegas and Phoenix, in two other key states, Nevada and Arizona.

How does this get quantified and proven in 1 week?  Trump needs to flip 3 or 4 states.

Title: Tin Foil or the Deep State or President Trump gone amuck?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 14, 2020, 07:42:55 PM

https://www.distributednews.com/474016.html?fbclid=IwAR0w79iafWLV6RIy8Tv5Gt4Q658sr9rB3bfXIwngWeSdAwf_HbfiE5yuyMM

Title: Re: Tin Foil or the Deep State or President Trump gone amuck?
Post by: DougMacG on November 14, 2020, 07:58:20 PM

I don't see how an executive order supersedes a constitutional process.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud
Post by: DougMacG on November 14, 2020, 08:01:28 PM

(https://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2020/11/2006787.gif?resize=580%2C387&ssl=1)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 16, 2020, 07:39:58 AM

Good article by Andrew McCarthy:
https://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=2647.msg130047#msg130047
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/11/trumps-post-election-litigation-crusade/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=featured-content-trending&utm_term=second

Here is Rudy on with Maria Bartiroma explaining the larger claim, mostly about voting machines and software:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/11/15/rudy_giuliani_trump_will_contest_election_vigorously_in_the_courts.html

Here is lawyer Sydney Powell.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/sidney_powell_gives_details_about_the_election_fraud_kraken.html
Powell:  The software is the problem.

I have no idea if it's true or false but what is described is also what happened in the Chavez recall election.  They know how much is the vote deficit and put in whatever is needed to cover and win.

Don't Giuliani and Powell have too much career credibility to make all this up?

Proving it, if true, within such a short time frame seems next to impossible, but I would still like to know if any of this is true.  And if any of it or all of it is true, too bad we have a complete news blackout on it.  If proof does come forward and judges and officials recognize it, the people who watch msm, NBC, Facebook et al are going to be blindsided.

There is a path if convincing evidence comes forward soon enough.  If three states including PA don't certify, this election goes to the House.  Not a House majority vote but House member majority for each state, which is a clear R. majority.

There are nothing but bad outcomes available.  Best case is that this is all false and Biden won a close election with only minor, not centrally orchestrated, cheating.  The other outcomes are that a shameful cheating conspiracy is true but never fully discovered, or it is found true and the outcome reversed without Biden voters ever believing it.

What do we have left if we can't trust our elections.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 16, 2020, 09:07:54 AM

"My new Dominion car sucks.  Drove it to the store and now it has 489,000 miles on it."


I'm so old I remember when it was Democrats who didn't trust voting machine companies.

Title: Dershowitz on Trumps right to legal challenge the results
Post by: ccp on November 16, 2020, 01:31:46 PM

https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/lawyers-cancel-culture-mccarthyism-pressure/2020/11/16/id/997291/

Title: This is fine!
Post by: G M on November 16, 2020, 01:34:32 PM

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/059/871/964/original/af7d199887df9e93.jpg)

Totally legit!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 16, 2020, 08:03:21 PM

As always, if you include a URL I will be able to post it elsewhere.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Smartmatic
Post by: DougMacG on November 16, 2020, 08:44:42 PM

Sure wish I knew if this is real.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/sidney-powell-drops-bomb-mark-levin-show-witness-creation-smartmatic-system-used-change-election-results-video/

The Trump campaign has a witness who was present for the creation of the Smartmatic system when it was used to steal at least one election for Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

Filth, but not proof.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2020, 05:43:17 AM

https://rumble.com/vb65f3-lou-dobbs-fbi-has-an-investigative-team-looking-into-2020-election.html?fbclid=IwAR3neafofJJazBfWVoi8QqpAhi0zngw7TMOdjpENi6E88Y-Cg9n8LopGBzo



https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16770/stolen-election

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 17, 2020, 08:18:42 AM

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=46398

Election fraud update.

What we know for sure:

"There is more proof of election fraud than there is of anthropogenic climate change."

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2020, 12:02:05 PM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/11/barrs_doj_prosecuting_dems_ringing_up_votes_in_philly.html

Title: racist racist racist
Post by: ccp on November 18, 2020, 05:13:46 AM

So if one questions very mysterious red flags in voting precincts that appear to have large minority populations

you are RACIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
and the world knows who you are:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/11/17/wayne-county-reverses-decision-certifies-disputed-election-results-as-video-goes-dark/

zoom goes down ,  as ALWAYS , just a glitch or mistake , or unintentional error -
they vote and decision reversed  and announced

why would ANYONE question what we can plainly see with our own eyes?
Even though we saw it - we are told nothing to see.

told we are crazy ,  misguided by conspiracy theories, false news , nazi propaganda, and "far far far right wing " fascist " news sites and radio

Yup

we need to units -  :roll:

always with Dems in power - we need to unite.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, PA case
Post by: DougMacG on November 18, 2020, 09:41:07 AM

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18618673/donald-j-trump-for-president-inc-v-boockvar/

Title: Rep electoral official's children doxxed in MI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 18, 2020, 03:51:43 PM

Wow , , ,

https://www.dailywire.com/news/michigan-democrat-doxxes-republicans-children-before-she-reverses-course-to-certify-county-vote?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=benshapiro&fbclid=IwAR0sZEL4H5gCYIMrq8bFgTiyhSyjXAMDrHGKoFHwmN7Yv3bciIBCz1A6H5s

Title: Re: Rep electoral official's children doxxed in MI
Post by: G M on November 18, 2020, 05:34:36 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 18, 2020, 03:51:43 PM

Wow , , ,

https://www.dailywire.com/news/michigan-democrat-doxxes-republicans-children-before-she-reverses-course-to-certify-county-vote?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=benshapiro&fbclid=IwAR0sZEL4H5gCYIMrq8bFgTiyhSyjXAMDrHGKoFHwmN7Yv3bciIBCz1A6H5s

We are a nation of LAWS VIOLENT THREATS from the left.

Title: error in Ga guess in whose favor
Post by: ccp on November 18, 2020, 05:53:16 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/11/18/report-georgia-election-monitor-finds-9626-vote-error-in-countys-hand-recount/

someone decided to add extra zero

woops
I made a mistake etc blah blah blah

no fraud just a simple goof.   :-(

Title: No evidence of fraud!
Post by: G M on November 18, 2020, 11:36:44 PM

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/059/951/772/original/63639527a5ebf1ef.png)


Well, maybe a little bit...

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 19, 2020, 06:36:18 AM

SERIOUS READ

Kim Strassel WSJ


The Trump campaign is pressing its case that last week’s ballot counting was off, and it will get its day in court. But if Republicans want a fuller accounting of the shenanigans, they’ll need to look much further back than Election Day. They’ll need to internalize Nancy Pelosi’s H.R. 1, and then do battle.

House Resolution 1 is the designation for the first bill unveiled in any new Congress. It’s designed to highlight the majority party’s top priority. In early 2017, the Republican-led House gave the title to Donald Trump’s tax reform. When Mrs. Pelosi retook the speaker’s gavel in 2019, her party had just campaigned on a slew of urgent Democratic priorities: health care, climate change, immigration, student debt. None of these rose to the honor of H.R. 1.


Instead, Mrs. Pelosi unveiled a 600-plus page bill devoted to “election reform.” Some of the legislation was aimed at weaponizing campaign-finance law, giving Democrats more power to control political speech and to intimidate opponents. But the bill was equally focused on empowering the federal government to dictate how states conduct elections—with new rules designed to water down ballot integrity and to corral huge new tranches of Democratic voters.

The bill would require states to offer early voting. They also would have to allow Election Day and online voter registration, diluting the accuracy of voting rolls. H.R. 1 would make states register voters automatically from government databases, including federal welfare recipients. Colleges and universities were designated as voter-registration hubs, and 16-year-olds would be registered to vote two years in advance. The bill would require “no fault” absentee ballots, allowing anyone to vote by mail, for any reason. It envisioned prepaid postage for federal absentee ballots. It would cripple most state voter-ID laws. It left in place the “ballot harvesting” rules that let paid activists canvass neighborhoods to hoover up absentee votes.



Democrats grandly named their bill the For The People Act, but conservatives had better titles. This page called it the “Majority Preservation Act,” while the editors at National Review described it as an “Unconstitutional, Authoritarian Power Grab.” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell decried the bill as a “naked attempt to change the rules of American politics to benefit one party,” and dubbed it the “Democrat Politician Protection Act.”

Mrs. Pelosi’s bill didn’t become law, despite her attempts this year to jam some of its provisions into coronavirus bills. But it turns out she didn’t really need it. Using the virus as an excuse, Democratic and liberal groups brought scores of lawsuits to force states to adopt its provisions. Many Democratic politicians and courts happily agreed. States mailed out ballots to everyone. Judges disregarded statutory deadlines for receipt of votes. They scrapped absentee-ballot witness requirements. States set up curbside voting and drop-off boxes. They signed off on ballot harvesting.
Meaning, “the fix” (as it were) was in well before anyone started counting votes. Pollsters aside, political operatives understood this election would be close—potentially closer in key states than it was in 2016. The Democratic strategy from the start, as evidenced by that legal onslaught, was to get rules in place that would allow them to flood the zone with additional mail-in ballots.

And of course there was harvesting—as these pages warned. This isn’t a new practice; candidates and campaigns have been honing it for years. Three years ago, the Palm Beach Post ran an expose on the practice in Florida. A North Carolina congressional race in 2018 was roiled by a ballot-harvesting operation, and a new election was ordered. This year simply offered the perfect environment to roll it out at new levels, and throughout the fall conservative groups were documenting examples.

Yet the beauty of ballot harvesting is that it is nearly impossible to prove fraud. How many harvesters offered to deliver votes, only to throw away inconvenient ones? How many voters were pushed or cajoled, or even paid—or had a ballot filled and returned for them without their knowledge? And this is before questions of what other mischief went on amid millions of mailed ballots (which went to wrong addresses or deceased people) and reduced voter verification rules. As the Heritage Foundation’s election expert Hans von Spakovsky has explained, mail-in voting is the “single worst form of election possible” because “it moves the entire election beyond the oversight of election officials.”

Republicans fought the worst changes but were up against the virus excuse. The question is whether they now understand the stakes. This election was a mere glimpse of the system Mrs. Pelosi wants nationwide, and she has already suggested “election reform” might again be her first priority in 2021. The GOP’s job is to harness voters’ frustration about the murky mess that was this year’s vote into a movement that demands transparency and renewed integrity of the ballot. Or risk a lot of 2020 repeats.

Write to kim@wsj.com.
Copyright ©2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Appeared in the November 13, 2020, print edition.
ReplyReport Edit Delete

Title: was kind of obvious
Post by: ccp on November 19, 2020, 06:39:58 AM

this occurred after revealed zoom cameras turned off (not glitch- obviously on purpose)

that the 2 repubs were bullied threatened lied to and misled:

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2020/11/18/republican-canvassers-rescind-their-votes-to-certify-wayne-county-michigan-results/

I will NEVER trust a democrat
or the MSM

big mistake to do so.

Biden has zero chance of unifying anything other then his family with Chinese

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 19, 2020, 09:35:04 PM

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/11/do-trumps-lawyers-know-what-they-are-doing.php

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on November 19, 2020, 09:40:21 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on November 19, 2020, 09:35:04 PM

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/11/do-trumps-lawyers-know-what-they-are-doing.php

It's a massive volume of data they are working with, but this is the sort of sloppiness that is unacceptable.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 19, 2020, 09:47:47 PM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/mathematics-prof-says-sworn-statement-many-56000-gop-ballots-pa-may-be

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 19, 2020, 09:50:57 PM

https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/H.I.G.%20McCarthy,%20&%20Staple%20Street%20letters.pdfArchive

Elizabeth Warren and other Democrats expressed concern over possible cheating in the election
This is a letter that was written a year ago by Elizabeth Warren and other Democrats.

They express concern that election machines might be rigged
----------

Oops it disappeared from the web.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on November 19, 2020, 09:57:38 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on November 19, 2020, 09:50:57 PM

https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/H.I.G.%20McCarthy,%20&%20Staple%20Street%20letters.pdfArchive

Elizabeth Warren and other Democrats expressed concern over possible cheating in the election
This is a letter that was written a year ago by Elizabeth Warren and other Democrats.

They express concern that election machines might be rigged
----------

Oops it disappeared from the wen.

https://nationalfile.com/democrats-warren-klobuchar-wyden-wrote-complaint-against-dominion-in-2019/

Title: Agree with major concern for cheating with regards to Sidney's claims
Post by: ccp on November 20, 2020, 08:18:53 AM

BUT

also agree with Tucker here -

Where the hell is the beef for goodness sakes:

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/sidney-powell-tucker-carlson-trump-election/2020/11/20/id/997986/

what we need is IC I think

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2020, 03:32:05 PM

Given the reality of intimidation of witnesses via doxxing and death threats, as well as the basics of litigation theory, I have no  problem FOR THIS MOMENT in Rudy and Sydney keeping their best cards close to  the vest.

That said, they have bet the farm on  some big accusations and had best have some real substance to their hand when the time comes.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on November 20, 2020, 04:12:23 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2020, 03:32:05 PM

Given the reality of intimidation of witnesses via doxxing and death threats, as well as the basics of litigation theory, I have no  problem FOR THIS MOMENT in Rudy and Sydney keeping their best cards close to  the vest.

That said, they have bet the farm on  some big accusations and had best have some real substance to their hand when the time comes.

Yes.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 20, 2020, 04:15:38 PM

ok

I am on their side

I am sure John Brennan friends are listening in
and tipping off the LEFT swamp mafia

Rudy and Sidney have major balls and ovaries!

Title: NRO: Dershowitz was right
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2020, 04:35:42 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/11/trumps-disgraceful-gambit/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-11-20&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 20, 2020, 04:56:36 PM

what do you mean Dershowitz was right

he is not mentioned in NR

editor hit piece

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2020, 05:17:58 PM

Thought I had posted this here already: 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/dershowitz-trump-may-try-to-deny-biden-270-electoral-votes-put-election-in-congress_3579716.html?ref=brief_News&utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-16

Title: GA signatures
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 03:42:48 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/georgia-governor-calls-for-audit-of-signatures-on-ballot-envelopes_3588017.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-21

Title: Dominion AWOL
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 03:46:39 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/dominion-cancels-planned-appearance-before-pennsylvania-lawmakers_3587425.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-21

Title: Dominion fifth column?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 06:25:25 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-small-world-of-voting-machine-certification_3587972.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-21

Title: More Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 09:46:23 AM

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1329649065819328514

Title: Evidence?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 01:41:46 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/williams-college-mathematician-flags-up-to-100000-ballots-in-pennsylvania_3587723.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-21

Title: The small world of voting machine certification
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 03:33:48 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-small-world-of-voting-machine-certification_3587972.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-21

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 21, 2020, 04:42:53 PM

"The small world of voting machine certification"

OMG this is nuts

Title: Doubt starting to spread?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 05:38:40 PM

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/11/19/whoa-nearly-a-third-of-democrats-believe-the-election-was-stolen-from-trump-n1160882?fbclid=IwAR0ccK8sNE-IKGqs5rXDTF0dgWl088NApeFUoC2871ne6Bl2jglyflLmlcY

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2020/61_think_trump_should_concede_to_biden

Title: The Math does not add up
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2020, 07:27:07 PM

https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2020-11/Miller_DeclarationAndAnalyisPA_GOP_BallotRequestData_2020_Final.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2J4ze1TmZNhcdTOm5lLaGR3bpU_S1wmp_Iij_nz5BMzVQpg96uBIcvKu0

Title: Choose carefully what you ask for , , , ballot harvesting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 22, 2020, 09:21:08 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/why-california-republicans-stopped-complaining-about-ballot-harvesting-and-embraced-the-process/?itm_campaign=headline-testing-why-california-republicans-stopped-complaining-about-ballot-harvesting-and-embraced-the-process&itm_medium=headline&itm_source=nationalreview&itm_content=How%20California%20Republicans%20Flipped%20the%20Script%20on%20Ballot%20Harvesting&itm_term=How%20California%20Republicans%20Flipped%20the%20Script%20on%20Ballot%20Harvesting

Title: Re: Choose carefully what you ask for , , , ballot harvesting
Post by: DougMacG on November 22, 2020, 10:39:19 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 22, 2020, 09:21:08 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/why-california-republicans-stopped-complaining-about-ballot-harvesting-and-embraced-the-process/?itm_campaign=headline-testing-why-california-republicans-stopped-complaining-about-ballot-harvesting-and-embraced-the-process&itm_medium=headline&itm_source=nationalreview&itm_content=How%20California%20Republicans%20Flipped%20the%20Script%20on%20Ballot%20Harvesting&itm_term=How%20California%20Republicans%20Flipped%20the%20Script%20on%20Ballot%20Harvesting

Behind a paywall for me.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, CNN warned of Dominion in 2006
Post by: DougMacG on November 23, 2020, 06:50:10 AM

CNN warned of Dominion in 2006.

https://youtu.be/-s9PkuiIw2Q

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 24, 2020, 03:43:40 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/conservative-activist-on-georgias-second-recount-the-most-important-part-is-matching-signatures_3590593.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-24

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 24, 2020, 05:36:13 AM

Powell accused Georgia Republican top officials.  Republicans need desperately to win in Georgia right now.  Within 24 hours, Powell was out. That leaves unknown, what is the truth, will we ever learn the truth?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/byron-yorks-daily-memo-what-next-for-trump-legal-team

Title: tomorrow
Post by: ccp on November 24, 2020, 04:04:44 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/happy-thanksgiving-lin-wood-announces-sidney-powell-will-file-lawsuit-georgia-tomorrow/

Title: Vulnerability of voting machines, Mother Jones 2019
Post by: DougMacG on November 24, 2020, 04:48:57 PM

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/09/defcon-2019-hacking-village/

Title: Today? Sydney Powell Day in America?
Post by: DougMacG on November 25, 2020, 07:22:37 AM

Quote from: ccp on November 24, 2020, 04:04:44 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/happy-thanksgiving-lin-wood-announces-sidney-powell-will-file-lawsuit-georgia-tomorrow/

I haven't heard anything yet on Sydney Powell Day in America.  Happy to come back later today and update this with:
THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING

Though the outcome is "certain", Kamala Harris has not resigned her Senate seat yet.  Vegas oddsmakers haven't paid out their Biden bets yet.  Somebody knows something?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 25, 2020, 07:26:56 AM

I hope the evidence is more than affidavits
but I have feeling it is that

while important still only witness accounts which gives the left easy denial to escape the truth

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 25, 2020, 07:40:54 AM

ccp:  I agree

https://votepatternanalysis.substack.com/p/voting-anomalies-2020
"Our analysis finds that a few key vote updates in competitive states were unusually large in size and had an unusually high Biden-to-Trump ratio. We demonstrate the results differ enough from expected results to be cause for concern."

Why did we have vote spikes?  Places like Illinois are only 55% Dem.  Places like Kansas are only 56% Republican.  Votes shouldn't "spike" in any state, much less in a closely divided swing state.
https://ballotpedia.org/Presidential_election_by_state,_2020

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 25, 2020, 07:46:35 AM

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/cover-up-whitmer-admin-says-records-do-not-exist-pertaining-to-25-million-dominion-contract-set-up-by-democrat-official/


$25 million dollar state contract relating to vote integrity?  No records?  What??!!

Title: American Spectator
Post by: ccp on November 25, 2020, 10:09:06 AM

https://spectator.org/what-we-must-believe-to-believe-biden-won/

so the Left yawns and notices most Republicans know we ze robbed

and they ask how to they control those Trump voters
or what to do about them
not about fraud election

got to wipe out fox talk radio and the dozen or so online conservative sites some how
some way

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud? Vote Spike PA
Post by: DougMacG on November 26, 2020, 07:11:57 AM

600,000 vote spike in PA, 99.5% for Biden. Odd or just a popular guy?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGGlnHe3Rgc

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 26, 2020, 08:52:20 AM

".600,000 vote spike in PA, 99.5% for Biden. Odd or just a popular guy?"

Amazing how so many people can be in a conspiracy and yet so silent, when they are promised reparations
and citizen status ,  and are well funded by globalists Bloombergs Soros Hollywood, and covered for by Democrat lawyers and media

Title: The Michigan miracle!
Post by: G M on November 26, 2020, 05:55:50 PM

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/176/667/original/2471efc1d24128c7.png)

Title: "dark money"
Post by: ccp on November 27, 2020, 03:51:12 PM

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/biden-dark-money/2020/11/27/id/999046/

funny if I contribute to campaign

what is the max 2,000 ? it is reportable public knowledge

but the rich can donate through shell LLC and PACs millions and they are not forced to disclose according to this?

nothing rigged here folks.

Title: Powell suit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 29, 2020, 09:44:02 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/powell-suit-asks-court-for-immediate-order-to-de-certify-georgias-election-results_3596929.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-29

Title: Dominion mobile server crash delays recount
Post by: ccp on November 29, 2020, 04:53:36 PM

*new mobile server*

nothing suspicious folks move along :

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/georgia-recount-in-fulton-county-delayed-by-dominion-server-crash-report

most secure election in history !

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 29, 2020, 07:03:26 PM

https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/11/what-youve-been-asking-for-a-fairly-complete-list-of-some-of-the-most-significant-claims-of-2020-election-miscounts-errors-or-fraud/?fbclid=IwAR16ia4a_LTmD6ODOWebifmyeEpsOft2C8mrKIV-j0cC4I--nHSW-HwQU5Y

Title: Vote fraud, six ways from Sunday at getting back at you ?
Post by: DougMacG on November 30, 2020, 06:38:06 AM

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. “So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really dumb to do this.”
...
The question now is whether this war against Trump ever stopped or whether it continued right through the election of Nov. 3.

It is the very question that Rachel Maddow asked Chuck Schumer on Jan. 3, 2017: “What do you think the intelligence community would do [to Trump], if they were motivated to?”

Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani want answers. Do you?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/11/30/why_millions_dont_believe_trump_lost_144744.html#2

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Kracken
Post by: DougMacG on November 30, 2020, 06:56:59 AM

https://nationalfile.com/the-kraken-retired-general-says-us-military-intel-group-nicknamed-kraken-seized-dominion-servers-in-germany/

Title: Voting anomalies
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2020, 06:59:24 AM

https://votepatternanalysis.substack.com/p/voting-anomalies-2020

Title: Gen. Thomas McInerney says US Special Forces attacked CIA server farm in Germany
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2020, 07:01:15 AM

second post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYt5Kn2n3zM&feature=share&fbclid=IwsecoAR1m-t3niCqHu3R2Oa6TimpDkk2qotv9YunTV2GXodhO0HqWe26-e8j7d2U

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2020, 07:11:29 AM

third

https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbi-requests-fraud-disenfranchisement-evidence-researcher-says_3597396.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-11-30

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 30, 2020, 07:17:05 AM

fourth

Image
BY JACK CROWE

November 30, 2020

CHRISTOPHER KREBS WAS FIRED by President Trump last week for the crime of having assured the public that he did his job and secured the election.

 

In his first interview since being thrust into the national spotlight, Krebs repeated the sentiment that earned him Trump’s ire and lost him his job leading Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

 

“There is no foreign power that is flipping votes. There’s no domestic actor flipping votes. I did it right. We did it right,” Krebs told Scott Pelley of CBS’s 60 Minutes. “This was a secure election.”

 

Just as he did when Krebs first contradicted his baseless claims of widespread fraud, Trump immediately took to Twitter after the Sunday night interview to insist that the 202O election was “probably our least secure EVER.”

 

“NO WAY WE LOST THIS ELECTION!” Trump tweeted after listening to Krebs explain that there is a paper record for 95 percent of the ballots cast, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that he did in fact lose.

 

As the president continues this shameful spectacle, and too many Republicans in Washington stay silent, embarrassed 60 Minutes viewers could take some comfort in Krebs’ praise for the Republican state officials who ensured that the election itself ran smoothly — and then refused to acquiesce to Trump’s selfish demands that they pretend otherwise.

 

Krebs praised secretaries of state in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Nevada, and Arizona, who, he said, are “under attack from all sides.”

 

“Look at Secretary [Brad] Raffensperger in Georgia, lifelong Republican,” Krebs said. “He put country before party in his holding a free and fair election in that state. There are some real heroes out there. There are some real patriots.”

 

Raffensperger has pushed back strongly on Trump’s election fraud claims and wrote an op-ed in which he renounced his longstanding support for the president.

 

There are countless stories of anonymous Republican local and state officials refusing to knuckle under to Trump’s absurd demands.

 

Tina Barton, the Republican clerk of the small Michigan city of Rochester Hills, told the New York Times that she received a call from the Trump campaign in the days after the election. The person on the other end asked her to endorse Trump’s effort to delay the certification of results in the battleground state, reportedly the first stage in Trump’s plan to disenfranchise voters by ensuring that loyal electors would be appointed by Republican state legislatures.

 

“Do you know who you’re talking to right now?” Barton asked the campaign official.

 

Another little-known Michigan Republican, Aaron Van Langevelde, dealt with more than a quick phone call. As one of two Republicans on the board of state canvassers, Van Langevelde faced overwhelming pressure to refuse to certify the election results from colleagues in Michigan and Trump allies in Washington.

 

Recognizing that the board of canvassers lacked the authority to independently investigate fraud claims — and lacking evidence that the results had been overturned — Van Langevelde voted to certify.

 

“We must not attempt to exercise power we simply don’t have,” Van Langevelde said before casting his vote, according to Politico. “As John Adams once said, 'We are a government of laws, not men.' This board needs to adhere to that principle here today. This board must do its part to uphold the rule of law and comply with our legal duty to certify this election.”

 

It took courage at the local and state level to curtail the damage being inflicted on the country by the White House. While it’s unlikely that Joe Biden will be shouting about how the election was rigged against him should he lose in 2024, he’s surrounding himself with people who have themselves worked to erode confidence in our elections.

 

In 2016, Trump’s victory was treated in some quarters as an impossibility. He was such a uniquely bad candidate that he had to have been helped, most likely by foreign actors. As Glenn Greenwald notes in his Monday newsletter, Neera Tanden, who Biden is considering for OMB director, was one of the loudest proponents of this theory. She suggested on Twitter that “Russian hackers” changed vote totals in Florida, handing the state to Trump over her career benefactor, Hillary Clinton.

 

And Tanden wasn’t alone in her conspiracy theorizing: an Economist/YouGov poll conducted one year after the election found that 66 percent of Democrats believed that “Russia tampered with vote tallies in order to get Donald Trump elected President.”

 

Trump is by far the worst offender when it comes to undermining confidence in the vote, but it didn’t start with him and his supporters aren’t alone.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 01, 2020, 11:43:10 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/the_smartest_man_in_the_room_has_joined_sidney_powells_team.html?fbclid=IwAR3S5uXOsAYhBXBs020fx-hD1JNPGAcUveSJS01pF5739P6qT9VwfQNxtFk

but see https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-navid-keshavarz-nias-claims-of-a-sudden-rise-in-slope-as-election-fraud-evidence.11469/

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/dec/1/barr-no-evidence-of-fraud-thatd-change-election-ou/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=EFh6XyQ39qKQcxXR66IA7EBhp9Z6qTPubFzUK0ykrEfOgZbYCE4WyNnDlcxUwAAn&bt_ts=1606851494851

Title: 280 ballots disappear, USPS chicanery
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2020, 01:53:33 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/up-to-280000-ballots-disappeared-after-being-transported-from-ny-to-pennsylvania-amistad-project-director_3600718.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-12-02

Title: 130 to 280 K ballots disappeared 10/21/20
Post by: ccp on December 02, 2020, 04:35:26 AM

"Kline also asserted in a statement that Postal Service workers were engaged in “widespread illegal efforts” to influence the election. At least one whistleblower said that they transported thousands of prefilled ballots across state lines, which, if true, would be a federal crime."

What?  Who would have thought  a government agency with employees who are most likely democrats would stoop to partaking in a "Federal Crime"?

To think that USPS (let alone UPS or Fedex ) workers could be in on a scam. 
Not possible.

Same as the slow walkers at DOJ or all other Fed agencies.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 02, 2020, 04:45:41 AM

Loved the witness last night on Tucker

especially the part where he saw someone(s) brought in bags(s?) of phony ballots to the election office and set them down at the feet of a Democrat lawyer in Philadelphia .

Like the Attorney General who kept stating in public
he was 100 % confident the DEms would win PA.

Liars for hire . 

The pieces of the puzzle ALL fit exactly as we knew they would .

Yet like Hillary points out - "no controlling legal authority"

Only in this case there is one but it refuses to do anything about it.

Title: we "found" them
Post by: ccp on December 02, 2020, 09:16:39 AM

ie : made them up

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/upstate-ny-congressional-race-in-doubt-after-55-uncounted-ballots-found

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2020, 10:03:31 AM

https://www.oann.com/whistleblowers-testify-to-fraud-in-battleground-states/

Title: isn't this obvious
Post by: ccp on December 02, 2020, 02:51:29 PM

https://www.westernjournal.com/abrams-founded-group-investigation-allegedly-soliciting-voter-registrations-dead-state-individuals/

and of course she and her mob are certainly  doing the same thing now for the Senate election
NO doubt

she needs to investigated

Title: President Trump's big statement
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2020, 07:14:41 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFzTuaVS8Kk&feature=emb_title

Title: Re: President Trump's big statement
Post by: G M on December 02, 2020, 07:17:20 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2020, 07:14:41 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFzTuaVS8Kk&feature=emb_title

Insurrection Act NOW!

Title: Electoral process, Dem organizing technology
Post by: DougMacG on December 02, 2020, 08:29:32 PM

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-30/everyaction-and-mobilize-give-democrats-the-app-they-need-to-keep-winning?srnd=premium&sref=nXmOg68r

Title: Re: Electoral process, Dem organizing technology
Post by: G M on December 02, 2020, 10:05:30 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on December 02, 2020, 08:29:32 PM

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-30/everyaction-and-mobilize-give-democrats-the-app-they-need-to-keep-winning?srnd=premium&sref=nXmOg68r

Aside from vote and electoral fraud?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 03, 2020, 05:25:48 AM

"Democrats Just Got the Digital Machine They Need to Keep Winning"

coming from shorty's news network , Bloomberg news,
did it mention their boss gave hundreds of millions to pay for much of this?

and despite this behemoth still 75 million people saw through their crap and said no
and others had to bribed with free education , free health care, free legal status , reparations payments

and they still had to cheat to win the electoral college

bottom line most do not want the stuff the Democrats are shoving down our throats

A friend of mine told me it could happen here about 40 yrs ago - I could not see it .
   

Title: Trivia question: How many ballots can fit in two suitcases?
Post by: ccp on December 04, 2020, 05:44:04 AM

https://calmatters.org/politics/post-it/2020/10/california-ballots-counted-first/

or maybe they just had their dinners or lunch boxes  in the suitcases  :wink: as will be claimed by the Democrat liars for hire

Title: Auditors in GA had history with Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 04, 2020, 07:59:02 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/firm-that-conducted-audit-of-georgia-voting-machines-has-long-history-with-dominion_3604466.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-12-04

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 05, 2020, 04:19:12 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/arizona-legislature-calls-for-immediate-forensic-audit-of-dominion-voting-machines_3605367.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-12-05

https://www.theepochtimes.com/michigan-judge-orders-forensic-review-of-22-dominion-voting-machines-giuliani-says_3605715.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-12-05

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ur4vl5UTN8g&fbclid=IwAR3qoO1c8IBQgJQtpEkfUQ36730dAE-c6flc8pmypJEGrnABXvoIP3-NSIA

https://americanmind.org/audio/john-eastman-testimony-during-georgia-senate-election-hearing-12-3-2020/?fbclid=IwAR0RXU58EQNEP0EhJ4k6b5F5cd-OCYKl7BE-rDcd2YySaVvS60aEaBAv-Ic

Title: Harry Reid show
Post by: ccp on December 05, 2020, 08:46:04 AM

caveat NPR:

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/10/933548747/will-harry-reid-machine-continue-to-work-for-democrats-in-next-elections

Title: Why would this cause grave and serious consequences?
Post by: G M on December 05, 2020, 02:01:16 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/crooks-georgia-election-officials-warn-judge-not-allowed-wipe-machines-clean-grave-serious-consequences/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 05, 2020, 06:32:20 PM

they will wipe them anyway

3 am

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 06, 2020, 02:36:57 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zECFo8yIZ0o&fbclid=IwAR1tZWlG0RGA9aWsCv-Tp338Hsv9W7jSYjkFKXRovqoGXqGqszvTjxFwHqU

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/64-gop-pennsylvania-lawmakers-send-letter-urging-congress-to-block-electoral-votes-from-going-to-biden?fbclid=IwAR3uuLIGVaoOLiMoUCiJO67k5nVOo1DdeTdJmGe6E0507V7k2AYTjOVJGmk

Title: President Trump proposes landmark election reform
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 06, 2020, 07:03:31 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-proposes-landmark-election-reform-and-overhaul-of-election-security-systems_3606426.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-12-06

Title: $400M in Chinese money to Dominion?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 06, 2020, 02:01:25 PM

Fuck Infowars, but Gateway Pundit is worth consideration:

https://www.dickmorris.com/china-linked-bank-paid-dominion-400-million-four-weeks-before-the-election/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports&fbclid=IwAR3bnv9vUWE1bthIx9-rUlU2yEDuOEIWV6vLPG_ATKrcTkELQxmZ9lHRhac

Title: Cruz to argue for Trump at SCOTUS in PA Case?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 07, 2020, 03:52:48 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/12/07/if-pennsylvania-case-moves-forward-this-senator-will-argue-at-the-supreme-court-n2581182

Title: Electoral process: No, the vote fraud video was not debunked, Mollie Hemmingway
Post by: DougMacG on December 08, 2020, 07:29:09 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/07/no-the-georgia-vote-counting-video-was-not-debunked-not-even-close/

Title: Re: Cruz to argue for Trump at SCOTUS in PA Case?
Post by: DougMacG on December 08, 2020, 07:59:42 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 07, 2020, 03:52:48 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/12/07/if-pennsylvania-case-moves-forward-this-senator-will-argue-at-the-supreme-court-n2581182

This may turn out to be a great role for Cruz.  Also, Texas is suing the states with the alleged cheat.
https://www.newswest9.com/article/news/local/texas/texas-attorney-general-ken-paxton-sues-battleground-states-unconstitutional-changes-to-2020-election-laws/513-27d922ef-e21c-4b47-813c-f3020a58bd05

This is all going to happen fast and be over soon.  Like a mass shooting and a lot of other breaking news stories, I will take a watch and see approach before rushing to judgment.  What seems persuasive at logically is that there are many massive mathematical anomalies that are centered in  6 Democrat-run cities in 6 swing states that don't fit any observed pattern anywhere else.  Presenting judicially admittable and persuasive evidence in a timely manner is another matter.  We will see.
-----------------------------

(Texas) Attorney General Ken Paxton believes that the states flooded the citizens with unlawful ballot applications and ballots while ignoring statutory requirements, involving how they were received, evaluated, and counted.

Paxton expresses how the trust of the citizens and the integrity of the 2020 election was compromised because of the violation of the statutes by the states.

“Trust in the integrity of our election processes is sacrosanct and binds our citizenry and the States in this Union together. Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin destroyed that trust and compromised the security and integrity of the 2020 election. The states violated statutes enacted by their duly elected legislatures, thereby violating the Constitution. By ignoring both state and federal law, these states have not only tainted the integrity of their own citizens’ vote, but of Texas and every other state that held lawful elections. Their failure to abide by the rule of law casts a dark shadow of doubt over the outcome of the entire election. We now ask that the Supreme Court step in to correct this egregious error.”   

Title: Supreme Court
Post by: ccp on December 08, 2020, 02:03:02 PM

refuses to hear PA election case request

not sure of the details of this latest blow:

https://wkow.com/2020/12/08/supreme-court-rejects-republican-bid-to-reverse-certification-of-biden-victory-in-pennsylvania/

bags of 100% Biden votes showing up in middle of night - laid at feet of Dem lawyers - not a Constitutional problem for the state (Commonwealth ) of PA.

among other irregularities.  :cry:

Cruz must have scared them off.......

Title: Election laws were not changed just for China Virus
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 07:30:45 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/76249-no-election-laws-were-not-changed-just-for-covid-2020-12-07?mailing_id=5486&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.5486&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: GA Gov Kemp met with Chinese, then awarded Dominion contract
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 11:14:12 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2020/12/08/ga-gov-kemp-awarded-107-million-contract-to-dominion-two-weeks-after-meeting-with-peoples-republic-of-china-consul-general/

Title: The Roberts decision
Post by: G M on December 09, 2020, 01:18:45 PM

(https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/7c9fd156b6b06dac.jpg)

Title: Armed protest at MI Sec. State's home
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 03:07:14 PM

https://www.npr.org/sections/biden-transition-updates/2020/12/07/943820889/michigan-secretary-of-state-says-armed-protesters-descended-on-her-home-saturday?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&fbclid=IwAR1ukFbwCLdA6L8BvVORKOD18k9BDpR8mHWHSx-BXV7s9E1sngRg0uVfa6M

We would not be happy were the shoe on the other foot,  but OTOH given the lack of pravda interest when it was the other side , , ,

Related?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxmYrW8s91w&feature=emb_logo

Title: McCarthy: Texas lawsuit is frivolous
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 03:53:03 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/texass-frivolous-lawsuit-seeks-to-overturn-election-in-four-other-states/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-12-09&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

I've used up my freebies, would someone please paste the actual article?

Title: An arrest in MI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 03:59:14 PM

third

https://www.lawofficer.com/michigan-state-police-arrest-democratic-official-six-felony-charges-election-fraud/

Title: Larry lib in on cover up
Post by: ccp on December 09, 2020, 04:20:01 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawyers-group-calls-for-disciplining-trump-legal-team-over-dangerous-fraud-allegations-215654402.html

Larry says move on

eye eye sir!   :roll:

a bunch of Dem lawyers judges and the other party hacks

Title: Re: McCarthy: Texas lawsuit is frivolous
Post by: DougMacG on December 09, 2020, 06:04:38 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 03:53:03 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/texass-frivolous-lawsuit-seeks-to-overturn-election-in-four-other-states/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-12-09&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

I've used up my freebies, would someone please paste the actual article?

Texas’s Frivolous Lawsuit Seeks to Overturn Election in Four Other States
By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY
December 9, 2020 4:28 PM

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton addresses reporters on the steps of the Supreme Court during a 2016 case in Washington, D.C., March 2, 2016. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
There is no way the Supreme Court is going to entertain Texas’s lawsuit.
NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE
The first thing to notice about Texas’s desperation lawsuit, which seeks to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election, is what does not appear on the front page: the name of the state’s solicitor general, Kyle Hawkins.

The lawsuit is brought against four other states — Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin — that have certified Joe Biden as the winner of their electoral votes. Thus, Texas attorney general Ken Paxton invokes the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court to hear disputes between states. Yet the brief is not signed by the lawyer who typically represents Texas before that nation’s highest court (as Solicitor General Hawkins did, for example, in the recent Obamacare case).

Plainly, this is because the complaint Paxton has filed is a political document that has no prospect of being taken seriously as a set of legal claims.

MORE IN TEXAS
The Dumb Statistical Argument in Texas’s Election Lawsuit
Goldman Sachs Considers Moving Asset Management Arm to Florida in Warning Sign for NYC’s Budget
Austin Mayor Flew to Mexico for Vacation While Advising Public to ‘Stay Home’
There is a lot to be said for Texas’s complaints as a political polemic. It is true that Democrats labor mightily to undermine election integrity. The only rational reason for that is to make it easier for legally unqualified people to cast ballots, and to cast in bulk — and under the influence of progressive activists — the ballots of people who would not otherwise have voted (and whose qualifications may be dubious). It is also true that mail-in voting on a massive scale, favored by Democrats, creates tremendous potential for fraud. This potential is inevitably realized in at least some fraud when coupled with other policies Democrats aggressively push — e.g., the weakening of identification, signature-verification, and witness requirements. It is also true that Democrat-dominated executive officials, courts, and bureaucracies presume broad authority to deviate from the terms of legislatively enacted election laws, under the guise of administering those laws.

All of these matters should be addressed by Congress, and by state lawmakers. Not a single one of them, however, gives the state of Texas standing to sue other states over the manner in which those states enforce (or refrain from enforcing) their laws.

This does not mean the flouting of election laws by officials in Pennsylvania and other states is not a serious issue. It means that if Texas wants to raise that issue, the Supreme Court is not the right forum. To repeat a point I’ve made before, the Court did not grant review of a case from Pennsylvania that it should have taken, involving a narrow, critical issue of constitutional law pertaining to elections, when that issue was raised by parties in the commonwealth who were directly affected. The justices are not going to have the slightest interest in entertaining a sprawling lawsuit brought by an unaffected third-party state — one that, if Texas got its way, would forevermore thrust the Supreme Court into the thick of electoral politics.

I doubt the Court will say anything other than that leave to file Texas’s complaint is denied. In the unlikely event of elaboration, the justices may convey that if Texas has a problem with the way other states administer elections, it should address that through the political process, including through Texas’s large and influential delegation of elected officials in Congress. Such a complaint is not the business of lawsuits . . . unless you’re ready for tomorrow’s lawsuit by, say, California and New York against Texas for trying to disenfranchise its citizens; or the countersuit by Pennsylvania et al. over Texas’s intrusion in affairs over which the Constitution recognizes their sovereignty, such as the manner of conducting elections.

If Texas’s theory is right, then every state now has standing to sue every other state over the latter’s administration of its own laws in connection with its own citizens if it can articulate some collateral consequence that may affect the allegedly injured state in some way. I have a hard time believing that the “Don’t Mess with Texas” State will want to live in the world that its attorney general proposes to create.

In point of fact, every claim raised in Texas’s complaint has already been rejected by other courts; in particular, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (in two cases, here and here) and the federal district court in Pennsylvania (here).

Texas’s principal claim, for example, is that by administering the election in a way that deviated from their states’ laws, election officials in the defendant states usurped the authority of their state legislatures, in violation of the Constitution’s Electors Clause (Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 2). The Third Circuit has explained that not even the citizens of the states where this happened nor candidates for office have standing to press such a claim. How on earth would a different, comparatively unaffected state have standing? Not surprisingly, the rambling discussion of standing principles in Paxton’s brief cites no case holding that a state has standing to challenge another state’s administration of an election.

THE MORNING JOLT
Get Jim Geraghty’s tour of the political news of the day.


Email Address
Texas further claims, on a Bush v. Gore theory, that its citizens’ equal-protection rights have been trampled by the four defendant states’ alleged counting of ballots submitted by unqualified voters. But our Constitution does not provide for a national election — much to the chagrin of blue states that would like to eradicate the Electoral College. We have state elections for president. To the extent that the citizens of Texas have a right to vote, it is given to them not by the Constitution but by their state legislature, and it is a right to vote for a candidate to be awarded Texas’s electoral votes, not those of other states.

Furthermore, the “diminished weight” theory of equal protection (i.e., that counting illegal votes disenfranchises lawful voters) has repeatedly been rejected when posited by citizens within the state where the unlawful voting takes place; the theory is even weaker across state lines. As the Third Circuit has emphasized, “Bush v. Gore does not federalize every jot and tittle of state election law.”

Texas’s substantive due-process claim may be even more fatuous. To repeat, even the citizens of a state where election-law violations allegedly occurred do not have a general, judicially enforceable right to force election officials to comply with state law. They must show a concrete, particularized, non-speculative injury. Even less do states have a right to make other states comply with the latter’s own laws. Texas has no standing to sue, say, Michigan over the failure of Michigan officials to comply with Michigan law, to the alleged detriment of Michigan’s citizens.


Finally, in its proposed lawsuit, Texas does exactly what the Third Circuit, in Trump for President v. Secretary, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, recently said a litigant may not do. It waited until the eleventh hour to file (beyond that, actually — the complaint was not submitted until after midnight on the federal safe-harbor day). It pleads conclusory allegations (including some, such as mentions of Dominion software, that are plainly included for atmospheric effect, unconnected to any claim for relief). It posits claims that have already been litigated and lost by parties that, unlike Texas, had some cognizable interests. And it seeks unprecedented, drastic relief — the undoing of other states’ elections and disenfranchisement of their citizens; the invocation of the Court’s purported “remedial authority” to order a new “special” election in those states; the vacating of the certification of electors by those states, and the barring of those states from voting in the Electoral College — without citing any case in which the courts have found such breathtaking authority to exist, much less exercised it.

Already under indictment for securities fraud, Attorney General Paxton is currently caught up in yet another corruption investigation — one that has roiled his office. Now, he has filed a lawsuit so frivolous and so blatantly political that the top appellate lawyers in his office evidently declined to endorse it. To be clear, though, this does not mean questions about election-law improprieties are frivolous.

Federal law provides a procedure under which, on January 6, Congress will convene to count the electoral votes. If Texas’s elected representatives, or those of any other state, object to the counting any state’s electoral votes, Congress will hear, debate, and vote on those objections at that point — mindful of what such disputes may portend for comity between the states. There is, however, no way the Supreme Court is going to entertain Texas’s lawsuit. There is also no way, I suspect, that Paxton doesn’t know that.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Flipboard
Email this article
172

ANDREW C. MCCARTHY is a senior fellow at National Review Institute, an NR contributing editor, and author of BALL OF COLLUSION: THE PLOT TO RIG AN ELECTION AND DESTROY A PRESIDENCY. @andrewcmccarthy

Title: Re: McCarthy: Texas lawsuit is frivolous
Post by: G M on December 09, 2020, 06:07:57 PM

I hope deep staters understand that if the jury box option fails, there is one box left.

Quote from: DougMacG on December 09, 2020, 06:04:38 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 03:53:03 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/texass-frivolous-lawsuit-seeks-to-overturn-election-in-four-other-states/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-12-09&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

I've used up my freebies, would someone please paste the actual article?

Skip to content
SECTIONS
NEWSLETTERS
POPULAR TOPICS
NRPLUS
MAGAZINE
PODCASTS
PHOTOS
VIDEOS
GAMES
WINE CLUB
CONTACT & ABOUT US
DONATE
SUBSCRIBE
FOLLOW US

Primary Menu
National Review
Search National Review
Search Text
SEARCH
GO
Dec. 9, 2020
SUBSCRIBE
 
LOGIN
NR PLUS LAW & THE COURTS
Texas’s Frivolous Lawsuit Seeks to Overturn Election in Four Other States
By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY
December 9, 2020 4:28 PM
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Flipboard
Email this article

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton addresses reporters on the steps of the Supreme Court during a 2016 case in Washington, D.C., March 2, 2016. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
There is no way the Supreme Court is going to entertain Texas’s lawsuit.
NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE
The first thing to notice about Texas’s desperation lawsuit, which seeks to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election, is what does not appear on the front page: the name of the state’s solicitor general, Kyle Hawkins.

The lawsuit is brought against four other states — Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin — that have certified Joe Biden as the winner of their electoral votes. Thus, Texas attorney general Ken Paxton invokes the original jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court to hear disputes between states. Yet the brief is not signed by the lawyer who typically represents Texas before that nation’s highest court (as Solicitor General Hawkins did, for example, in the recent Obamacare case).

Plainly, this is because the complaint Paxton has filed is a political document that has no prospect of being taken seriously as a set of legal claims.

MORE IN TEXAS
The Dumb Statistical Argument in Texas’s Election Lawsuit
Goldman Sachs Considers Moving Asset Management Arm to Florida in Warning Sign for NYC’s Budget
Austin Mayor Flew to Mexico for Vacation While Advising Public to ‘Stay Home’
There is a lot to be said for Texas’s complaints as a political polemic. It is true that Democrats labor mightily to undermine election integrity. The only rational reason for that is to make it easier for legally unqualified people to cast ballots, and to cast in bulk — and under the influence of progressive activists — the ballots of people who would not otherwise have voted (and whose qualifications may be dubious). It is also true that mail-in voting on a massive scale, favored by Democrats, creates tremendous potential for fraud. This potential is inevitably realized in at least some fraud when coupled with other policies Democrats aggressively push — e.g., the weakening of identification, signature-verification, and witness requirements. It is also true that Democrat-dominated executive officials, courts, and bureaucracies presume broad authority to deviate from the terms of legislatively enacted election laws, under the guise of administering those laws.

All of these matters should be addressed by Congress, and by state lawmakers. Not a single one of them, however, gives the state of Texas standing to sue other states over the manner in which those states enforce (or refrain from enforcing) their laws.

This does not mean the flouting of election laws by officials in Pennsylvania and other states is not a serious issue. It means that if Texas wants to raise that issue, the Supreme Court is not the right forum. To repeat a point I’ve made before, the Court did not grant review of a case from Pennsylvania that it should have taken, involving a narrow, critical issue of constitutional law pertaining to elections, when that issue was raised by parties in the commonwealth who were directly affected. The justices are not going to have the slightest interest in entertaining a sprawling lawsuit brought by an unaffected third-party state — one that, if Texas got its way, would forevermore thrust the Supreme Court into the thick of electoral politics.

I doubt the Court will say anything other than that leave to file Texas’s complaint is denied. In the unlikely event of elaboration, the justices may convey that if Texas has a problem with the way other states administer elections, it should address that through the political process, including through Texas’s large and influential delegation of elected officials in Congress. Such a complaint is not the business of lawsuits . . . unless you’re ready for tomorrow’s lawsuit by, say, California and New York against Texas for trying to disenfranchise its citizens; or the countersuit by Pennsylvania et al. over Texas’s intrusion in affairs over which the Constitution recognizes their sovereignty, such as the manner of conducting elections.

If Texas’s theory is right, then every state now has standing to sue every other state over the latter’s administration of its own laws in connection with its own citizens if it can articulate some collateral consequence that may affect the allegedly injured state in some way. I have a hard time believing that the “Don’t Mess with Texas” State will want to live in the world that its attorney general proposes to create.

In point of fact, every claim raised in Texas’s complaint has already been rejected by other courts; in particular, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (in two cases, here and here) and the federal district court in Pennsylvania (here).

Texas’s principal claim, for example, is that by administering the election in a way that deviated from their states’ laws, election officials in the defendant states usurped the authority of their state legislatures, in violation of the Constitution’s Electors Clause (Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 2). The Third Circuit has explained that not even the citizens of the states where this happened nor candidates for office have standing to press such a claim. How on earth would a different, comparatively unaffected state have standing? Not surprisingly, the rambling discussion of standing principles in Paxton’s brief cites no case holding that a state has standing to challenge another state’s administration of an election.

THE MORNING JOLT
Get Jim Geraghty’s tour of the political news of the day.


Email Address
Texas further claims, on a Bush v. Gore theory, that its citizens’ equal-protection rights have been trampled by the four defendant states’ alleged counting of ballots submitted by unqualified voters. But our Constitution does not provide for a national election — much to the chagrin of blue states that would like to eradicate the Electoral College. We have state elections for president. To the extent that the citizens of Texas have a right to vote, it is given to them not by the Constitution but by their state legislature, and it is a right to vote for a candidate to be awarded Texas’s electoral votes, not those of other states.

Furthermore, the “diminished weight” theory of equal protection (i.e., that counting illegal votes disenfranchises lawful voters) has repeatedly been rejected when posited by citizens within the state where the unlawful voting takes place; the theory is even weaker across state lines. As the Third Circuit has emphasized, “Bush v. Gore does not federalize every jot and tittle of state election law.”

Texas’s substantive due-process claim may be even more fatuous. To repeat, even the citizens of a state where election-law violations allegedly occurred do not have a general, judicially enforceable right to force election officials to comply with state law. They must show a concrete, particularized, non-speculative injury. Even less do states have a right to make other states comply with the latter’s own laws. Texas has no standing to sue, say, Michigan over the failure of Michigan officials to comply with Michigan law, to the alleged detriment of Michigan’s citizens.


Finally, in its proposed lawsuit, Texas does exactly what the Third Circuit, in Trump for President v. Secretary, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, recently said a litigant may not do. It waited until the eleventh hour to file (beyond that, actually — the complaint was not submitted until after midnight on the federal safe-harbor day). It pleads conclusory allegations (including some, such as mentions of Dominion software, that are plainly included for atmospheric effect, unconnected to any claim for relief). It posits claims that have already been litigated and lost by parties that, unlike Texas, had some cognizable interests. And it seeks unprecedented, drastic relief — the undoing of other states’ elections and disenfranchisement of their citizens; the invocation of the Court’s purported “remedial authority” to order a new “special” election in those states; the vacating of the certification of electors by those states, and the barring of those states from voting in the Electoral College — without citing any case in which the courts have found such breathtaking authority to exist, much less exercised it.

Already under indictment for securities fraud, Attorney General Paxton is currently caught up in yet another corruption investigation — one that has roiled his office. Now, he has filed a lawsuit so frivolous and so blatantly political that the top appellate lawyers in his office evidently declined to endorse it. To be clear, though, this does not mean questions about election-law improprieties are frivolous.

Federal law provides a procedure under which, on January 6, Congress will convene to count the electoral votes. If Texas’s elected representatives, or those of any other state, object to the counting any state’s electoral votes, Congress will hear, debate, and vote on those objections at that point — mindful of what such disputes may portend for comity between the states. There is, however, no way the Supreme Court is going to entertain Texas’s lawsuit. There is also no way, I suspect, that Paxton doesn’t know that.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Flipboard
Email this article
172

ANDREW C. MCCARTHY is a senior fellow at National Review Institute, an NR contributing editor, and author of BALL OF COLLUSION: THE PLOT TO RIG AN ELECTION AND DESTROY A PRESIDENCY. @andrewcmccarthy

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 09, 2020, 06:41:43 PM

McCarthy was on Gorka today. He made clear the potentially, directly injured party is the state legislature in each state whose power to set the rules of the election was violated.

McCarthy is smarter than us but that doesn't mean he is right on what 5 Justices will do.  The fact they are hearing arguments means the door is open a hair. IF the preponderance of the evidence shows that what happened in these four state was illegal tampering on a scale large enough to swing the results, not fair elections, then the constitution has an defined method of resolution available to the Court.

Odds of reversing this election are one in a quadrillion, again.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2020, 08:46:50 PM

From my FB page.  Not sure who actually wrote it:
============================================

I doubt the Court will say anything other than that leave to file Texas’s complaint is denied. In the unlikely event of elaboration, the justices may convey that if Texas has a problem with the way other states administer elections, it should address that through the political process, including through Texas’s large and influential delegation of elected officials in Congress. Such a complaint is not the business of lawsuits . . . unless you’re ready for tomorrow’s lawsuit by, say, California and New York against Texas for trying to disenfranchise its citizens; or the countersuit by Pennsylvania et al. over Texas’s intrusion in affairs over which the Constitution recognizes their sovereignty, such as the manner of conducting elections.
If Texas’s theory is right, then every state now has standing to sue every other state over the latter’s administration of its own laws in connection with its own citizens if it can articulate some collateral consequence that may affect the allegedly injured state in some way. I have a hard time believing that the “Don’t Mess with Texas” State will want to live in the world that its attorney general proposes to create.
In point of fact, every claim raised in Texas’s complaint has already been rejected by other courts; in particular, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (in two cases, here and here) and the federal district court in Pennsylvania (here).

Texas’s principal claim, for example, is that by administering the election in a way that deviated from their states’ laws, election officials in the defendant states usurped the authority of their state legislatures, in violation of the Constitution’s Electors Clause (Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 2). The Third Circuit has explained that not even the citizens of the states where this happened nor candidates for office have standing to press such a claim. How on earth would a different, comparatively unaffected state have standing? Not surprisingly, the rambling discussion of standing principles in Paxton’s brief cites no case holding that a state has standing to challenge another state’s administration of an election.

Texas further claims, on a Bush v. Gore theory, that its citizens’ equal-protection rights have been trampled by the four defendant states’ alleged counting of ballots submitted by unqualified voters. But our Constitution does not provide for a national election — much to the chagrin of blue states that would like to eradicate the Electoral College. We have state elections for president. To the extent that the citizens of Texas have a right to vote, it is given to them not by the Constitution but by their state legislature, and it is a right to vote for a candidate to be awarded Texas’s electoral votes, not those of other states.
Furthermore, the “diminished weight” theory of equal protection (i.e., that counting illegal votes disenfranchises lawful voters) has repeatedly been rejected when posited by citizens within the state where the unlawful voting takes place; the theory is even weaker across state lines. As the Third Circuit has emphasized, “Bush v. Gore does not federalize every jot and tittle of state election law.”

Texas’s substantive due-process claim may be even more fatuous. To repeat, even the citizens of a state where election-law violations allegedly occurred do not have a general, judicially enforceable right to force election officials to comply with state law. They must show a concrete, particularized, non-speculative injury. Even less do states have a right to make other states comply with the latter’s own laws. Texas has no standing to sue, say, Michigan over the failure of Michigan officials to comply with Michigan law, to the alleged detriment of Michigan’s citizens.

Finally, in its proposed lawsuit, Texas does exactly what the Third Circuit, in Trump for President v. Secretary, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, recently said a litigant may not do. It waited until the eleventh hour to file (beyond that, actually — the complaint was not submitted until after midnight on the federal safe-harbor day). It pleads conclusory allegations (including some, such as mentions of Dominion software, that are plainly included for atmospheric effect, unconnected to any claim for relief). It posits claims that have already been litigated and lost by parties that, unlike Texas, had some cognizable interests. And it seeks unprecedented, drastic relief — the undoing of other states’ elections and disenfranchisement of their citizens; the invocation of the Court’s purported “remedial authority” to order a new “special” election in those states; the vacating of the certification of electors by those states, and the barring of those states from voting in the Electoral College — without citing any case in which the courts have found such breathtaking authority to exist, much less exercised it.

Already under indictment for securities fraud, Attorney General Paxton is currently caught up in yet another corruption investigation — one that has roiled his office. Now, he has filed a lawsuit so frivolous and so blatantly political that the top appellate lawyers in his office evidently declined to endorse it. To be clear, though, this does not mean questions about election-law improprieties are frivolous.

Federal law provides a procedure under which, on January 6, Congress will convene to count the electoral votes. If Texas’s elected representatives, or those of any other state, object to the counting any state’s electoral votes, Congress will hear, debate, and vote on those objections at that point — mindful of what such disputes may portend for comity between the states. There is, however, no way the Supreme Court is going to entertain Texas’s lawsuit. There is also no way, I suspect, that Paxton doesn’t know that.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 09, 2020, 09:53:45 PM

Author unknown:


There are always tipping points. The powers that been seem utterly intent on testing how far they can yank this. I won't say you're wrong to be skeptical and pessimistic. (If we can call people being reticent to "war-war" pessimistic? Ha!).

Folks are reluctant - in the extreme - to throw their lives and comforts away, and I concede most will sit on the fence - through any indignity - waiting to see which side prevails.

But it doesn't take "most folks" to knock a pear over. And defiance spreads. It spreads faster if FedGovCo starts stomping on people and overreacting. Look how quickly Bundy Ranch almost zipped out of control. That entire mess was one negligent discharge away from Lexington 2.0. Blatantly stealing national elections is that times fifty-million... and more cats know about it and have skin in the game.

To enjoy mass support, a revolt needs to have a legitimate grievance - something egregious most folks can sympathize with. It also has to enrage people on a moral level - beyond what than they can bury in escapism and creature comforts...

...well, you don't get much more sympathetic than "stealing elections." And the powers that be have Bubba's undivided attention now - and not in a good way. All the energy that was going into Sports (ratings dead), Movies (pandemic dead), and Video Games (SJW infected and dying), is getting channeled into Joe-Six-Pack contemplating who he needs to shoot to stop Tranny-Story-Hour and get his kid's football season running again.

The small creature comforts tip the scales in the end. And those are being strangled by the fools who benefit most from them. The accumulation of one-thousand slights adds up over time. Every cruel cut and overreach remembered - until no amount of escapism, avoidance and appeasement can suppress the anger. Particularly when the left's cultists have made those avenues deliberately unbearable.

Title: Hail Mary
Post by: G M on December 09, 2020, 09:59:19 PM

https://www.captainsjournal.com/2020/12/08/texas-sues-the-states-of-georgia-michigan-pennsylvania-and-wisconsin-in-attempt-to-avoid-civil-war/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 10, 2020, 04:50:09 AM

All legal questions keep getting diverted back to 'standing', but the real question is whether or not overwhelming evidence can be presented within the time limits.

McCarthy's point is that Texas has no more standing than any state or citizen.  But if the evidence is overwhelming that this election result is a sham in these four states, we all are the injured, in no small way.  A third of the states joining them, more states than we had at Founding, roughly twice as many as left the Union in the last civil war, demonstrates that.  Lack of standing IS the frivolous argument. .

We need to know we can find justice through the courts to settle our disputes.  The unthinkable alternatives otherwise become the only remedies remaining.

The highest court needs to see the evidence and hear thw arguments on both sides and rule on the merit.

Title: Larry Lib
Post by: ccp on December 10, 2020, 05:14:43 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/laurence-tribe-donald-trump-election-over-082118042.html

Larrylib,

explain to us why a law professor is aiding and abetting in the cover up of  election law crimes .

no concern for election fraud which is plainly obvious
to anyone with a brain who can read

just that the orange man is gone.

I really can't stand this partisan creep

Title: Andrew McCarthy on the Texas lawsuit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 10, 2020, 07:16:42 AM

I doubt the Court will say anything other than that leave to file Texas’s complaint is denied. In the unlikely event of elaboration, the justices may convey that if Texas has a problem with the way other states administer elections, it should address that through the political process, including through Texas’s large and influential delegation of elected officials in Congress. Such a complaint is not the business of lawsuits . . . unless you’re ready for tomorrow’s lawsuit by, say, California and New York against Texas for trying to disenfranchise its citizens; or the countersuit by Pennsylvania et al. over Texas’s intrusion in affairs over which the Constitution recognizes their sovereignty, such as the manner of conducting elections.

If Texas’s theory is right, then every state now has standing to sue every other state over the latter’s administration of its own laws in connection with its own citizens if it can articulate some collateral consequence that may affect the allegedly injured state in some way. I have a hard time believing that the “Don’t Mess with Texas” State will want to live in the world that its attorney general proposes to create.
In point of fact, every claim raised in Texas’s complaint has already been rejected by other courts; in particular, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (in two cases, here and here) and the federal district court in Pennsylvania (here).

Texas’s principal claim, for example, is that by administering the election in a way that deviated from their states’ laws, election officials in the defendant states usurped the authority of their state legislatures, in violation of the Constitution’s Electors Clause (Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 2). The Third Circuit has explained that not even the citizens of the states where this happened nor candidates for office have standing to press such a claim. How on earth would a different, comparatively unaffected state have standing? Not surprisingly, the rambling discussion of standing principles in Paxton’s brief cites no case holding that a state has standing to challenge another state’s administration of an election.

Texas further claims, on a Bush v. Gore theory, that its citizens’ equal-protection rights have been trampled by the four defendant states’ alleged counting of ballots submitted by unqualified voters. But our Constitution does not provide for a national election — much to the chagrin of blue states that would like to eradicate the Electoral College. We have state elections for president. To the extent that the citizens of Texas have a right to vote, it is given to them not by the Constitution but by their state legislature, and it is a right to vote for a candidate to be awarded Texas’s electoral votes, not those of other states.
Furthermore, the “diminished weight” theory of equal protection (i.e., that counting illegal votes disenfranchises lawful voters) has repeatedly been rejected when posited by citizens within the state where the unlawful voting takes place; the theory is even weaker across state lines. As the Third Circuit has emphasized, “Bush v. Gore does not federalize every jot and tittle of state election law.”

Texas’s substantive due-process claim may be even more fatuous. To repeat, even the citizens of a state where election-law violations allegedly occurred do not have a general, judicially enforceable right to force election officials to comply with state law. They must show a concrete, particularized, non-speculative injury. Even less do states have a right to make other states comply with the latter’s own laws. Texas has no standing to sue, say, Michigan over the failure of Michigan officials to comply with Michigan law, to the alleged detriment of Michigan’s citizens.

Finally, in its proposed lawsuit, Texas does exactly what the Third Circuit, in Trump for President v. Secretary, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, recently said a litigant may not do. It waited until the eleventh hour to file (beyond that, actually — the complaint was not submitted until after midnight on the federal safe-harbor day). It pleads conclusory allegations (including some, such as mentions of Dominion software, that are plainly included for atmospheric effect, unconnected to any claim for relief). It posits claims that have already been litigated and lost by parties that, unlike Texas, had some cognizable interests. And it seeks unprecedented, drastic relief — the undoing of other states’ elections and disenfranchisement of their citizens; the invocation of the Court’s purported “remedial authority” to order a new “special” election in those states; the vacating of the certification of electors by those states, and the barring of those states from voting in the Electoral College — without citing any case in which the courts have found such breathtaking authority to exist, much less exercised it.

Already under indictment for securities fraud, Attorney General Paxton is currently caught up in yet another corruption investigation — one that has roiled his office. Now, he has filed a lawsuit so frivolous and so blatantly political that the top appellate lawyers in his office evidently declined to endorse it. To be clear, though, this does not mean questions about election-law improprieties are frivolous.

Federal law provides a procedure under which, on January 6, Congress will convene to count the electoral votes. If Texas’s elected representatives, or those of any other state, object to the counting any state’s electoral votes, Congress will hear, debate, and vote on those objections at that point — mindful of what such disputes may portend for comity between the states. There is, however, no way the Supreme Court is going to entertain Texas’s lawsuit. There is also no way, I suspect, that Paxton doesn’t know that.

Title: GA and Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 10, 2020, 07:45:53 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/georgia-years-long-court-battle-reveals-dominions-security-and-audit-flaws-weak-testing_3611494.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-12-10

Title: Re: Larry Lib, Lawrence Tribe
Post by: DougMacG on December 10, 2020, 08:48:56 AM

"HuffPost
Harvard Law Professor Hits Donald Trump With The Cold Truth: ‘You Are A Loser’ "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, Tribe is both a partisan hack and the nation's leading, liberal, constitutional scholar, an oxymoron on steroids.

What bothers me is not that this one individual is leftist or creepy, but that a place like Harvard attaches their once esteemed brand name to that.

Nobel gave its award to Obama for beginning the apologize for America tour and to Yassir Arafat, the Godfather of modern terror.  Pulitzer gave its award to Wash Post and NYT for Russia conspiracy coverage that was 100% false.  NBC, ABC, CBS put their journalism stamp on practicing Democrat operatives.  Harvard put its brand on the likes of Lawrence Tribe.  When are these institutions no longer considered prestigious or even mainstream and what are the replacement brand names that should carry that level of respect?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 10, 2020, 09:42:42 AM

"Nobel gave its award to Obama for beginning the apologize for America tour and to Yassir Arafat, the Godfather of modern terror.  Pulitzer gave its award to Wash Post and NYT for Russia conspiracy coverage that was 100% false.  NBC, ABC, CBS put their journalism stamp on practicing Democrat operatives.  Harvard put its brand on the likes of Lawrence Tribe.  When are these institutions no longer considered prestigious or even mainstream and what are the replacement brand names that should carry that level of respect?"

lets not forget Academy Awards and of course the Emmy joke of an award to
Mario's kid .

if any one should get an Emmy for daytime television DJT has captivated and entertained the world like no one in decades .

But of course the liberals who run those would not dream of it.
I could go on but I will keep to myself .

Title: Maybe?
Post by: G M on December 11, 2020, 10:22:16 AM

(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/election%2020201211%2002.jpg)

No.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 12, 2020, 05:42:55 AM

The Texas suit, later joined by other states, against Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Georgia, was a nice try, but it was always a long shot. Of course SCOTUS would be reluctant to grab so much power by ordering state legislatures to seat the right electors. Why? Because the power is already in the hands of the legislatures to do this.
... - AmericanThinker

Title: The 2005 Carter-Baker Report could have averted what we have now
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 12, 2020, 08:30:30 AM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2020/11/20/7-ways-the-2005-carter-baker-report-could-have-averted-problems-with-2020-election/?utm_source=TDS_Email&fbclid=IwAR3mNvQpeBeUOoExU1VSM-Ure-RkCITgQxbq7u7GDshfQ3gBM3nbfhj_th4

7 Ways the 2005 Carter-Baker Report Could Have Averted Problems With 2020 Election
Fred Lucas / @FredLucasWH / November 20, 2020 / 171 Comments

On Sept. 19, 2005, former President Jimmy Carter (left) returned to the White House to provide President George W. Bush a copy of the report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform. Carter co-chaired the commission with former Secretary of State James Baker. (Photo: Brendan Smialowski/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images)

They called on states to increase voter ID requirements; to be leery of mail-in voting; to halt ballot harvesting; to maintain voter lists, in part to ensure dead people are promptly removed from them; to allow election observers to monitor ballot counting; and to make sure voting machines are working properly.

They also wanted the media to refrain from calling elections too early and from touting exit polls.

All of this may sound eerily similar to the issues in the prolonged presidential election battle of 2020. But these were among the 87 recommendations from the 2005 report of the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, known informally as the Carter-Baker Commission.

The bipartisan commission’s co-chairmen were former Democratic President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James Baker, a Republican who served in the George H.W. Bush administration.

The left is actively working to undermine the integrity of our elections. Read the plan to stop them now. Learn more now >>

The commission was created to address voting and election integrity issues raised by the tumultuous 36-day postelection battle of 2000, which was settled by the U.S. Supreme Court decision that resulted in awarding Florida’s 25 electoral votes and the presidency to Republican George W. Bush over Democrat Al Gore.

Had Congress and state governments adopted many of the panel’s recommendations, the 2020 postelection mess between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden might have been avoided, said Carter-Baker Commission member Kay C. James, now the president of The Heritage Foundation.

“So many of the problems we’re now hearing about in the aftermath of the 2020 election could have been avoided had states heeded the advice of the Commission on Federal Election Reform,” she said. 

James continued:

Simple protections against fraud, like voter ID and updated voter registration lists, make perfect sense if we truly believe that every vote must count. Election officials should take another look at the commission’s recommendations and make sure they’re doing everything possible to protect the integrity of our elections.

Several state legislatures adopted aspects of the recommendations, particularly voter ID proposals. However, Congress reportedly was unenthusiastic about the report.

Major media outlets have called the race for Biden, but election litigation is still playing out in courts, and votes are still being counted.

However, 70% of Republicans do not believe the 2020 election was free and fair, according to a Politico/Morning Consult poll. Before the election, just 35% of Republicans didn’t believe the election would be free and fair. The shift was different among Democrats, where 95% believed the election was free and fair afterward, compared with 52 who said the same before the election.

Here’s a look at the 2005 panel’s recommendations relevant to this year’s elections.

1) Voter IDs
With the vast expansion of mail-in voting this year, voter ID requirements were less likely.

Today, states have a patchwork of voter ID laws, with 36 states either requiring or requesting voters to present identification at the polls, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The conference says only six states have “strict” photo ID requirements—Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Wisconsin.

The Carter-Baker Commission called for voter ID standards nationwide in its 2005 report.

“To ensure that persons presenting themselves at the polling place are the ones on the registration list, the Commission recommends that states require voters to use the REAL ID card, which was mandated in a law signed by the President in May 2005,” the Carter-Baker Commission report said.

“The card includes a person’s full legal name, date of birth, a signature (captured as a digital image), a photograph, and the person’s Social Security number. This card should be modestly adapted for voting purposes to indicate on the front or back whether the individual is a U.S. citizen. States should provide an [Election Assistance Commission]-template ID with a photo to non-drivers free of charge.”

Carter, when speaking months after the release of the report, said other countries not known for being examples of democracy had fairer elections than the United States, and stressed the need for photo IDs.

“It’s disgraceful and embarrassing,” the former president said in May 2006. On IDs, Carter said, “Americans have to remember you have to have the equivalent to what we’re requiring to cast a ballot to cash a check or board a plane.”

2) Mail-In and Absentee Voting Risks
In a brief filed supporting the Trump campaign’s Pennsylvania litigation over mail-in ballots, a group of Republican state attorneys general reference the Cater-Baker Commission report among other items regarding mail-in voting and ballot harvesting.

The 2020 election trends seemed to shift dramatically as mailed-in votes were counted. Further, many questions have emerged about the point of origin for ballots.

Specifically, the report called on states to prohibit third parties or political operatives from collecting ballots—a practice commonly known as “ballot harvesting.”

The report stated: “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.”

“State and local jurisdictions should prohibit a person from handling absentee ballots other than the voter, an acknowledged family member, the U.S. Postal Service, or other legitimate shipper, or election officials,” the 2005 commission report said. “The practice in some states of allowing candidates or party workers to pick up and deliver absentee ballots should be eliminated.”

However, this year, as mail-in voting veered into becoming a partisan issue, the Carter Center issued a statement promoting support for mail-in voting, but maintaining safeguards against ballot harvesting.

The Carter Center, founded by the former president and first lady Rosalynn Carter, is affiliated with Emory University and promotes peace and democracy efforts globally and domestically.

A Carter Center press release in May said the commission report “noted among its many findings and recommendations that because it takes place outside the regulated environment of local polling locations, voting by mail creates increased logistical challenges and the potential for vote fraud, especially if safeguards are lacking or when candidates or political party activists are allowed to handle mail-in or absentee ballots.”

“However, the Carter-Baker Commission found that where safeguards for ballot integrity are in place—for example in Oregon, where the entire state has voted by mail since 1998—there was little evidence of voter fraud,” the Carter Center statement continued.

The commission’s main recommendations on vote-by-mail and absentee voting were to increase research on vote-by-mail (and early voting) and to eliminate the practice of allowing candidates or party workers to pick up and deliver absentee ballots. 

Fortunately, since 2005, many states have gained substantial experience in vote-by-mail and have shown how key concerns can be effectively addressed through appropriate planning, resources, training, and messaging.

Carter himself is quoted in the press release saying, “I urge political leaders across the country to take immediate steps to expand vote-by-mail and other measures that can help protect the core of American democracy—the right of our citizens to vote.”

3) Avoiding Duplicate Registration Across State Lines
In Nevada, the Trump campaign asserts there were potentially thousands of out-of-state votes cast in one of the most closely contested states.

The Carter-Baker Commission report called for states to make it easier to track registered voters who move from one state to another to reduce duplication of registrations.

The report states, “Invalid voter files, which contain ineligible, duplicate, fictional, or deceased voters, are an invitation to fraud.” 

“In order to assure that lists take account of citizens moving from one state to another, voter databases should be made interoperable between states,” the Carter-Baker report stated. “This would serve to eliminate duplicate registrations, which are a source of potential fraud.”

The report calls for states to maintain and update their voter registration lists.

“When an eligible voter moves from one state to another, the state to which the voter is moving should be required to notify the state which the voter is leaving to eliminate that voter from its registration list,” the report said, adding:

All states should have procedures for maintaining accurate lists, such as electronic matching of death records, driver’s licenses, local tax rolls, and felon records.

Federal and state courts should provide state election offices with the lists of individuals who declare they are non-citizens when they are summoned for jury duty.

4) Election Observers for Integrity
In Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Nevada, Republicans have complained that qualified election observers have been prohibited from watching the counting.

The Carter-Baker Commission report stressed the need for election observers to maintain the integrity of the ballots.

“All legitimate domestic and international election observers should be granted unrestricted access to the election process, provided that they accept election rules, do not interfere with the electoral process, and respect the secrecy of the ballot,” the 2005 report said.

Such observers should apply for accreditation, which should allow them to visit any polling station in any state and to view all parts of the election process, including the testing of voting equipment, the processing of absentee ballots, and the vote count.

States that limit election observation only to representatives of candidates and political parties should amend their election laws to explicitly permit accreditation of independent and international election observers.

5) Reliable Voting Machines
Voting machines have also been a significant issue in 2020, particularly in Michigan, as one county there flipped from Biden to Trump after a hand recount showed the machine count to be inaccurate.

The Carter-Baker Commission suggested that machines print out paper receipts for voters to verify their vote was accurately counted.

“States should adopt unambiguous procedures to reconcile any disparity between the electronic ballot tally and the paper ballot tally,” the 2005 report says. “The Commission strongly recommends that states determine well in advance of elections which will be the ballot of record.”

6) Media Calling Elections
On election night, Fox News Channel was the first to call the state of Arizona for Biden, prompting outrage in the Trump camp. Moreover, major media outlets have projected Biden to have won the election, even as vote counting and litigation continue.

The 2005 commission report also addressed problems with the media, suggesting news outlets voluntarily offer candidates free airtime and also show restraint in calling a state for one candidate or the other. The First Amendment would prevent any such rule from being mandatory.

“News organizations should voluntarily refrain from projecting any presidential election results in any state until all of the polls have closed in the 48 contiguous states,” the report states. “News organizations should voluntarily agree to delay the release of any exit-poll data until the election has been decided.”

7) Prosecuting Voter Fraud
The Carter-Baker Commission suggested that federal and state prosecutors should more aggressively monitor voter fraud.

“In July of even-numbered years, the U.S. Department of Justice should issue a public report on its investigations of election fraud,” the report says.

This report should specify the numbers of allegations made, matters investigated, cases prosecuted, and individuals convicted for various crimes. Each state’s attorney general and each local prosecutor should issue a similar report. … The U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Public Integrity should increase its staff to investigate and prosecute election-related fraud.

Title: Why some states are ripe for electoral fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 12, 2020, 08:46:40 AM

second

https://townhall.com/columnists/jeffdavidson/2020/12/12/why-some-states-are-ripe-for-election-fraud-n2581445

Title: "The 2005 Carter-Baker Report could have averted what we have now"
Post by: ccp on December 12, 2020, 12:11:56 PM

Funny

I don't James Earl Carter  telling us about the fraud  now from a webcam in his basement while on Fox News
 in 2020.

He could be welcome guest on Tucker Ingraham Hannity if he really was honest as he claims.

Title: Correction to China bought Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2020, 02:40:41 AM

https://billlawrenceonline.com/china-bought-dominion/?fbclid=IwAR22W5aC_Kkt-TKdnqUDGicwYDorYp2j_mCpwG8LGklS1pq0K-IyxzdLi2g

Title: Judge to decide fate of Dominion audit…
Post by: ccp on December 13, 2020, 08:17:10 AM

from populist.press:

https://populist.press/judge-to-decide-fate-of-dominion-audit/

thank God! this judge appointed in 2017
if obama or clinton or never trump bush judge this would have NO Chance of seeing light of day as part of the cover up:

http://www.13thcircuitcourt.org/directory.aspx?EID=416

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2020, 08:43:50 AM

13th Circuit?  I didn't realize we had that many!

Title: How to answer?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2020, 09:18:13 AM

Honorable Dem asks:  The Reps lost every (over 50?) lawsuit.  So how can you say there was vote fraud and that Trump won?

How to answer concisely?

Title: Re: How to answer?
Post by: G M on December 13, 2020, 10:15:55 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2020, 09:18:13 AM

Honorable Dem asks:  The Reps lost every (over 50?) lawsuit.  So how can you say there was vote fraud and that Trump won?

How to answer concisely?

Has there been an actual trial on the merits where they have lost? Or just endless bullshit technicalities so the evidence is never seen by a jury?

Title: Re: How to answer?
Post by: G M on December 13, 2020, 10:21:45 AM

Quote from: G M on December 13, 2020, 10:15:55 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2020, 09:18:13 AM

Honorable Dem asks:  The Reps lost every (over 50?) lawsuit.  So how can you say there was vote fraud and that Trump won?

How to answer concisely?

Has there been an actual trial on the merits where they have lost? Or just endless bullshit technicalities so the evidence is never seen by a jury?

https://twitter.com/TomFitton/status/1337966276585664513

Title: Vote count 99% Biden, 3 hours in 4 cities, do you believe in miracles?
Post by: DougMacG on December 13, 2020, 11:53:25 AM

How do they answer the one in a quadrillion question - where the vote count in 4 cities flipped the entire election in 3 hours in demographics where Trump otherwise increased his vote share everywhere else and even in these cities during all other hours of vote counting?

As Al Michaels asked, "Do you believe in miracles?"

I don't,  not during overnight, unobserved vote counting in Democrat run cities that come up with enough votes to flip the nation.

Where is the broken water main?

Did this follow or violate the laws established by the state legislatures?

I think it's the courts who believe they lack standing. Apparently this must be settled by the state legislatures. 

Can you be honorable and be comfortable with winning by cheating?

The constitution provides a second method to select the President when the first path fails. Take it.

Title: Re: Vote count 99% Biden, 3 hours in 4 cities, do you believe in miracles?
Post by: G M on December 13, 2020, 12:14:23 PM

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/341/216/original/7e85e5d84d646a5a.png)

Quote from: DougMacG on December 13, 2020, 11:53:25 AM

How do they answer the one in a quadrillion question - where the vote count in 4 cities flipped the entire election in 3 hours in demographics where Trump otherwise increased his vote share everywhere else and even in these cities during all other hours of vote counting?

As Al Michaels asked, "Do you believe in miracles?"

I don't,  not during overnight, unobserved vote counting in Democrat run cities that come up with enough votes to flip the nation.

Where is the broken water main?

Did this follow or violate the laws established by the state legislatures?

I think it's the courts who believe they lack standing. Apparently this must be settled by the state legislatures. 

Can you be honorable and be comfortable with winning by cheating?

The constitution provides a second method to select the President when the first path fails. Take it.

Title: Re: Vote count 99% Biden, 3 hours in 4 cities, do you believe in miracles?
Post by: G M on December 13, 2020, 12:16:27 PM

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/341/201/original/182262201f7cb315.png)

Quote from: G M on December 13, 2020, 12:14:23 PM

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/341/216/original/7e85e5d84d646a5a.png)

Quote from: DougMacG on December 13, 2020, 11:53:25 AM

How do they answer the one in a quadrillion question - where the vote count in 4 cities flipped the entire election in 3 hours in demographics where Trump otherwise increased his vote share everywhere else and even in these cities during all other hours of vote counting?

As Al Michaels asked, "Do you believe in miracles?"

I don't,  not during overnight, unobserved vote counting in Democrat run cities that come up with enough votes to flip the nation.

Where is the broken water main?

Did this follow or violate the laws established by the state legislatures?

I think it's the courts who believe they lack standing. Apparently this must be settled by the state legislatures. 

Can you be honorable and be comfortable with winning by cheating?

The constitution provides a second method to select the President when the first path fails. Take it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2020, 04:53:05 PM

Please give the URLs when posting memes so I can post them elsewhere.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 13, 2020, 05:23:33 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2020, 04:53:05 PM

Please give the URLs when posting memes so I can post them elsewhere.

https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/341/201/original/182262201f7cb315.png


https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/341/216/original/7e85e5d84d646a5a.png

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 14, 2020, 03:16:53 AM

TY

Title: When the Dem election fraud is too big to fail
Post by: G M on December 14, 2020, 07:09:20 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2020/12/13/courts-to-voters-democrat-election-fraud-is-too-big-to-fail/

Courts to Voters: Democrat Election Fraud Is ‘Too Big to Fail’
We will not have another fair election in our country. There is no “next time.”
By Karin McQuillan

December 13, 2020
The courts have spoken, one after another. Some 74 million Americans have been denied our day in court.  The Democrats’ crime of stealing a presidential election is too big to fail.

Our play-it-safe judges don’t want to venture into these enormous seas, full of sharks, without precedent. They want to say in the safe spaces of the familiar. Stealing an election for city council is familiar enough to be overturned by law. Stealing a presidential election by wholesale fraud is above the law.

One might think that somehow our laws are written too narrowly to catch the whale of Democrat fraud in the election, but for one thing: the declarations from the bench that it is unthinkable to “upend an election.” Our judges tell us that ruling fraudulent ballots invalid would “disenfranchise” millions of voters. These are political statements. They are pusillanimous statements. They are not legal statements.

Upending an election has no precedent, we are told. But stealing a presidential election on this scale has no precedent, either.  The courts are saying that if election crimes are so consequential, they require a politically consequential act to be redressed, then no redress is allowed.

That doesn’t even make sense.

We are told there is no redress because the problem is political.

Yes, stealing an election is political. It is also illegal. It is also unconstitutional.

The judges’ angry rebukes of the Republican plaintiffs are bogus by the very terms they use. If our judges are not willing to “disenfranchise” fraudulent and illegal votes, then they are disenfranchising the entire country.

We are not getting the candidate who won the election. But the Supreme Court tells us our state attorneys have no standing to protect our votes.

The evidence will not be heard in court. We cannot see the evidence formally submitted, discovery allowed, or 500 sworn testimonies of wrongdoing examined. Because none of us have the legal right to protest this heinous crime. Because we should have gone to court before the crime was committed, not after. Now is too late.

This is a failure of our justice system on a massive scale.

It is the wrong time or the wrong place or the wrong person to be heard. But the evidence is still there.

When those charged with defense of our laws will not defend them, the fraud will become institutionalized. There will be no remedy after the fact. Democrat-controlled states will be safe havens for election rules that bake in the outcome. Chinese corruption and cyberwarfare in our election system will be hardened, not corrected.

We will not have another fair election in our country. There is no “next time.”

Title: Dominion in MI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 14, 2020, 11:22:39 AM

https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20423772-antrim-county-forensics-report?fbclid=IwAR2jFbo7BarE0ly0F_4zXqXKa-NXiRjKLBioJ4AXYeJ_yLzBpeyeOB_0i1A

Title: From a FB opponent:
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 14, 2020, 12:35:56 PM

The most telling aspect of the Wisconsin federal district court’s rejectionof another Trump campaign lawsuit on Saturday is so obvious it is easy to miss. And no, it is not that the rejecting was done by a Trump-appointed judge, Brett H. Ludwig, or that it was done on the merits.

After all that’s been said over the last six weeks, this fleeting passage near the start of the court’s workmanlike, 23-page decision and order should take our breath away (my highlighting):

With the Electoral College meeting just days away, the Court declined to address the issues in piecemeal fashion and instead provided plaintiff with an expedited hearing on the merits of his claims. On the morning of the hearing, the parties reached agreement on a stipulated set of facts and then presented arguments to the Court.

A “stipulated set of facts,” in this context, is an agreement between the lawyers for the adversary parties about what testimony witnesses would give, and/or what facts would be established, if the parties went through the process of calling witnesses and offering tangible evidence at a hearing or trial.

In a real controversy, in which one or both of the parties are making hotly disputed factual claims, there are few if any stipulations. For example, a defendant who vehemently denies that he committed stock fraud may be willing to stipulate that 20,000 shares of XYZ Corp’s common stock were sold on December 14; but other than that, the defendant will demand that the adversary call the fact witnesses who claim he defrauded them so he can cross-examine. He will call his own witnesses to show what really happened, and they will be aggressively questioned, too.

Publicly, the Trump campaign has been claiming there was extensive vote fraud and law-breaking.

Specifically with respect to Wisconsin, President Trump tweeted on November 28: “The Wisconsin recount is not about finding mistakes in the count, it is about finding people who have voted illegally . . . We have found many illegal votes. Stay tuned!” The campaign further maintained that the recount it demanded would “show somewhere around 100,000 illegal ballots in the two counties that Biden carried” (i.e., Milwaukee and Dane).

This is in addition to the innumerable times the president and his surrogates have asserted that they were being systematically prevented from proving massive fraud and illegality. The courts and state officials, we’ve been told, have invoked legal technicalities, such as the supposed lack of standing to sue, in order to stop the campaign from calling witnesses and introducing voluminous documentary evidence.
GOP Senator Lisa Murkowski Tells Trump to Start Transition

So what happened in Wisconsin?

Judge Ludwig denied the state’s claims that the campaign lacked standing. Instead, he gave the campaign the hearing they asked for — the opportunity to call witnesses and submit damning exhibits. Yet, when it got down to brass tacks, the morning of the hearing, it turned out there was no actual disagreement between the Trump team and Wisconsin officials about the pertinent facts of the case. The president’s counsel basically said: Never mind, we don’t need to present all our proof . . . we’ll just stipulate to all the relevant facts and argue legal principles.

In the end, after all the heated rhetoric, what did they tell the court the case was really about? Just three differences over the manner in which the election was administered — to all of which, as Ludwig pointed out, the campaign could have objected before the election if these matters had actually been of great moment.

There was no there there. Despite telling the country for weeks that this was the most rigged election in history, the campaign didn’t think it was worth calling a single witness. Despite having the opportunity of a hearing before a Trump appointee who was willing to give the campaign ample opportunity to prove its case, the campaign said, “Never mind.”

The legal arguments were not much more weighty than the vacant factual presentation.

The Trump team started out as audaciously on claimed constitutional violations as it had been on public allegations of fraud. It claimed Wisconsin officials had run roughshod over the Constitution’s Electors Clause, Due Process Clause, Equal Protection Clause, and First Amendment — the array of allegations they’ve made in other battleground states as well. When it became clear, however, that the court was willing to entertain the president’s case but would scrutinize it closely, the Trump team quickly dropped the First Amendment and Due Process claims. In addition, as Ludwig recounts, the president’s counsel “offer[ed] no clue of a coherent Equal Protection theory,” and “offered neither evidence nor argument to support such a claim.”

So the challenge boiled down to this: Wisconsin had allegedly flouted the Electors Clause, which empowers states legislatures to prescribe the manner of conducting elections, by allowing bureaucrats to change election law under the guise of applying it. The state was said to have done this in three ways. First, it allowed election boards to correct errors and omissions in regard to the addresses provided by witnesses vouching for absentee ballots. Second, as the pandemic tightened its grip, election officials issued guidance informing voters in the elderly and “at-risk” health categories — not all voters — that they might qualify for absentee voting under the state’s “indefinite confinement” exemption. Third, they authorized drop boxes for the submission of ballots.

Ludwig rejected these claims on the merits. As a general matter, he explained that the Constitution gives each state legislature power to prescribe the manner of conducting an election; he concluded that the Trump team was confounding this with the means by which this prescribed manner is carried out.

In Wisconsin (as across the country), the manner of conducting the election is by popular vote, which was done. The means of conducting the popular election has some variations from county to county, but that inevitability has never been of constitutional significance. Even if it were, Wisconsin’s election bureaucracy was created by the state legislature precisely to administer elections and provide procedural guidance for conducting them. Ergo, the fact that the election commission may go beyond the letter of statutes does not mean it is violating state law; it is carrying out the mission state law created it to accomplish:

complementing (not contradicting) baseline statutory requirements with administrative procedures.
As for the three specific complaints:

• Ludwig noted that the practice of allowing election officials to use available information to correct faulty witness-address information began in 2016. That was when Trump won the state by close to the 20,000-vote margin he lost it by this time; and back then, just as this time around, he made no objection to address-correction. The court found the guidance, which apparently affected “at least some absentee ballots,” to be consistent with state law, which disqualifies ballots if the entire address is missing, but does not prohibit correcting flawed addresses.

• The application of the “indefinite confinement” exemption, which was used by 240,000 of the 3.3 million voters, was in harmony with both state law permitting the election commission to issue guidance and with a ruling by Wisconsin’s state supreme court.

• In employing 500 drop boxes, the commission relied on guidance from the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of the Trump administration’s Department of Homeland Security.

In connection with each of these claims, Ludwig observed that the doctrine of laches (sitting on one’s rights too long) could have been applied because the campaign easily could have raised and litigated them pre-election. Nevertheless, the court found there was no need to resort to laches because the Trump complaints, at most, involved “disputed issues of statutory construction” that did not involve “any significant departure from the legislative scheme” for conducting elections.

The lack of a significant claim was especially noteworthy because the campaign’s claims for relief were, Ludwig said, “extraordinary” (emphasis in original). The Trump team was asking the court to declare that 50,000 ballots were “likely” tainted (a comedown from the 100,000 counsel touted in public statements). More eye-poppingly, the campaign was asking the court to invalidate the popular vote (i.e., disenfranchise 3.3 million voters) and remand the case to the state legislature (GOP-controlled) to appoint electors (i.e., to seat the Trump rather than Biden slate to cast the state’s 10 electoral votes) — even though state officials had already certified Biden’s victory in the manner prescribed by state law.

As has been the case since Election Day, the mismatch between the improprieties alleged and the remedy sought was vast, wholly apart from the court’s rejection of the allegations.

Nor can it be ignored that this is not the first time the campaign ducked an opportunity to prove its claims of a stolen election in court. In Pennsylvania, just days before the date a federal judge had set aside for a hearing on the Trump campaign’s complaint, the campaign dropped its fraud chargesand agreed that no hearing would be necessary. In Michigan, the campaign dropped its lawsuit after a federal judge threatened to dismiss it for failure to prosecute — nearly a week after filing the case with great fanfare, the campaign had still not served its complaint on the secretary of state.

It has become an article of faith among ardent Trump followers that the election was stolen. The president continues to insist that this is the case, and these flames were further fanned by 19 Republican-controlled state governments, along with 126 Republican members of Congress, who joined the meritless Texas lawsuit, tossed out by the Supreme Court on Friday. The rationalization behind that stunt was that the president has been denied his day in court. But every time a court offers him an opportunity to establish by proof what he is promoting by Twitter, Team Trump folds. Why is that?

Title: Re: From a FB opponent:
Post by: DougMacG on December 14, 2020, 01:11:46 PM

"to all of which, as Ludwig pointed out, the campaign could have objected before the election if these matters had actually been of great moment."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It wasn't standing, it was laches, meaning timeliness, and a judge predisposed to not apply the remedy, reverse the outcome. 

Author implies the Biden side doesn't deny allegations including massive vote fraud.  Both sides stipulated the facts?

Sounds more like gloating than legal analysis.  No judge wants to touch this; that's what they've come up with.  Looks like that's good enough.

Are you better off winning by theft or losing by theft?  The next two to four years may answer that.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 14, 2020, 01:30:51 PM

Tangent:

It is spelled "laches".

And I remember working a Section 7 Clayton Act (pertaining to mergers) case when I worked a summer ant the Anti-Trust Division of the FTC where laches was asserted against the FTC when it tried undoing a merger that had occurred DECADES earlier.

Working from memory, said the court "Laches does not run against the government when it asserts the people's rights" , , , or something like that.

None of the recent references to laches in court decisions that I have seen seem to take this into account.

Turning to the subject at hand, I am of the thought that my FB opponent makes some very telling points.

Title: Why aren't they all being examined?
Post by: G M on December 14, 2020, 02:23:51 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-bombshell-mi-judge-grants-attorney-matt-deperno-permission-release-results-forensic-examination-16-dominion-voting-machines-antrim-co-video/

Title: Coomer
Post by: G M on December 14, 2020, 02:50:25 PM

https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/375/602/original/c4c13e99644dce23.jpg

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/060/375/602/original/c4c13e99644dce23.jpg)


https://nationalfile.com/dominion-eric-coomer-allegedly-bragged-he-made-fking-sure-that-trumps-not-gonna-win/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 14, 2020, 02:57:46 PM

I appreciate the correction, don't like to telegraph my ignorance.

It seems that it was the legislatures that had to fix this, or the legislatures that had to bring the action to court.  If you want the court to declare that a massive conspiracy crime took place, your evidence should be the arrest and conviction records of the people who did it.  That is not possible in a one month time frame - with no one of legal authority investigating it.

Separate from judicial rulings and the impending inauguration, the questions remain, did Biden get more legal votes in these swing states?  Will we ever know what happened? Will it always be partisan facts, one side believes this, the other side believes the opposite?  If it was stolen, will those responsible face justice?  Will system failures be addressed to keep it from happening again? 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 14, 2020, 03:13:01 PM

There are obviously no consequences for vote/election fraud. After the mass amnesties for illegal aliens and then chain migration, the left won't need to cheat in future elections.

Quote from: DougMacG on December 14, 2020, 02:57:46 PM

I appreciate the correction, don't like to telegraph my ignorance.

It seems that it was the legislatures that had to fix this, or the legislatures that had to bring the action to court.  If you want the court to declare that a massive conspiracy crime took place, your evidence should be the arrest and conviction records of the people who did it.  That is not possible in a one month time frame - with no one of legal authority investigating it.

Separate from judicial rulings and the impending inauguration, the questions remain, did Biden get more legal votes in these swing states?  Will we ever know what happened? Will it always be partisan facts, one side believes this, the other side believes the opposite?  If it was stolen, will those responsible face justice?  Will system failures be addressed to keep it from happening again?

Title: repubs let us down - again
Post by: ccp on December 14, 2020, 05:18:57 PM

we on this board saw this coming

we read how the laws were being changed in many states
and how it was always in ways favorable to Dems

we watched while we read reports of how Biden team hired hundreds of lawyers to go each state
along with probably thousands of other on standby to run to local courthouses STAT

we watched as we read reports the dems were unleashing unprecedented ballot collections
as some reports of people who admit scamming the system
going door to door and from  nursing home to nursing home
and we see EVERY Goddamn election in the urban minority areas they running around bringing in ballots by the 10s of thousands at the end of elections to overcome deficits

mailing out millions of ballots

reports of phony ballots from overseas

reports of the dominion machines being used in countries like Venezuela
 and being ripe for fraud and Texas refusing to use them for obvious conflicts of interests and that they could be rigged and hacked

I think we all sat here and watched it being set up for the election to be stolen

the media played their part in the giant scam and set it up by claiming Joe Gaffe was so far ahead, Trump  would without question be a sore loser and selfish and called this a "threat to democracy" etc.
claim fraud and never leave the White House

***instead of Republicans fighting back
we see Republican legislatures taking their breaks sitting on their God damn asses and doing nothing to stop the election officials, and even agreed with them to go ahead change all these rules

AGAIN we were fucked by our own people doing jack -
we all did our part and went out like we were supposed to and voted !

Trump was out there in advance saying the obvious

and the rest of the  Repubs
are too stupid

or worse, getting moneys from the billionaires and China

We need to continue to prove this election was stolen

but once Biden gets in there everything will be wiped

and at best we will wind up with Jeb and Whitman and Christie all of whom will not go the hell away

I am steaming now
same Republican losers every time

then I go back to news
and ABC I read this:

no outrage the election was stolen just outrage Trump is the only one who fights back - from a Republican!:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/michigan-congressman-quitting-gop-over-223900007.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 15, 2020, 04:13:49 AM

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2020/12/mi-judge-approves-release-of-audit-showing-68-error-rates-in-countys-dominion-voting-software/?utm_campaign=alt&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=amn&fbclid=IwAR2r4K6ktmMAbo4_rt_8zRYdmVvFgiJxrjphLgjUVFtYfhdSh-W2uAl2X-o

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 15, 2020, 08:12:15 AM

https://dailycaller.com/2020/12/14/michigan-house-strips-lawmaker-committee-assignments-violent-disruption/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=ju5t9fEFFAKNKNfiylvfCUECFsu7TjGzD2PJ4v1i

Title: Re: repubs let us down - again
Post by: DougMacG on December 15, 2020, 11:06:02 AM

ccp, I appreciate the anger and frustration expressed in this post.

That a couple of lawyers, Sydney Powell in particular and Rudy Giuliani, said this happened is not evidence to overturn an election result.  But it is indicator to us of where the facts will land if this ever is fully investigated and discovered.

Yesterday, seemed to be the deadline, but I would add the next two deadlines of Jan 5 and noon Jan 20.  With each passing deadline the level of proof must be even more overwhelming, but that has been true from the start.

Removal via impeachment only happens when the President's own party turns on him and even then it only turns power over to Kamala or to Nancy, a remedy not fitting of the crime.

Still, getting to the bottom of this ASAP is crucial to the survival of the Republic.  I will settle for treason level charges for all involved in any massive effort, whenever the evidence is conclusive, even if the illegitimate puppet remains in office for 4 years.

It won't be investigated unless Trump and assigns put that in motion now.

Quote from: ccp on December 14, 2020, 05:18:57 PM

we on this board saw this coming

we read how the laws were being changed in many states
and how it was always in ways favorable to Dems

we watched while we read reports of how Biden team hired hundreds of lawyers to go each state
along with probably thousands of other on standby to run to local courthouses STAT

we watched as we read reports the dems were unleashing unprecedented ballot collections
as some reports of people who admit scamming the system
going door to door and from  nursing home to nursing home
and we see EVERY Goddamn election in the urban minority areas they running around bringing in ballots by the 10s of thousands at the end of elections to overcome deficits

mailing out millions of ballots

reports of phony ballots from overseas

reports of the dominion machines being used in countries like Venezuela
 and being ripe for fraud and Texas refusing to use them for obvious conflicts of interests and that they could be rigged and hacked

I think we all sat here and watched it being set up for the election to be stolen

the media played their part in the giant scam and set it up by claiming Joe Gaffe was so far ahead, Trump  would without question be a sore loser and selfish and called this a "threat to democracy" etc.
claim fraud and never leave the White House

***instead of Republicans fighting back
we see Republican legislatures taking their breaks sitting on their God damn asses and doing nothing to stop the election officials, and even agreed with them to go ahead change all these rules

AGAIN we were fucked by our own people doing jack -
we all did our part and went out like we were supposed to and voted !

Trump was out there in advance saying the obvious

and the rest of the  Repubs
are too stupid

or worse, getting moneys from the billionaires and China

We need to continue to prove this election was stolen

but once Biden gets in there everything will be wiped

and at best we will wind up with Jeb and Whitman and Christie all of whom will not go the hell away

I am steaming now
same Republican losers every time

then I go back to news
and ABC I read this:

no outrage the election was stolen just outrage Trump is the only one who fights back - from a Republican!:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/michigan-congressman-quitting-gop-over-223900007.html

Title: Interesting priorities in MI.
Post by: G M on December 15, 2020, 12:13:22 PM

https://twitter.com/MillerStream/status/1338595061399842822

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 15, 2020, 01:43:43 PM

".But it is indicator to us of where the facts will land if this ever is fully investigated and discovered."

That is the problem

this will never be investigated

Repubs are unwilling .  what do they do - count ballots again and then say case closed -  the ballots can't be matched to anything
  signatures tor identifications to know what they are even counting
  they could have phony ballots phony voters phony swapped ballots etc
  it is a joke

this after they sat on their asses in the legislatures while partisan election board people and AGs and judges ran around them .
 
those machines are probably already wiped

we had poll watchers but we needed them 24/7

to watch them smuggle in phony ballots in the middle of the night .....

how fucking sickening

and I had to watch that idiot Romney boasting about bipartisanship with that dogface on CNN today

what a God darn fool....

he must think we are stupid enough to nominate him AGAIN

Title: MI legislature subpoena of election hard drives
Post by: DougMacG on December 15, 2020, 03:58:10 PM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/michigan-legislature-committees-subpoena-election-hard-drives-laptops?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Ask nicely for evidence? How about unannounced SWAT teams at dawn with guns drawn like they do with innocent Trump associates.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 15, 2020, 04:22:12 PM

Oh, it never works that way, Doug.

That's like asking the FBI to investigate Antifa!

Quote from: DougMacG on December 15, 2020, 03:58:10 PM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/michigan-legislature-committees-subpoena-election-hard-drives-laptops?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Ask nicely for evidence? How about unannounced SWAT teams at dawn with guns drawn like they do with innocent Trump associates.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 15, 2020, 04:32:55 PM

"Ask nicely for evidence? How about unannounced SWAT teams at dawn with guns drawn like they do with innocent Trump associates."

right

the militant Dems will cooperate
like Ghrislaine is cooperating with the investigators on Epstein

we do need early am raids with newsmax tipped off just prior so they can have the cameras rolling
to shove it in everyones faces on the evening news

the hard drives emails and every thing is already wiped

come on man , DON'T look at the date !

' suckers '

Title: WI Supreme Court decision
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 16, 2020, 06:03:11 AM

Looking for the actual decision of the WI Supreme Court.  I'm hearing the dissents are some real humdingers.

Title: dominion machines subpoena in Ar and more in Michigan
Post by: ccp on December 16, 2020, 07:04:26 AM

of course announcing all this is like calling the mob boss and tipping off ahead of time

that said this is great news
watch  - everything wiped and then Olobama will mock us for being election fraud nuts like he does with birther crap:

this could be good - too late to help DJT but what if we can "prove " election really was stolen ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSpX9PtxwH0

Title: Not the squeaky clean State of Nevada!
Post by: G M on December 16, 2020, 08:27:24 AM

https://thenationalpulse.com/politics/nevada-dmv-subpoena/

Shocking!

Title: neveda thousands of unregistered voters voted
Post by: ccp on December 16, 2020, 09:00:49 AM

unfortunately there is no way to prove these were all for Biden
since of course the ballots have no names on them
and can no longer be matched to the envelopes

(by design)

Title: Levin on the FSCOTUS
Post by: G M on December 16, 2020, 12:42:22 PM

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1339239763723898881.html

1. This election has exposed the complete collapse of the judiciary as a check on unconstitutional acts by state officials eviscerating legislative authority under our federal constitution (Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 2).
2. It has also exposed the Supreme Court as a highly political, result-oriented, LIBERAL body that grants standing when it wants to rule on a case (Mass v. EPA) and denies standing when it wants to duck a case (Texas v. PA, et al).
3. That Court intervenes relentlessly in state election processes, almost exclusively in support of leftwing activists and Democrat organizations that seek to weaken election security and fraud prevent.
4. The Court and inferior federal and state courts have earned the contempt of tens of millions of Americans.  While the media, Democrats, NeverTrumpers, and others, have celebrated the denial of substantive court proceedings to scores of petitioners raising fundamental federal
5. and state constitutional issues, not to mention serious questions of fraud in states including, but not limited to Wisconsin and Georgia, these courts have disgraced themselves and severely damaged the electoral process.
6. In effect, they have served as the Praetorian Guard for the planned, elaborate, and unlawful acts of the Democrat Party, its lawyers, and their state public officeholders throughout battleground states.  Despite the media claiming that 6 of the justices are conservative, and
7. ..Chuck Schumer's propaganda about his desire to pack the Court because it is supposedly too conservative, the FACT is the opposite.
8. When the Court actually upholds the Constitution it is, more often than not, the EXCEPTION to the rule, which for the Court is activism with few limits.

Title: that is it ; lets screw ourselves again
Post by: ccp on December 16, 2020, 02:59:11 PM

what is wrong with Repub legislature ?

are they on the take

fight for Gods sake.

they did jack for the past month
the next election is set up AGAIN.

we need spotters to surround the voting centers 24/7

every van and license plate that pulls up needs to be videoed
we need people to stand inside and get right up close

we need voter ID signature verification and close checks of the ballots before - no after they are separated from the envelopes

probably none of this will happen

ESPCIALLY IN FOLK COUNTY

Title: 2nd post
Post by: ccp on December 16, 2020, 03:58:32 PM

Love ya Maria, but can we please have more then just hearsay and rumor mongering :


https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/boom-maria-bartiromo-intel-source-told-trump-fact-win-election-supreme-court-take-cases-stop-clock-video/

why can't intel source blow the whistle and be whistler blower - I thought whistle blowers are sacrosanct .

can be done anonymously  (when it is a Democrat )

this is certainly more important then some phone call to the Ukraine.

Title: has it always been that private concerns can pay costs of voters
Post by: ccp on December 17, 2020, 10:26:49 AM

zuckerberg provides 250 mill that goes probably almost exclusively to pay for leftist voting

now SPLC is adding drop boxes in Atlanta

This way no one has to sneak in the ballots in middle of night
they just pop in the phony ballots in these chosen select "urban" areas

and this is ok with our elected officials.
who sit on our ass and watch us get robbed again

Title: White House summary of fraud
Post by: ccp on December 18, 2020, 04:57:15 AM

https://populist.press/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20-1.pdf

We still have no clear conclusions of the Dominion voting machines

Title: I have no optimism at all
Post by: ccp on December 18, 2020, 06:58:34 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/us/76k-voters-georgia-runoffs/2020/12/18/id/1002181/
looks like the country is done for

4 yrs of radicalism
ugghhhh!

free college debt forgiveness
health care for free
 bringing in the younger people
reparations

all of us can be bribed
anywhere up from a pack of cigarettes  up 50 K works to bring em in.

Title: We have nothing to hide!
Post by: G M on December 18, 2020, 03:04:12 PM

https://behindtheblack.com/behind-the-black/points-of-information/maricopa-county-election-board-defies-state-subpoenas/

Totally legit!

Title: wow
Post by: ccp on December 18, 2020, 03:56:42 PM

https://populist.press/justice-caught-on-video-admitting-why-he-really-refused-election-fraud-case/

does he have zero balls
to stand up for the Constitution

or does madame Ghiselle have pics stashed away somewhere
ready to hit the NYT or WP if John becomes shall we say
disagreeable to the LEFT.

 :wink:

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 18, 2020, 06:43:55 PM

Not very deeply sourced , , ,

Title: Andrew McCarthy: A whopper of a rigging claim (Dominion)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 10:41:38 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/a-whopper-of-an-election-rigging-claim/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Saturday%202020-12-19&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Title: Re: Andrew McCarthy: A whopper of a rigging claim (Dominion)
Post by: G M on December 19, 2020, 11:04:11 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 10:41:38 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/a-whopper-of-an-election-rigging-claim/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Saturday%202020-12-19&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

I don't see Deep State AC calling for the Dominion voting machines nationwide to be forensically examined. Why is that? Why wouldn't he want it to be clear there was no fraud?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 11:10:42 AM

I don't have the citation handy, but regarding this:

https://populist.press/justice-caught-on-video-admitting-why-he-really-refused-election-fraud-case/

Apparently the Justices have been meeting only by Zoom.

As I said above, "Thinly sourced".

Title: we are just supposed to trust the election boards etc.
Post by: ccp on December 19, 2020, 11:30:16 AM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/12/19/maricopa-county-leaders-refuse-to-comply-with-the-state-legislatures-electionrelated-subpoena-n2581842


why can we NOT have an independent audit?

why can they simply not just comply?

always excuses .

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 19, 2020, 11:31:35 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 11:10:42 AM

I don't have the citation handy, but regarding this:

https://populist.press/justice-caught-on-video-admitting-why-he-really-refused-election-fraud-case/

Apparently the Justices have been meeting only by Zoom.

As I said above, "Thinly sourced".

Zoom? The app that routes things through Chinese servers?

https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020/04/06/zooms-data-sailing-into-china-fbi-issues-warning-of-counterintelligence-threat/

Title: Makes total sense!
Post by: G M on December 19, 2020, 12:11:16 PM

https://i.imgur.com/8DtVKeB.png

(https://i.imgur.com/8DtVKeB.png)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 19, 2020, 04:58:28 PM

Quote from: G M on December 19, 2020, 11:31:35 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 11:10:42 AM

I don't have the citation handy, but regarding this:

https://populist.press/justice-caught-on-video-admitting-why-he-really-refused-election-fraud-case/

Apparently the Justices have been meeting only by Zoom.

As I said above, "Thinly sourced".

Zoom is asshoe!

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/12/19/zoom-executive-based-in-china-spied-on-dissidents-at-the-behest-of-the-chinese-communist-party-n1220998


Zoom? The app that routes things through Chinese servers?

https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020/04/06/zooms-data-sailing-into-china-fbi-issues-warning-of-counterintelligence-threat/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 06:01:02 PM

Not relevant to the point that the source purported to be a clerk to a Justice who overheard them in a room.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 19, 2020, 06:11:05 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 06:01:02 PM

Not relevant to the point that the source purported to be a clerk to a Justice who overheard them in a room.

Do we have documentation that supports the Zoom scenario?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 06:21:43 PM

As previously stated:  "I don't have the citation handy"

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on December 19, 2020, 07:52:53 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 06:21:43 PM

As previously stated:  "I don't have the citation handy"

Welcome to the endless wilderness of mirrors.

We now have to spend more time vetting information than reading it.

Title: 5 More Ways Biden magically outperformed
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2020, 08:56:23 PM

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/23/5-more-ways-joe-biden-magically-outperformed-election-norms/?fbclid=IwAR0QwIZTSrj3wgMjnQaF57ZIHBTPN6VfDKOpXZB-jZ3W92Ui5rpYzv8l3xc

Title: Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2020, 02:56:20 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/joe-biden-appears-to-outperform-in-counties-using-dominion-or-hart-voting-machines-data-analyst_3625672.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2020-12-20

Title: Navarro: The Immaculate Deception
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2020, 02:59:05 AM

https://bannonswarroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20-1.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1sZbnPP36j3j_wT9BQ9Bd2VKzi5pmY1ol00OWxruYw1YMiYmZZtZXrjQ0

Title: WI Supreme Court decision
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2020, 08:03:34 AM

https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=311669

Title: Former WI judge testifies
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2020, 08:25:47 AM

Fourth post:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Gun-glKH8U&feature=emb_logo

Title: agree with DJT not conceding
Post by: ccp on December 21, 2020, 06:01:20 AM

of course he will leave WH
he does not need to be at
  swearing in

has been done before

he was robbed

why condone it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 21, 2020, 06:12:04 AM

Agree!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 21, 2020, 11:03:55 AM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/12/17/kt-mcfarland-explains-why-the-intelligence-report-on-the-election-is-being-delayed-n2581739

Title: NRO: Why Trump's lawsuits flopped
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 21, 2020, 12:30:04 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/why-trumps-election-fraud-lawsuits-flopped/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MJ_20201221&utm_term=Jolt-Smart

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, History Repeats, 1960
Post by: DougMacG on December 23, 2020, 06:28:44 AM

Steve Hayward, Powerlineblog.com

DECEMBER 21, 2020 BY STEVEN HAYWARD
HISTORY REPEATS
Respectable people everywhere are scandalized at President Trump’s insistence that the election results are not to be taken at face value, and deplore the pressure he has brought on Attorney General Bill Barr and other Republicans to press the matter. How outrageous! How unprecedented!

Unprecedented? I wonder. Especially when by accident I ran across a newspaper column from the late and revered journalist Ralph de Toledano from December 6, 1960:

What began as a “forlorn hope” to pick up a few more electoral votes for Vice President Nixon is now a full-scale Republican operation. The decision to make it so, it can be reliably reported, was made by President Eisenhower, who is in a table-thumping mood about what he believes to be the theft of the election from Vice President Nixon.

As a result, word has gone out from the White House to Attorney General William P. Rogers to get off his above-the-battle pedestal and to do everything federal law allows in order to get an undisputed count in Illinois, Missouri, Texas, Nevada, and New Jersey. He has also told Republican National Committee Chairman Thurston B. Morton to put the weight of his resources behind state GOP groups battling for a recount. . .

Four precincts in Chicago, for example, with some 1,200 qualified voters, cast over 2,000 votes on November 8. Yet the tallies from these precincts are included as legitimate in the official city canvas. Chicago newspaper estimate as many as 100,000 votes were stolen in Cook County.

In Texas, one interesting statistic indicates what a careful investigation of the election might produce. Vice President Nixon ran 40,000 votes ahead of Mr. Kennedy in districts using voting machines. In districts that continue to use paper ballots only—easily destroyed or declared invalid—Mr. Kennedy ran 85,000 votes ahead of Mr. Nixon.

de Toledano added:

If [Kennedy] sits in the White House, and it is determined that he was not entitled to the electoral college vote which put him there, both his own prestige and that of American democracy will be tarnished.

Democrats spent the last four years charging that Trump was an illegitimate president. Time to return the favor

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 23, 2020, 07:58:43 AM

"Democrats spent the last four years charging that Trump was an illegitimate president. Time to return the favor"

hopefully we can
depending on Ga.

this election was stolen

just like they did in '60
just like they tried to do in '16 running around in all the urban areas getting votes at the last minute
like they do every election

time to fight back

but of course we do have the romneys
thank god McCain is no longer in senate (though sorry he is passed away)

funny how the states will not us forensically examine the voting machines
and just expect us to *trust* them

we here how Trumps response is "UNPRECEDENTED " in modern times

yet not a peep about the unprecedented media in unison working for DEm party
or the election irregularities
etc

Title: Dominion sues
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 23, 2020, 09:19:16 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9081035/Dominion-Voting-Systems-SUES-Trump-campaign-Rudy-Giuliani-Sidney-Powell-OANN-Newsmax.html

Title: GA legislature electoral subcommittee calls for withdrawing certification
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 23, 2020, 09:29:17 AM

https://tennesseestar.com/2020/12/22/georgia-state-senate-report-election-results-are-untrustworthy-certification-should-be-rescinded/?fbclid=IwAR2Buid7zQ2PskFbl_AkKdarOeu_ssqbQ26NPcF_1uOpMn8A3nmz25uJO1w

Code: [Select]

http://www.senatorligon.com/THE_FINAL%20REPORT.PDF

Title: FOX, NEWSMAX backtracking
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 23, 2020, 09:38:18 AM

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2020/12/21/fox-news-newsmax-walk-back-election-fraud-claims-after-voting-machine-manufacturer-threatens-legal-action/?sh=69b98b21cfd2&fbclid=IwAR3gCzztHwuMP5Ckkww0z4-0NAMj1ZCUggq94wV06FyJKn86HYkbw3pTL9Q

Title: Re: Dominion sues
Post by: DougMacG on December 23, 2020, 12:56:07 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 23, 2020, 09:19:16 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9081035/Dominion-Voting-Systems-SUES-Trump-campaign-Rudy-Giuliani-Sidney-Powell-OANN-Newsmax.html

Can they sue him for calling them baseless allegations?  Certainly the allegations have a base.

I also would like to know the truth or untruth about all this - in a timely manner.

Title: Andrew McCarthy: Fatally flawed Trump petition to SCOTUS
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 24, 2020, 11:26:47 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/a-fatally-flawed-trump-petition-to-the-supreme-court/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-12-23&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Title: Re: Andrew McCarthy: Fatally flawed Trump petition to SCOTUS
Post by: G M on December 24, 2020, 05:09:12 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 24, 2020, 11:26:47 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/12/a-fatally-flawed-trump-petition-to-the-supreme-court/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202020-12-23&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Funny how there is "no evidence" when there is no investigation.

Title: Well, if true, this is curious
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 24, 2020, 06:16:38 PM

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1333076236071944194

Title: Re: Well, if true, this is curious
Post by: G M on December 24, 2020, 06:35:13 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 24, 2020, 06:16:38 PM

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1333076236071944194

I have seen a photo somewhere that was allegedly a vote counter opening a package from a Chinese shipping company that if, true, would potentially corroborate this.

Title: Vote fraud, The (Dr.) Peter Navarro Report, Immaculate Deception
Post by: DougMacG on December 26, 2020, 07:57:23 AM

(PhD Harvard, did the media ever call him "Doctor"?)

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/12/17/peter_navarro_presents_the_immaculate_deception_a_coordinated_effort_to_stack_election_against_trump.html

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/peter-navarro-the-immaculate-deception-report-news-conference-transcript

https://www.larslarson.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20.pdf

Title: Navarro Report, Immaculate Deception, 6 dimensions of irregularities in 6 states
Post by: DougMacG on December 26, 2020, 06:51:02 PM

Hundreds of footnotes at the link, see previous post in thread.  Sorry for the length of this but if 'baseless' is to be refuted, one needs to show basis.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Six Key Dimensions of Election Irregularities
The Navarro Report

Executive Summary
This report assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 Presidential Election by examining six
dimensions of alleged election irregularities across six key battleground states. Evidence used to
conduct this assessment includes more than 50 lawsuits and judicial rulings, thousands of affidavits
and declarations,
testimony in a variety of state venues, published analyses by think tanks and
legal centers, videos and photos, public comments, and extensive press coverage.
The matrix below indicates that significant irregularities occurred across all six battleground states
and across all six dimensions of election irregularities. This finding lends credence to the claim
that the election may well have been stolen from President Donald J. Trump.
From the findings of this report, it is possible to infer what may well have been a coordinated
strategy to effectively stack the election deck against the Trump-Pence ticket. Indeed, the observed
patterns of election irregularities are so consistent across the six battleground states that they
suggest a coordinated strategy to, if not steal the election outright, strategically game the election
process in such a way as to “stuff the ballot box” and unfairly tilt the playing field in favor of the
Biden-Harris ticket. Topline findings of this report include:
 The weight of evidence and patterns of irregularities are such that it is irresponsible for
anyone – especially the mainstream media – to claim there is “no evidence” of fraud or
irregularities.
 The ballots in question because of the identified election irregularities are more than
sufficient to swing the outcome in favor of President Trump should even a relatively small
portion of these ballots be ruled illegal.

 All six battleground states exhibit most, or all, six dimensions of election irregularities.
However, each state has a unique mix of issues that might be considered “most important.”
To put this another way, all battleground states are characterized by the same or similar
election irregularities; but, like Tolstoy’s unhappy families, each battleground state is
different in its own election irregularity way.
 This was theft by a thousand cuts across six dimensions and six battleground states rather
than any one single “silver bullet” election irregularity.
 In refusing to investigate a growing number of legitimate grievances, the anti-Trump media
and censoring social media are complicit in shielding the American public from the truth.
This is a dangerous game that simultaneously undermines the credibility of the media and
the stability of our political system and Republic.
 Those journalists, pundits, and political leaders now participating in what has become a
Biden Whitewash should acknowledge the six dimensions of election irregularities and
conduct the appropriate investigations to determine the truth about the 2020 election. If
this is not done before Inauguration Day, we risk putting into power an illegitimate and
illegal president lacking the support of a large segment of the American people.
 The failure to aggressively and fully investigate the six dimensions of election irregularities
assessed in this report is a signal failure not just of our anti-Trump mainstream media and
censoring social media but also of both our legislative and judicial branches.
o Republican governors in Arizona and Georgia together with Republican majorities
in both chambers of the State Legislatures of five of the six battleground states –
Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin2
– have had both the
power and the opportunity to investigate the six dimensions of election
irregularities presented in this report. Yet, wilting under intense political pressure,
these politicians have failed in their Constitutional duties and responsibilities to do
so – and thereby failed both their states and this nation as well as their party.
o Both State courts and Federal courts, including the Supreme Court, have failed the
American people in refusing to appropriately adjudicate the election irregularities
that have come before them. Their failures pose a great risk to the American
Republic.
 If these election irregularities are not fully investigated prior to Inauguration Day and
thereby effectively allowed to stand, this nation runs the very real risk of never being able
to have a fair presidential election again – with the down-ballot Senate races scheduled for
January 5 in Georgia an initial test case of this looming risk.

I. Introduction
At the stroke of midnight on Election Day, President Donald J. Trump appeared well on his way
to winning a second term. He was already a lock to win both Florida and Ohio; and no Republican
has ever won a presidential election without winning Ohio while only two Democrats have won
the presidency without winning Florida.3
At the same time, the Trump-Pence ticket had substantial and seemingly insurmountable leads in
Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. If these leads held, these four key battleground
states would propel President Trump to a decisive 294 to 244 victory in the Electoral College.
Shortly after midnight, however, as a flood of mail-in and absentee ballots began entering the
count, the Trump red tide of victory began turning Joe Biden blue. As these mail-in and absentee
ballots were tabulated, the President’s large leads in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and
Wisconsin simply vanished into thin Biden leads.
At midnight on the evening of November 3, and as illustrated in Table 1, President Trump was
ahead by more than 110,000 votes in Wisconsin and more than 290,000 votes in Michigan. In
Georgia, his lead was a whopping 356,945; and he led in Pennsylvania by more than half a million
votes. By December 7, however, these wide Trump leads would turn into razor thin Biden leads –
11,779 votes in Georgia, 20,682 votes in Wisconsin, 81,660 votes in Pennsylvania, and 154,188
votes in Michigan.
Table 1: A Trump Red Tide Turns Biden Blue
There was an equally interesting story unfolding in Arizona and Nevada. While Joe Biden was
ahead in these two additional battleground states on election night – by just over 30,000 votes in
Nevada and less than 150,000 votes in Arizona – internal Trump Campaign polls predicted the
President would close these gaps once all the votes were counted. Of course, this never happened.
In the wake of this astonishing reversal of Trump fortune, a national firestorm has erupted over
the fairness and integrity of one of the most sacrosanct institutions in America – our presidential
election system. Critics on the Right and within the Republican Party – including President Trump
himself – have charged that the election was stolen. They have backed up these damning charges
with more than 50 lawsuits,4
thousands of supporting affidavits and declarations, and seemingly
incriminating videos, photos, and first-hand accounts of all manner of chicanery.5

Critics on the Left and within the Democrat Party have, on the other hand, dismissed these charges
as the sour grapes of a whining loser. Some of these critics have completely denied any fraud,
misconduct or malfeasance altogether. Others have acknowledged that while some election
irregularities may have existed, they strenuously insist that these irregularities are not significant
enough to overturn the election.
There is a similar Battle Royale raging between large anti-Trump segments of the so-called
“mainstream” media and alternative conservative news outlets. Across the anti-Trump mainstream
media diaspora – which includes most prominently print publications like the New York Times
and Washington Post and cable TV networks like CNN and MSNBC – a loud chorus of voices has
been demanding that President Trump concede the election.
These same anti-Trump voices have been equally quick to denounce or discredit anyone –
especially anyone within their own circle – that dares to investigate what may well turn out to be
THE biggest political scandal in American history. Social media outlets like Facebook, Twitter,
and YouTube likewise have been actively and relentlessly censoring anyone who dares to call the
results of the election into question.
In contrast, alternative news outlets, primarily associated with the American conservative
movement, have provided extensive, in-depth coverage of the many issues of fraud, misconduct,
and other irregularities that are coming to light. From Steve Bannon’s War Room Pandemic6
and John Solomon’s Just the News to Raheem Kassam’s National Pulse, to Newsmax, and One America News Network,
 Americans hungry for facts and breaking developments have been able
to find such critical information only by following this alternative coverage.
That the American public is not buying what the Democrat Party and the anti-Trump media and
social media are selling is evident in public opinion polls. For example, according to a recent
Rasmussen poll: “Sixty-two percent (62%) of Republicans say it is ‘Very Likely the Democrats
stole the election’” while 28% of Independents and 17% of Democrats share that view.
If, in fact, compelling evidence comes to light proving the election was indeed stolen after a fait
accompli Biden inauguration, we as a country run the very real risk that the very center of our
great American union will not hold.
To put this another way, if the greatest democracy in world history cannot conduct a free and fair
election, and if much of the mainstream media of this country won’t even fully investigate what is
becoming a growing mountain of evidence calling into question the election result, there is little
chance that our democracy and this Republic will survive as we know it. It is therefore critical
that we get to the bottom of this matter. That is the purpose of this report.

II. Six Dimensions of Election Irregularities across Six Battleground States
This report assesses the fairness and integrity of the 2020 presidential election across six key
battleground states where the Democrat candidate Joe Biden holds a slim lead, and the results
continue to be hotly contested. As documented in the extensive endnotes, the evidence used to
conduct this assessment includes more than 50 lawsuits and judicial rulings, thousands of affidavits
and declarations, testimony presented in a variety of state venues, published reports and analyses
by think tanks and legal centers, videos and photos, public comments and first-hand accounts, and
extensive press coverage.
From a review and analysis of this evidence, six major dimensions of alleged election irregularities
have been identified and assessed on a state-by-state basis across six key battleground states:
Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. These six dimensions include
outright voter fraud, ballot mishandling, contestable process fouls, Equal Protection Clause
violations, voting machine irregularities, and significant statistical anomalies.
The matrix in Table 2 provides an overview of the presence or absence of each of the six
dimensions of alleged election irregularities in each of the six battleground states. Column 1 lists
each of the six dimensions along with the alleged Biden victory margin and the possible illegal
ballots due to election irregularities. Columns 2 through 7 in the matrix then indicate the presence
or absence of the election irregularities in any given state.
Note that a checkmark in matrix cell indicates there is widespread evidence in a given state for a
particular dimension of election irregularity while a star indicates there is at least some evidence.
Table 2: 2020 Alleged Election Irregularities across the Six Battleground States

Two key points stand out immediately from the matrix. First, significant irregularities appear to
be ubiquitous across the six battleground states. Only Arizona is free of any apparent widespread
ballot mishandling while only Pennsylvania lacks significant statistical anomalies. The rest of the
matrix in Table 2 is a sea of checkmarks and occasional stars.
Second, if one compares the alleged Biden victory margin in Column 7 of the figure with the
possible illegal ballots in Column 8, it should be clear that the number of possible illegal ballots
dwarfs the alleged Biden victory margin in five of the six states.
For example, the alleged Biden victory margin in Nevada is 33,596 votes yet the number of ballots
in question is more than three times that. In Arizona, which has the narrowest alleged Biden
victory margin at 10,457 votes, there are nearly 10 times that number of possible illegal ballots;
and the ratio of the alleged Biden vote lead to possible illegal ballots is even higher for Georgia.
Only Michigan is the exception to the rule. This is not because it is likely to be a true exception
but simply because there remains insufficient estimates of how the various types of irregularities
in Michigan translate into possible illegal votes.
Clearly, based on this matrix, the American people deserve a definitive answer as to whether this
election was stolen from Donald J. Trump. Absent a thorough investigation prior to Inauguration
Day, a cloud and a stain will hang over what will be perceived by many Americans as an
illegitimate Biden administration.
The next six sections of this report examine in more detail each of the six dimensions of alleged
election irregularities.
 
III. Outright Voter Fraud
Outright voter fraud ranges from the large-scale manufacturing of fake ballots, bribery, and dead
voters to ballots cast by ineligible voters such as felons and illegal aliens, ballots counted multiple
times, and illegal out-of-state voters. Table 3 provides an overview across the six battleground
states of the various types of outright voter fraud that have been alleged to be present.
Table 3: Outright Voter Fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election
From the figure, we see that different types of fraud may be present in all six states. Let’s more
precisely define each of these different types of fraud using examples that are designed to be
illustrative rather than exhaustive.
Bribery
In a voter fraud context, bribery refers to the corrupt solicitation, acceptance, or transfer of value
in exchange for official action, such as voter registration or voting for a preferred candidate. At
least in Nevada, there is a slam dunk case that such bribery occurred.
What is so stunning about the Nevada case is the brazen disregard for our federal bribery laws. In
the Silver State, in an effort orchestrated by the Biden campaign, Native Americans appear to have
traded their votes not for pieces of silver but rather for Visa gift cards, jewelry, and other “swag.”

According to the Epoch Times, such vote buying schemes also may have occurred in eight other
states, including Arizona and Wisconsin.
 
Fake Ballot Manufacturing and Destruction of Legally Cast Real Ballots
Fake ballot manufacturing involves the fraudulent production of ballots on behalf of a candidate;
and one of the most disturbing examples of possible fake ballot manufacturing involves a truck
driver who has alleged in a sworn affidavit that he picked up large crates of ballots in New York
and delivered them to a polling location in Pennsylvania. There may be well over 100,000 ballots
involved, enough fake ballots alone to have swung the election to Biden in the Keystone State.
Likewise in Pennsylvania, there is both a Declaration and a photo that suggests a poll worker used
an unsecured USB flash drive to dump an unusually large cache of votes onto vote tabulation
machines. The resultant tabulations did not correlate with the mail-in ballots scanned into the
machines.
Arguably the most flagrant example of possible fake ballot manufacturing on behalf of Joe Biden
may have occurred at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta, Georgia. The possible perpetrators were
caught in flagrante delicto on surveillance video.
In one version of this story, poll watchers and observers as well as the media were asked to leave
in the middle of the night after a suspicious water leak. Once the room was cleared, several election
officials pulled out large boxes of ballots from underneath a draped table. They then proceeded to
tabulate a quantity of fake manufactured ballots estimated to be in the range of tens of thousands.

Note that a large surge in Biden votes following the tabulation of these ballots can be clearly
observed after these votes were processed.
Despite what appears to be damning evidence of a possible crime, a spate of stories appeared
across the anti-Trump media diaspora dismissing any concerns. According to these whitewash
stories, these were regular and authorized ballot boxes, observers in the media were not asked to
leave but simply left on their own, and it is perfectly acceptable to count ballots in the absence of
observers. Or so the spin goes.
Of course, this is precisely the kind of incident that should be fully investigated both by Georgia’s
Attorney General as well as by the Federal Department of Justice. Yet it remains unclear as to
whether such investigations are underway. Meanwhile, the videotape itself, absent an adequate
explanation, has contributed to the current climate of skepticism surrounding the fairness and
integrity of the election.
Finally, as an example of the possible destruction of legally cast real ballots there is this allegation
from a court case filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona: Plaintiffs
claim that over 75,000 absentee ballots were reported as unreturned when they were actually
returned. These absentee ballots were then either lost or destroyed (consistent with allegations of
Trump ballot destruction) and/or were replaced with blank ballots filled out by election workers
or other third parties.
 
Indefinitely Confined Voter Abuses
Indefinitely confined voters are those voters unable to vote in person because of old age or some
disability. There are two types of possible abuses associated with such indefinitely confined voters.
The first kind of abuse involves exploiting the elderly or the infirm by effectively hijacking their
identities and votes. For example, in Georgia, the family of an elderly man in a nursing home
facility discovered that a mail-in ballot had been requested and submitted under his voter
registration identity, yet it was done without his consent.
 In a similar situation in Pennsylvania,
two parents and their daughter who has Downs Syndrome went to vote in person and discovered
that a mail-in ballot had both been requested and submitted for the daughter without her consent.22
The second kind of indefinitely confined voter abuse is far more consequential, at least in the state
of Wisconsin. The key allegation here in several court filings is that “bad-faith voters” registering
as “indefinitely confined” intentionally broke “Wisconsin election law to circumvent election
integrity photo identification requirements.” In a nutshell, they were able to vote without showing
a voter identification photo and therefore underwent a far less rigorous I.D. check than would
otherwise have been conducted.
This abuse happened, according to one press account, after “clerks in Dane and Milwaukee
counties offered illegal advice that encouraged individuals to use indefinite confinement as a way
to ignore the state’s photo I.D. requirement.” The Trump side has called this correctly an open
invitation to fraud; and stories and pictures abound of Wisconsin voters who registered as
indefinitely confined but were seen also attending weddings, riding their bikes, going on vacation,
and otherwise be anything but confined.
Here is what is most important about this particular type of election fraud: In the wake of the
expanded definition of indefinitely confined voters – a definition ruled legally incorrect by the
Wisconsin Supreme Court
– the number of indefinitely confined voters surged from just under
70,000 voters in 2019 to over 200,000 in 2020.26 This 130,000 vote increment of new indefinitely
confined voters is more than five times the Biden victory margin in Wisconsin.
Ineligible Voters and Voters Who Voted in Multiple States
Ineligible voters include felons deemed ineligible, underage citizens, nonregistered voters, illegal
aliens, illegal out-of-state voters, and voters illegally using a post office box as an address.
In a court filing by the Trump campaign legal team, lead counsel Ray Smith provided a list of more
than 70,000 allegedly ineligible voters casting ballots in Georgia in the 2020 election. Also in
Georgia, over 20,000 people appear to have filed a Notice of Changed Address form to the Georgia
state government or had other indications of moving out of state. Yet, these clearly ineligible outof-state voters appeared to have remained on the voter rolls and voted in the 2020 election.

As additional data points regarding ineligible out-of-state voters, there are these: Between 80 and
100 self-proclaimed Black Lives Matter-affiliated members from other states have admitted to
having voted in Pennsylvania.

As for those voters who vote in multiple states, one lawsuit claims that roughly 15,000 mail-in or
absentee ballots were received in Nevada from voters who were known to have voted in other
states. It is useful to note here that in Nevada, poll workers allegedly were not consistent in their
procedures when checking voters in to vote about whether they accepted California or Nevada
Voter Identification as proof of eligibility to register to vote.


Dead Voters and Ghost Voters
According to widespread evidence, there was a surprising number of ballots cast across several
key battleground states by deceased voters, sparking one wag to quip, in reference to a classic
Bruce Willis movie, this was the “Sixth Sense” election – I see dead people voting.
In Pennsylvania, for example, a statistical analysis conducted by the Trump Campaign matching
voter rolls to public obituaries found what appears to be over 8,000 confirmed dead voters
successfully casting mail-in ballots.
 In Georgia – underscoring the critical role any given
category of election irregularities might play in determining the outcome – the estimated number
of alleged deceased individuals casting votes almost exactly equals the Biden victory margin.
In Michigan, according to one first-hand account offered in a declaration, computer operators at a
polling location in Detroit were manually adding the names and addresses of thousands of ballots
to vote tabulation systems with voters who had birth dates in 1900. And in Nevada, a widower
since 2017 saw that his deceased wife had successfully cast a mail-in ballot on November 2, 2020,
three and a half years after her death.
It may be useful to note here that dead voters played a critical role in stealing the election from
Richard Nixon, a theft orchestrated by Mayor Richard Daley and his Chicago political machine.
According to one report “more than 3,000 votes [were] cast in the names of individuals who were
dead, and more than 31,000 individuals voted twice in different locations in the city.” President
Kennedy’s victory margin in Illinois was less than 9,000 votes.
On the Ghost Voter front, a “Ghost Voter” is a voter who requests and submits a ballot under the
name of a voter who no longer resides at the address where that voter was registered. In Georgia
for example, it is alleged that over 20,000 absentee or early voters – almost twice the Biden victory
margin – cast their ballots after having moved out of state. In Nevada, a poll worker reported that
there were as many as 50 ballots per day being delivered to homes vacated by their former
residents.
Counting Ballots Multiple Times
Counting ballots multiple times occurs most egregiously when batches of ballots are repeatedly
rescanned and re-tabulated in electronic voting machines. It can also happen when the same person
votes multiple times within the same day. Evidence of these particular kinds of “ballot stuffing”
are present across all six battleground states.

For example, in Wisconsin, poll workers were observed running ballots through tabulation
machines more than once.
 In Wayne County, Michigan, Republican poll watchers observed
canvassers re-scanning batches of ballots through vote tabulation machines up to 3 to 4 times.
In Pennsylvania, a poll worker observed a woman vote twice in the same day by changing her
appearance. Another poll worker observed people in voting lines in one corner of a polling
location voting, and then coming to another polling location at the other side of the building to
vote. Still another poll worker witnessed a woman voting twice at voting machines on Election
Day.
IV. Ballot Mishandling
Ballot mishandling represents the second major dimension of alleged election irregularities in the
2020 presidential election. As Table 4 illustrates, this is a multifaceted problem across the
battleground states. Let’s work our way through this figure starting with the failure to properly
check the identification of voters.
Table 4: Ballot Mishandling in the Battleground States
No Voter I.D. Check
It is critical for the integrity of any election for poll workers to properly verify a voter’s identity
and registration when that voter comes in to cast an in-person ballot. However, there is at least
some evidence of a lack of adequate voter ID check across several of the battleground states.
For example, in Michigan, the chairperson of a polling location permitted an individual to vote
without presenting voter identification and another with only a photocopy of a driver’s license.
 
In Nevada, poll workers were instructed to advise people who wanted to register to vote and did
not have proper Nevada IDs or Driver’s Licenses to do the following: These unregistered voters
could go outside into the parking lot and make an appointment with the Department of Motor
Vehicles as late as January 2021 to obtain a Nevada Driver’s License as proof of their identity.
They could then bring in confirmation of their DMV appointment in either paper or digital form;
and that would be sufficient to allow them to be registered.
Signature Matching Abuses
It is equally critical that ballot counters legally verify mail-in and absentee ballots by checking if
the signatures on the outer envelopes match the voters’ registration records.
45 Note, however, that
a variety of signature matching abuses represent a major issue in Nevada, Pennsylvania, and
especially in Georgia.
In Georgia, contrary to state law, the Secretary of State entered into a Consent Decree with the
Democrat Party that weakened signature matching to just one verification instead of two. This
illegal weakening of the signature match test has called into question more than 1.2 million mail-in ballots cast in Georgia.
Georgia is not the only state where signature match check abuses have surfaced. Nevada law
requires that persons – not machines – review all signatures and ballots. Yet the Clark County
Registrar of Voters used a defective signature matching computer system called Agilis to conduct
such checks. As will be discussed further below, this problem of machines replacing humans
contrary to Nevada state law was compounded by the fact that the Agilis system has an
unacceptably low accuracy rate, making it easier for illegal ballots to slip through its screen.
Signature match abuses also surfaced in Wisconsin where mandatory voter information
certifications for mail-in ballots were reduced and/or eliminated, again contrary to state law. As
noted in one lawsuit, this change “undermined the authority of the state legislature, reduced the
security and integrity of the election by making it easier to engage in mail-in ballot fraud and
created another standard-less rule in conflict with the clear terms of the Wisconsin Election Code,
preventing uniform treatment of absentee ballots throughout the State.”
“Naked Ballots” Lacking Outer Envelope
A naked ballot is a mail-in or absentee ballot lacking an outer envelope with the voter’s signature
on it. It is illegal to accept the naked ballot as the outer envelope provides the only way to verify a
voter’s identity.
The illegal acceptance of naked ballots appears to be particularly acute in Pennsylvania as a result
of ill-advised “guidance” issued by the Secretary of State – a registered Democrat
– that such
naked ballots be counted.

This issuance of such guidance, in violation of state law,51 appears to be a blatant attempt by a
Democrat politician to boost the count for Joe Biden as it was clear that Democrats would be voting
disproportionately higher through mail-in ballots. This incident is especially egregious because
when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejected this guidance, the Secretary of State refused to
issue new guidance directing election officials to NOT count non-compliant mail-in or absentee
ballots.
Broken Chain of Custody & Unauthorized Ballot Handling or Movements
The maintenance of a proper chain of custody for ballots cast is the linchpin of fair elections. Chain
of custody is broken when a ballot is fraudulently transferred, controlled, or moved without
adequate supervision or oversight.

While chain of custody issues can apply to all ballots, the risk of a broken chain of custody is
obviously higher for mail-in and absentee ballots. This is because the ballots have to go through
more hands.
In the 2020 presidential election, the increased use – often illegal use – of unsupervised drop boxes
arguably has enhanced the risk of a broken chain of custody. So, too, has the increased practice of
so-called “ballot harvesting” whereby third parties pick up ballots from voters and deliver them to
drop boxes or directly to election officials.
Both drop boxes and ballot harvesting provide opportunities for bad actors to insert fraudulent
ballots into the election process. That this is a very serious matter is evident in this observation by
BlackBoxVoting.org: “In court cases, chain of custody violations can result in refusal to admit
evidence or even throwing a case out. In elections, chain of custody violations can result in
‘incurable uncertainty’ and court orders to redo elections.” (emphasis added)
As an example of the drop box problem, in Pennsylvania, ballots were illegally dumped into drop
boxes at the Nazareth ballot drop center in violation of state law. Likewise in Pennsylvania, a
man caught on videotape and photos came out of an unmarked Jeep extracting ballots from an
unsupervised ballot drop-box to bring them into a ballot counting center. That same man was
observed to come back with an empty ballot container to place in the unsupervised drop box.

In Wisconsin, the state’s Election Committee illegally positioned five hundred drop boxes for
collection of absentee ballots across the state. However, these drop boxes were disproportionately
located in urban areas which tend to have much higher Democrat registration, thereby favoring the
candidacy of Joe Biden. Note: Any use of a drop box in Wisconsin is illegal by statute. Therefore,
the votes cast through them cannot be legally counted in any certified election result.57
As an example of ballot harvesting – in this case at the front end of the process – 25,000 ballots
were requested from nursing home residents in Pennsylvania at the same time.

As additional examples of a possible broken chain of custody, there are these: Large bins of
absentee ballots arrived at the Central Counting Location in Wisconsin with already opened
envelopes, meaning that ballots could have been tampered with.
 They were nonetheless counted.
Also in Wisconsin, an election worker was observed moving bags of blank ballots into a vehicle
and then driving off without supervision.
 There is also the previously referenced case whereby
a truck driver has offered a firsthand account of moving large quantities of fake manufactured
ballots from New York to Pennsylvania.
As a final note on the unauthorized handling or movement of ballots, there is the problem of illegal
ballot counters. These are persons who not legally permitted and/or certified to be counting ballots.
In one curious case, an individual who worked as an official photographer for Kamala Harris’
campaign in 201961 was alleged to be involved in scanning ballots in Floyd County, Georgia.
Ballot counters cannot have any ties to candidates in a presidential election.
Ballots Accepted Without Postmarks and Backdating of Ballots
Across all of the battleground states, it is against state law for poll workers to count either mail-in
or absentee ballots that lack postmarks. It is also illegal to backdate ballots so that they may be
considered as having met the election deadline for the receipt and counting of such ballots. There
is some evidence of these irregularities in several of the battleground states.
For example, in Wisconsin, according to one Declaration, employees of the United States Postal
Service (USPS) in Milwaukee were repeatedly instructed by two managers to backdate latearriving ballots so they could still be counted. In addition, the USPS was alleged to have
backdated as many as 100,000 ballots in Wisconsin.
Similarly, in Detroit, Michigan, as noted in a court case, poll workers were instructing ballot
counters to backdate absentee ballots so they could be counted.
 One poll watcher also observed
ballots in Michigan being run through vote tabulation machines without postmarks on them.65
 
V. Contestable Process Fouls
Contestable process fouls represent the third dimension of election irregularities in the 2020
presidential election. The various forms such process fouls can take are illustrated in Table 5 across
the six battleground states.
Table 5: Contestable Process Fouls in the Battleground States
Abuses of Poll Watchers and Observers
Central to the fairness and integrity of any election is the processes by which observers monitor
the receipt, opening, and counting of the ballots. You can see in the Table 5 that poll watcher and
observer abuses were present across all six battleground states.
In Georgia, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, poll watchers and observers were denied entry to
ballot counting centers by Judges of Elections and other poll workers. This was despite presenting
proper certification and identification.
In Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania,Republican poll watchers were also forced
inside confined areas, thereby limiting their view. In some cases, this confinement was enforced
by local law enforcement.

Across these four battleground states, Republican poll watchers were also directed to stand at
unreasonably lengthy distances from ballot counters. In Michigan – arguably the “first among
equals” when it comes to observer abuses – poll workers put up poster boards on the windows of
the room where ballots were being processed and counted so as to block the view. In
Pennsylvania, tens of thousands of ballots were processed in back rooms where poll observers
were prohibited from being able to observe at all.
This is an extremely serious matter because it is these poll watchers and observers who represent
the frontline defenders of a fair election process. Their job is to make sure all ballots are handled
properly and tabulated accordingly. They seek to answer questions like: Is there a signature match
process being conducted? Does each ballot have an outer envelope or is it a naked ballot? Are
ballots being run more than once through the tabulation machines?
When poll watchers or observers are barred from viewing or forced to view from unacceptably
large distances, these watchdogs cannot accurately answer these questions. They, therefore, cannot
fulfill their critical watchdog function.
Mail-In Ballot and Absentee Ballot Rules Violated Contrary to State Law
In Georgia, more than 300,000 individuals were permitted to vote who had applied for an absentee
ballot more than 180 days prior to the Election Day. This is a clear violation of state law.
In both Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Democrat election officials acted unilaterally to accept both
mail-in and absentee ballots after Election Day. State Republicans have argued this is contrary to
state law.
In Pennsylvania, absentee and mail-in ballots were accepted up to three days after Election Day.
On November 7th, in anticipation of a legal challenge, the United States Supreme Court ordered
that the approximately 10,000 absentee and mail-in ballots that had arrived past November 3rd be
separated from ballots that had arrived on Election Day.77 This direction notwithstanding, a poll
watcher reported on November 7th that, in Delaware County, ballots received the previous night
were not being separated from ballots received on Election Day, contrary to state law.
Wisconsin state law does not permit early voting. Nonetheless, city officials in the Democrat
stronghold of Madison, Wisconsin assisted in the creation of more than 200 “Democracy in the
Park” illegal polling places.
These faux polling places were promoted and supported by the Biden campaign. They provided
witnesses for absentee ballots and acted in every way like legal polling places. Moreover, they
received ballots outside of the limited 14-day period preceding an election that is authorized by
statute for in-person or absentee balloting. These were clear violations of state law.
 
Voters Not Properly Registered Allowed to Vote
One of the jobs of poll workers is to ensure that in-person voters are legally registered and are who
they say they are. Across at least three of the six battleground states – Georgia, Nevada, and
Wisconsin – this job may not have been effectively done.
In Wisconsin, for example, officials refused to allow poll watchers to challenge the qualifications
of people applying to vote or require proof of such persons’ qualifications. In Georgia, more than
2,000 individuals appear to have voted who were not listed in the State’s records as having been
registered to vote.
In Pennsylvania, a poll watcher observed poll workers taking individuals whose names did not
appear in voter registration books back into a separate area that was unobserved by any poll
watchers. There, these apparently unregistered voters met with a Judge of Elections who allegedly
told them: “you go back in, tell them this is your name, and you can vote.”

Illegal Campaigning at Poll Locations
Poll workers are supposed to remain politically neutral. When a poll worker displays bias for one
political candidate over another at a polling location, this is contrary to state law. Unfortunately,
this law appears to have been repeatedly violated in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
For example, in Pennsylvania, poll workers were wearing paraphernalia from a group called
“Voter Protection.” This is a 100% Democrat-funded Political Action Committee dedicated to
Democrat redistricting in Pennsylvania; and the wearing of its paraphernalia constitutes illegal
campaigning at the polls.
In a similar type of illegal campaigning in Michigan, poll workers were allowed to wear Black
Lives Matter shirts and were seen carrying tote bags of President Obama paraphernalia. In
addition, poll workers with Biden and Obama campaign shirts on were allowed on the ballot
counting floor.
In Wisconsin, representatives from the Biden campaign were outside with clipboards talking to
voters on their way in to vote. They were clearly inside the prohibited perimeter for electioneering.
Poll workers did nothing to address this illegal campaigning despite the objections of observers.86
Ballots Cured by Poll Workers or Voters Contrary to Law
Under prescribed circumstances, both poll workers and voters may fix ballots with mistakes or
discrepancies. This process is known as “ballot curing.”
In nineteen states, poll workers must notify voters if there are errors or discrepancies on their
ballots and allow them to “cure” or correct any errors so their votes will count. However, in states
that do not allow curing, ballots with discrepancies such as missing or mismatched signatures must
be discarded.

In Pennsylvania, and contrary to state law, poll workers were trained to allow voters to cure or
“correct” their ballots.
According to one court filing, Democrat-controlled counties in
Pennsylvania participated in pre-canvass activities prior to Election Day “by reviewing received
mail-in ballots for deficiencies.” Such discrepancies included “lacking the inner secrecy
envelope or lacking a signature of the elector on the outer declaration envelope.” Voters were then
notified so that they could cure their ballots – a clear violation of state law.
Numerous other examples of illegally cured ballots abound. For example, in Wisconsin, tens of
thousands of ballots were observed to be corrected or cured despite election observer objections.
In Pennsylvania, poll workers sorted approximately 4,500 ballots with various errors into bins.
Poll workers then re-filled out the 4,500 ballots so that they could be read by tabulation machines,
an action contrary to state law.
In Michigan, poll workers altered the dates on the outer envelopes of the ballots so that they would
be able to count them. Michigan poll workers also filled out blank ballots to “correct” mail-in
and absentee ballots according to what they believed the “voter had intended.”
VI. Equal Protection Clause Violations
The Equal Protection Clause is part of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and a
fundamental pillar of the American Republic. This Equal Protection Clause mandates that no State
may deny its citizens equal protection of its governing laws.
Table 6 illustrates three major alleged violations of the Equal Protection Clause in the 2020
presidential election. As the table illustrates, each violation was observed to occur across all six
battleground states.
Table 6: Equal Protection Clause Violations in the Six Battleground States

Higher Standards of Certification & I.D. Verification Applied to In-Person Voters
The first alleged violation focuses on the application of higher standards of certification and voter
identification for in-person voters than mail-in and absentee ballot voters. In effect, these higher
standards disproportionately benefited the candidacy of Joe Biden because President Trump had a
much higher percentage of in-person voters than mail-in and absentee voters. Indeed, mail-in and
absentee ballots were largely skewed for Joe Biden across the country by ratios as high as 3 out of
4 votes in some states.
Note here that much of the alleged fraud and ballot mishandling focused on mail-in voters and
absentee ballots. Therefore, the lower the level of scrutiny of these voters, the more illegal votes
for Joe Biden relative to Donald Trump could slip in. It should likewise be noted here that this
particular violation of the Equal Protection Clause was further enabled by poll watchers being
denied meaningful observation.
Perhaps the most egregious examples of this particular violation of the Equal Protection clause
occurred in Georgia and Michigan. Georgia, for example, requires ID for voting in-person and
Michigan will only allow provisional voting without an ID. However, in both Georgia and
Michigan, a valid ID is not required to vote by mail so long as the person has already registered in
a previous election.
These procedures are ripe for fraud. In fact, there is evidence that election fraudsters targeted voters
who had voted in past elections but not voted in more recent ones. These fraudsters could then cast
ballots on behalf of these infrequent voters with little likelihood they would be caught. Numerous
affidavits, however, detail persons arriving to vote at polls only to be informed that records indicate
they had already voted. At least fourteen such affidavits have been made by Georgians.
As a further example, in Wisconsin, mail-in ballots were accepted without witness signatures
placed properly in the allocated envelope location. A comparable process for in-person voting
would have resulted in the invalidation of the vote.
Different Standards of Ballot Curing
As a second major violation of the Equal Protection Clause, likewise observed across all six
battleground states, different standards for correcting mistakes on ballots (ballot curing) were
applied across different jurisdictions within the states. Often, jurisdictions with predominantly
Democrat registration were more expansive about allowing the curing of ballots than jurisdictions
with predominantly Republican registration.
In Pennsylvania, there was a clear difference between how ballots were – or were not – cured in
Republican counties versus Democrat counties. When Pennsylvania’s Secretary of State Kathy
Boockvar issued illegal guidance authorizing counties to cure ballots, this illegal guidance was not
followed in at least eight different Republican counties.
 Meanwhile, ballots were cured in
Democrat counties under this illegal guidance.

In Arizona, there likewise was a clear difference between how in-person voters were treated versus
mail-in ballots. On the one hand, mail-in voters had up to 5 days to “cure” or “fix” invalid mail-in
ballots sent prior to Election Day.
 On the other hand, in-person voters in Maricopa County, for
example, had to deal with poll workers who did not know how to work electronic voting machines
properly. This resulted in thousands of in-person votes being marked incorrectly and disregarded
rather than cured.
Differential and Partisan Poll Watcher Treatment
In most states, political party candidates and ballot issue committees are able to appoint poll
watchers and observers to oversee the ballot counting process.103 Such poll watchers and observers
must be registered voters and present certification to the Judge of Elections in order to be able to
fulfill their duties at a polling location.
Such certified poll watchers should be free to observe at appropriate distances regardless of their
party affiliation. Yet in key Democrat strongholds, e.g., Dane County in Wisconsin and Wayne
County in Michigan, which yielded high Biden vote counts, Republican poll watchers and
observers were frequently subject to different treatment ranging from denial of entry to polling
places to harassment and intimidation.
For example, in Georgia, a certified poll watcher witnessed other poll workers at a polling location
discussing how they should not speak to her due to her party affiliation. In Pennsylvania, a
Republican poll watcher was harassed and removed from the polling location due to his party
affiliation. In Wisconsin, a Republican poll watcher was prevented from observing due to the
fact that polling locations were not allowing Republicans in.
Note the synergy here between the problem of the process foul involved with denying access to
certified poll watchers (discussed in the previous section) and the violation of the Equal Protection
Clause such conduct entails when such denial, harassment, and intimidation differs by party
affiliation.
 

VII. 2020 Election Voting Machine Irregularities
Perhaps no device illustrates that technology is a double-edged sword than the machines and
associated software that have come to be used to tabulate votes across all 50 states.108 Types of
voting equipment include optical scanners used to process paper ballots, direct recording electronic
systems which voters can use to directly input their choices, and various marking devices to
produce human-readable ballots.
Two main types of voting machine irregularities have been alleged in the 2020 presidential
election. As Table 7 illustrates, these types of irregularities include large-scale voting machine
inaccuracies together with inexplicable vote switching and vote surges, often in favor Joe Biden.
Table 7: 2020 Voting Machine Irregularities

Large-Scale Voting Machine Inaccuracies
Much has been made about the shadowy genesis of a company called Dominion which provides
voting machines and equipment to 28 states. According to critics, Dominion’s roots may be
traced to an effort by the Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez to rig his sham elections.
 Dominion
is also alleged to have ties to the Clinton Foundation,
 while the Smartmatic software used in the
Dominion machines is alleged to have links to the shadowy anti-Trump globalist financier George
Soros.
The controversy swirling over Dominion and Smartmatic notwithstanding, one of the biggest
problems with machine inaccuracies may be traced to a company called Agilis. Nevada election
officials in Clark County, a Democrat stronghold in Nevada, used Agilis signature verification
machines to check over 130,000 mail-in ballot signatures.
According to a court case filed in the First Judicial District Court in Carson City, the Agilis
machines used a “lower image quality than suggested by the manufacturer.” Clark County
Election Department officials also lowered the accuracy rate below the manufacturer’s
recommendations, making the whole verification process unreliable.

In a test run, it was proven that, at the manufacturer’s setting, the Agilis machine already had a
high tolerance for inaccuracies—as high as 50% non-matching. In other words, half of the ballots
that might be moved through the machine would be impossible to verify; and Clark County
officials lowered that threshold even further.
As a final comment on this case, there is also the broader legal matter that the Agilis machines
were used to “entirely replace signature verification by election personnel.” This is contrary to
Nevada state law.
As noted in a court case: “In violation of Nevada law, the Clark County Election Department
allows the Agilis machine to solely verify 30% of the signatures accompanying the mail-in ballots
without ever having humans inspect those signatures.”
A similar problem has been alleged in a court filing in Arizona with a software known as the Novus
6.0.0.0. In cases where ballots were too damaged or illegible to be read by vote tabulation
machines, Novus was used in an attempt to cure or restore the ballots. The system would do so by
trying to read the applicable scans of the original rejected ballots. However, as noted in a court
case filed by Kelli Ward, Chairwoman of the Arizona Republican Party: “the software was highly
inaccurate, and it often flipped the vote.”
Inexplicable Vote Switching and Vote Surges In Favor of Biden
As a further complication to the Novus software problem in Arizona referenced above, the
software was not only highly inaccurate. According to observers, and as an example of
inexplicable vote switching, “the software would erroneously prefill ‘Biden’ twice as often as it
did ‘Trump.’”
At least one instance of a large and inexplicable vote switching and vote surge in favor of Joe
Biden took place in Antrim County, Michigan – and it is associated with the controversial
aforementioned Dominion-Smartmatic voting machine hardware-software combo. In this
Republican stronghold, 6,000 votes were initially, and incorrectly, counted for Joe Biden. The
resulting vote totals were contrary to voter registration and historical patterns and therefore raised
eyebrows. When a check was done, it was discovered that the 6,000 votes were actually for Donald
J. Trump.
A subsequent forensic audit of the Antrim County vote tabulation found that the Dominion system
had an astonishing error rate of 68 percent.
 By way of comparison, the Federal Election
Committee requires that election systems must have an error rate no larger than 0.0008 percent.

Perhaps even more troubling given concerns over hackers and Dominion’s alleged ties to bad
foreign actors, the records that would have allowed the detection of remote internet access went
missing from the Antrim County system. This was in direct violation of Michigan state law,
which requires retention of voting records for 22 months -- such information was in place for
previous election years, but not this election. At the very least, the results of this audit indicates
the need for further investigation of the Dominion system across other states in the country.

In Georgia, there were numerous "glitches" with the Dominion machines where the results would
change. The most notable of these changes was a 20,000 vote surge for Biden and 1,000 vote
decrease for Trump.

VIII. Statistical Anomalies in the Six Battleground States
The 2020 presidential election appears to feature at least four types of statistical anomalies that
raise troubling questions. Table 8 illustrates the incidence of these statistical anomalies across the
six battleground states. As you can see from the table, Wisconsin and Georgia are characterized
by the highest degree of statistical anomalies, with three of the four anomalies present. Nevada
and Arizona show two anomalies present while Michigan has at least one. Let’s take a more
granular look now at each of these types of statistical anomalies.
Table 8: Statistical Anomalies in the Battleground States
Dramatic Changes in Mail-in and Absentee Ballot Rejection Rates from Previous Elections
It is routine across the 50 states for mail-in-and absentee ballots to be rejected for any number of
reasons. These reasons may include: the lack of a signature or adequate signature match, a late
arrival past a deadline, the lack of an external envelope that verifies voter-identification (a naked
ballot), or if voters provide inaccurate or incomplete information on the ballots.
In the 2020 presidential race, Joe Biden received a disproportionately high percentage of the mailin and absentee ballots. Perhaps not coincidentally, we saw a dramatic fall in rejection rates in
Pennsylvania, Nevada, and especially Georgia.

For example, in Nevada, the overall rejection rate dropped from 1.6% in 2016 to 0.58% in
2020.
 In Pennsylvania, the 2016 rejection rate of 1.0% dropped to virtually nothing at
0.28%.

 The biggest fall in the overall absentee ballot rejection rate came, however, in Georgia.
Its rejection rate fell from 6.8% in 2016 to a mere 0.34% in 2020.
These dramatically lower rejection rates point to a conscious effort by Democrat election officials
across these key battleground states to subject mail-in and absentee ballots to a lower level of
scrutiny. That this kind of government conduct and gaming of our election system may have
contributed to tipping the scales in favor of Joe Biden can be illustrated in this simple calculation:
In the 2020 race, Georgia election officials received 1,320, mail-in and absentee ballots. If
these ballots had been rejected at the 2016 rate of 6.8% instead of the 2020 rate of 0.34%, there
would have been 81,321 ballots rejected instead of the 4,489 ballots that were actually rejected.
Under the conservative assumption that 60% of these mail-in and absentee ballots went to Joe
Biden, this dramatic fall in the rejection rate provided Joe Biden with an additional 16,264 votes.
That’s more than the margin of the alleged Biden victory in Georgia.
Excessively High Voter Turnout (at times exceeding 100%)
When there are more ballots cast than registered or eligible voters, fraud has likely taken place.
During the 2020 presidential election, excessively high voter turnout occurred across all six swing
states.
In analyzing this problem, it is important to distinguish between states that have same-day
registration and those that don’t. States with same-day registration can plausibly have voter turnout
that is higher than 100%. However, is impossible for that to happen in states without same-day
registration without fraud having taken place.
Consider, then, Arizona which does not allow same-day voter registration. According to testimony
from an MIT-trained mathematician, Candidate Biden may have received a weighted 130% total
of Democrat votes in Maricopa County to help him win the state due to an algorithm programmed
into the Dominion voting machines used there.
Although Michigan does allow same-voter registration, voter turnout was still abnormally
high. Here again, the Dominion voting system has been implicated. To wit:
Cybersecurity executive and former NASA analyst, Russ Ramsland, testified that in Wayne
County, Michigan, where Dominion Voting Systems equipment was used, 46 out of 47 precincts
in the county displayed greater than a 96% voter turnout. 25 out of those precincts showed a 100%
voter turnout.

Wisconsin, which also allows same-day voter registration, also reported abnormally high voter
turnout when compared to 2016 numbers. For example, Milwaukee reported a record 84% voter
turnout during the 2020 presidential election versus 75% in 2016.Of the city’s 327 voting wards,
90 reported a turnout of greater than 90%.

Statistically Improbable Vote Totals Based on Party Registration and Historical Patterns
The 2020 presidential election was characterized by strong partisan voting patterns consistent with
historical patterns. As a rule, heavily Republican jurisdictions voted heavily for President Trump
and heavily Democrat jurisdictions voted heavily for Joe Biden.
In some cases, however, there were instances where these partisan and historical patterns were
violated. It is precisely in such instances where either outright fraud or machine inaccuracies or
manipulations are most likely to be operative.
As one example of such statistically improbable vote totals, there are the results in Arizona’s Fifth
Congressional District. In one precinct in the suburb of Queen Creek, the vote percent for President
Trump dropped dramatically relative to 2016, from 67.4 to 58.5 percent.
 This was attributed to
an “unusually high” number of duplicate ballots.
Unusual Vote Surges
Several unusual vote surges took place in the very early hours of the morning of November 4th in
Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin. An analysis conducted by the Voter Integrity Project of The
New York Times publicly reported data on Election Day that showed several vote “spikes” that
were unusually large in size with unusually high Biden-to-Trump ratios. Such spikes or surges
could well indicate that fraudulent ballots had been counted.
In Georgia, for example, an update at 1:34 AM on November 4th showed 136,155 additional ballots
cast for Joe Biden, and 29,115 additional votes cast for President Trump.
 An update in Michigan
at 3:50 AM on November 4th showed an update of 54,497 additional votes cast for Joe Biden, and
4,718 votes cast for President Trump.
 And an update in Wisconsin at 3:42 AM on November
4th showed 143,379 additional ballots cast for Joe Biden, and 25,163 votes cast for President
Trump.
 
IX. A State-By-State Analysis and Signal Failure of Our Legislative and
Judicial Branches
All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.
– Anna Karenina, by Leo Tolstoy
It should be clear at this point that all six battleground states suffer from most or all of the six
dimensions of election irregularities documented in this report. However, like Tolstoy’s unhappy
families, it is also true that each battleground state is different in its own election irregularity way.
That is, each battleground state may be characterized by a unique mix of issues that,
impressionistically, might be considered “most important” in swinging that state for Joe Biden.
Consider Arizona, a state with the lowest alleged Biden victory margin at 10,457 votes. This is a
state with statistically improbable high voter turnouts in Maricopa and Pima counties; widespread
ballot mishandling; and 1.6 million mail-in ballots (which tended towards Biden) subjected to
much lower standards of certification and ID verification than in-person voters (who tended
towards Trump).
In Georgia, the alleged Biden victory margin was just 11,779 votes. What perhaps jumps out most
in the Peach State is the illegal Consent Decree that effectively gutted the signature match
requirements for millions of mail-in ballots. There is also the quite unresolved fake ballot
manufacturing matter of the roughly 100,000 ballots that were mysteriously pulled, in the dead of
night, out from underneath tables and expeditiously tabulated. Of course, we saw that Georgia’s
electoral version of a Three-card Monte sleight-of-hand led to a strong Biden vote surge.
Of all of the six battleground states which suffered from numerous observer and poll watcher
abuses, Michigan must rank as “first among equals.” With its “board up the windows” and “rough
up the observers” tactics, Detroit in Wayne County was the center of this “see no evil” universe.
When two local Republican officials tried to withhold certification of the votes in this county for
practices such as these and demanded an audit, they were subject to extreme intimidation and
“doxing” and quickly capitulated.
As for Nevada, this is a state likewise with a very narrow alleged victory margin for Joe Biden –
33,596 votes. Here, voting machine irregularities associated with the Agilis machine have called
into question as many as 130,000 votes. There may also be an unusually large number of ballots
cast by out-of-state voters and others who did not meet residency requirements. Of course, the
brazen bribery of Native Americans to vote for Joe Biden is a dark stain on the state and the
Democrat Party.

In Pennsylvania, an equally brazen Democrat Secretary of State issued illegal guid

Title: Sidney Powell Releases 270 Page Document on Massive 2020 Election Fraud
Post by: DougMacG on December 26, 2020, 06:54:58 PM

Attorney Sidney Powell Releases 270 Page Document on Massive 2020 Election Fraud Involving Foreign Interference

https://wpcdn.zenger.news/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/24190822/2020-12-23-Sidney-Powell-Team-Binder-ZENGER-NEWS.pdf

Title: Sidney Powell Blasts GOP For Not Backing Donald Trump’s Election Challenges
Post by: DougMacG on December 26, 2020, 07:11:49 PM

https://www.inquisitr.com/6429781/sidney-powell-blasts-gop/
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I believe Sydney Powell over the mainstream media saying baseless accusations, but I don't know that it is sufficiently proven or know how to persuade the unbiased this is what happened.  How do you explain that one private attorney is more honest than all the journalists in Washington combined?

Has she (and others) not made the case (yet), or is there just too much evidence from too many sources of too many types for anyone / everyone to make sense of it all?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 27, 2020, 05:22:19 AM

Why did the Trump Administration distance itself from her?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 27, 2020, 06:22:16 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 27, 2020, 05:22:19 AM

Why did the Trump Administration distance itself from her?

My understanding was that she was accusing Republican officials in Georgia in particular and that created other complications.

Do you think Rudy and the Trump team don't buy the dominion accusations?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 27, 2020, 07:25:43 AM

Following on your point Crafty:

https://www.newsweek.com/sidney-powell-wants-fight-donald-trump-his-aides-wont-let-her-she-says-1557267

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 27, 2020, 07:27:03 AM

Trump speech blocked by msm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvys8172l3c&feature=youtu.be

Title: Must Read on Electoral fraud and the American Color Revolution
Post by: G M on December 28, 2020, 11:47:49 AM

https://www.revolver.news/2020/09/meet-norm-eisen-legal-hatchet-man-and-central-operative-in-the-color-revolution-against-president-trump/

Title: Gateway Pundit on PA vote discrepancies-- anything to this?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 28, 2020, 06:53:47 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-pennsylvania-certified-results-president-found-error-error-twice-size-difference-candidates/

Title: proof of voter fraud or more hot air?
Post by: ccp on December 29, 2020, 08:10:08 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-pennsylvania-certified-results-president-found-error-error-twice-size-difference-candidates/

But if one looks at Russ Diamond's post
one can see the number of confirmed voters is less then then number of votes - but that is on Nov 3

Pa allowed counting till Nov 6 th; could those extra votes be mail ins that came after Nov 3rd?

As much as I am convinced weeze robbed I am getting blockbuster headline fatigue from our side's web sites suggesting they have proof - that later turns into an affidavit from a witness etc and nothing more.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 29, 2020, 10:58:18 AM

Agreed that some on our side have engaged in bombastic BS.  Very counter-productive!

Title: Judge Stacey Abrams' sister orders keeping GA rolls dirty
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 29, 2020, 11:51:46 AM

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/federal-judge-stacey-abrams-sister-orders-two-georgias-counties-to-cease-removing-ineligible-voters-from-rolls/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 29, 2020, 03:35:29 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 29, 2020, 10:58:18 AM

Agreed that some on our side have engaged in bombastic BS.  Very counter-productive!

Running with the conclusion before proving the underlying point: our side acting like liberals. 

Which one was THE piece that proves the conclusion?  My view: There is not ONE, smoking gun point possible that proves the case.  You have to look at all the evidence.  Some have tried to present the whole story, even Trump, but hard to do that when you are blocked by all media and all delivery methods.

First to me is the "one in a quadrillion" point.  If you take the vote count on election night and the known distribution of votes to the candidates, there is less than a one in a quadrillion chance that the remaining votes swing the election to Biden.  He didn't beat great odds; he beat impossible odds.

Stop there if that doesn't make you curious about what happened in the states.

Second, the Navarro Report looks at 6 dimensions of fraud or illegality in 6 states, 6 cities, backed with 148 footnotes of evidence and testimony, makes the best case for what happened where.

It would be nice to have the whole thing spelled out in a memo, signed by Biden, spelling out the whole operation, but it doesn't work that way.

Third, the number of illegally cast votes exceeds the margin of victory by more than double.  In Pennsylvania, 379,000 illegal votes cast. Margin of victory, 154,000.

Given that fact, no one can have confidence in the outcome.

Last, all the cheating went in one direction.
-----
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163048/20201208132827887_TX-v-State-ExpedMot%202020-12-07%20FINAL.pdf
The probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote in the
four Defendant States—Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—
independently given President Trump’s early lead in those States as of 3 a.m.
on November 4, 2020, is less than one in a quadrillion, or 1 in
1,000,000,000,000,000. For former Vice President Biden to win these four
States collectively, the odds of that event happening decrease to less than one
in a quadrillion to the fourth power (i.e., 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,0004). See Decl.
of Charles J. Cicchetti, Ph.D. (“Cicchetti Decl.”) at ¶¶ 14-21, 30-31 (App. 4a-7a,
9a).
-----
Navarro Report
https://www.larslarson.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20.pdf
-----
https://gellerreport.com/2020/12/379000-illegal-ballots-were-cast-in-michigan-by-the-election-379000-illegal-ballots-were-cast-in-michigan-now-have-receipts-to-prove-it.html/
-----
Like said earlier, whatever, everyone does it. All mainstream sources refuse to cover it and then the Washington Post fact checker says its false because the fraud is not reported in any mainstream sources.  A trick taken straight from hockey stick author Michael Mann.  Don't let peers review dissenting work, then claim that dissenting studies are not peer reviewed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/18/this-might-be-most-embarrassing-document-created-by-white-house-staffer/

Title: John Lott vote fraud test
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 06:53:03 AM

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3756988

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID3757120_code16317.pdf?abstractid=3756988&mirid=1

The estimates here indicate that there were 70,000 to 79,000 “excess” votes in Georgia and Pennsylvania. Adding Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, the total increases to up to 289,000 excess votes.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 30, 2020, 07:22:04 AM

Doug,

so many numbers
so many estimates
and no "proof"

it 79 K enough to turn election in Michigan or Pa?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 08:10:33 AM

Quote from: ccp on December 30, 2020, 07:22:04 AM

Doug,

so many numbers
so many estimates
and no "proof"

it 79 K enough to turn election in Michigan or Pa?

There is no 'one' smoking gun and there is no patience or desire to look at it all.  It won't be overturned but I hope we cover all of it here since they won't do that in so many other locations.

Forget 'strict scrutiny' and 'preponderance of evidence', this particular challenge is governed by NFL Rule 15, Section 9 (Instant Replay):  "A decision will be reversed only when the [Referee] has indisputable visual evidence available to him that warrants the change." 
-----------------------------------------------
Biggest lie of 2020:  "Baseless allegations"
-----------------------------------------------
More today:
https://donaldtrumpcampaign.cmail19.com/t/ViewEmail/r/7F6B752007F6C6782540EF23F30FEDED/F6FA4D321886A825D08BC3D516CA522B

Title: Sidney Powell makes her case on Rush
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 30, 2020, 08:51:54 AM

https://populist.press/sidney-powell-goes-off-in-latest-interview-absolutely-unprecedented/

Title: Hawley to object to certification
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 30, 2020, 09:24:11 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/t/newsmax/article/1003534/1

Title: Hawley: I’ll Object to Electoral College Votes
Post by: ccp on December 30, 2020, 01:00:01 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/12/30/sen-josh-hawley-ill-object-to-electoral-college-votes-on-january-6/

a fighter

how "unbeltway"  8-)

Title: Re: Sidney Powell makes her case on Rush
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 03:25:11 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 30, 2020, 08:51:54 AM

https://populist.press/sidney-powell-goes-off-in-latest-interview-absolutely-unprecedented/

Did 5 states really stop counting at roughly the same time, right as Trump was going over the 270 mark?

How is it legal to 'stop counting' or order vote counting stopped without a legal, compelling reason?  Water main broke?  No it didn't. If it is your constitutional responsibility to count and report results, you count and report results.  Who ordered the stop? Who did they communicate with? Get a warrant, find out.  How about a swat team pre-dawn search seizure with guns drawn like they do with 'conservative' suspects.  If this happened in multiple states at the same time, someone was in charge at each location, somebody communicated with them, somebody directed.

It's great that Hawley is raising the issue.  Let Dem Senators go on record now for what we most likely will all know later.

I would hate to be spreading a false conspiracy charge, baseless accusation that undermines confidence in what were perfectly or reasonably well conducted elections.  It does not look like that's what's happening here.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 30, 2020, 03:28:14 PM

I no longer have confidence in Sidney Powell, but given all the lying and censorship all  around thought she deserved to have her elevator pitch version of things to Rush deserved an airing.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 08:00:35 PM

Eyewitness Testimony: 136,000 votes for Joe Biden “appeared” after poll watchers were dismissed from the State Farm Arena
https://gellerreport.com/2020/12/eyewitness-testimony-136000-votes-for-joe-biden-appeared-after-poll-watchers-were-dismissed-from-the-state-farm-arena.html
(Atlanta, Georgia)

 - Whatever. Everyone does it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 09:09:48 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on December 30, 2020, 03:28:14 PM

I no longer have confidence in Sidney Powell, but given all the lying and censorship all  around thought she deserved to have her elevator pitch version of things to Rush deserved an airing.

Does that mean you believe the Dominion charge she makes is BS?
Or, the fraud was real but not enough to swing the election?
The charge is true but she can't prove it?
It will be all known someday but not proven on time?

I cannot explain why I believe her.  I had not heard of her until recently and have no idea of her politics.  I can't see why she would not risk her reputation by making these claims if she didn't have good basis to know they are true - even though far more esteemed organizations like NY Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN do just that nearly everyday.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 09:18:08 PM

Georgia Witness: "93% OF MILITARY BALLOTS FOR BIDEN"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9Gi7af-Gz8

"Batches and batches all Biden.  I find that statistically impossible."

Watermark problem also.  Ballots disappeared.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 09:21:01 PM

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qs2n8cucvjxfr4h/Emergency%20Petition%20for%20Writ%20of%20Mandamus.pdf?dl=0

Emergency petition to Supreme Court.  Lin Wood.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 30, 2020, 09:26:42 PM

BREAKING: Arizona Attorney General Joins Election Lawsuit Against Maricopa County

https://electionwiz.com/2020/12/30/breaking-arizona-attorney-general-joins-election-lawsuit-against-maricopa-county/

A lot happening as we near the deadline.

Title: WSJ: President Trump's Embarrassing Hustle
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 31, 2020, 05:53:23 AM

Trump’s Embarrassing Electoral College Hustle
It is doomed to fail but would still set a destructive precedent.
By The Editorial Board
Dec. 30, 2020 6:41 pm ET

President Trump’s last and worst shot at overturning the 2020 election will come on Jan. 6, as the new Congress meets in joint session to tally the votes from the Electoral College. Mr. Trump wants Republican lawmakers to lodge formal objections to Joe Biden’s electors, and this kamikaze mission already has a few volunteers.

Here’s what would happen next, at least according to the Electoral Count Act: If a state’s electors are challenged by both a Senator and a Representative, then each chamber is supposed to retire to consider it. If they rejected the electors of enough states to deny Mr. Biden 270 electoral votes, then the House would choose the President.
***
But how could lawmakers justify throwing out electors for Mr. Biden? Although Mr. Trump keeps tweeting claims of massive vote fraud, his lawsuits have been rejected in court, sometimes by his own conservative appointees.

Any challenge to Mr. Biden’s electors appears doomed, since upholding the objection takes a majority in both chambers. The Democratic House would use the opportunity to excoriate Mr. Trump a final time on his way out the door, and grown-ups in the Republican Senate are unlikely to play along. Hence the Trump crowd’s latest argument: that the power to invalidate electors rests with the joint session’s presiding officer—Vice President Mike Pence.

A nub of truth here is that the Electoral Count Act might be unconstitutional. Originally passed after the contested-election mess of 1876, it purports to let a simple majority of Congress decide which presidential electors are valid, a power that’s hard to justify under the Constitution or separation-of-power principles.
Reverting to the Constitution’s text, however, would be small help to Mr. Trump. The workings of the Electoral College were refined by the 12th Amendment, which says that the Vice President shall “open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” Where does that language give Mr. Pence unilateral authority to set aside electors? This can’t be what the Founders wanted.

In 1876, at least, there were competing electors that each claimed official imprimatur. In Oregon the Governor and the Secretary of State certified different slates. Florida’s outgoing Governor signed off on a group of electors, only to be reversed by the incoming Governor.

None of that ambiguity exists now. Self-styled Republican shadow electors held their own gatherings this month in some states that Mr. Biden won. But it was a purely extracurricular exercise. In Georgia the GOP chairman said it was intended to preserve Mr. Trump’s legal options, even as the state’s Republican leaders officially certified electors for Mr. Biden.

If Democrats tried a similar Electoral College stunt, Republicans would hoot it down. The closest recent analogue was after the 2004 race, when Democrats challenged Ohio’s electors, claiming they wanted to force a debate on voting reforms. Sen. Barbara Boxer joined them, delaying the ratification for hours as the House and Senate considered the objections.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi defended the exercise, saying that the discussion “should not be considered frivolous.” Rep. Jerrold Nadler thundered that “the right to vote has been stolen from qualified voters,” while allowing that irregularities “have not been proved to have changed the outcome.” Rep. Maxine Waters charged that Ohio’s “partisan Secretary of State, Mr. Kenneth Blackwell, I’m ashamed to say an African-American man,” failed to pursue voter intimidation.

What was the GOP’s rejoinder? “Some Democrats only want to gripe about counts, recounts, and recounts of recounts,” said Rep. Deborah Pryce. Then- Rep. Roy Blunt pointed to the substantial Ohio margin. “If we were taking this important time today to talk about a difference of 118 votes,” he said, “that might be justifiable,” but Mr. Bush won by 118,000. Then- Rep. Rob Portman dismissed “irresponsible conspiracy theories about what happened in Ohio,” adding: “I was there. It didn’t happen.”

Counts, recounts, and recounts of recounts—that’s a description of Georgia this year. The difference is that in 2004 Democratic candidate John Kerry conceded. “I will not be taking part in a formal protest of the Ohio electors,” he said. Despite reports of irregularities, “our legal teams on the ground have found no evidence that would change the outcome.” Does Mr. Trump want to depart by making people pine for the statesmanship of John Kerry?
***
Republicans should be embarrassed by Mr. Trump’s Electoral College hustle. Mr. Trump is putting his loyal VP in a terrible spot, and what do Republicans think would happen if Mr. Pence pulled the trigger, Mr. Biden was denied 270 electoral votes, and the House chose Mr. Trump as President? Riots in the streets would be the least of it.

Mr. Pence is too much of a patriot to go along, but the scramble to overturn the will of the voters tarnishes Mr. Trump’s legacy and undermines any designs he has on running in 2024. Republicans who humor him will be giving Democrats license to do the same in the future, and then it might matter.

Title: inventor of grocery scanner hacks into vote machines
Post by: ccp on December 31, 2020, 06:07:15 AM

https://pjmedia.com/election/victoria-taft/2020/12/30/tech-expert-shocks-ga-election-fraud-hearing-with-news-he-got-into-voting-system-with-wifi-n1293439

The response for the Left

trump lost biden won
sore losers
over and over again
baseless lies crazy threat to democracy

and then get some democrat lawyer to tell us it is BS

Title: Re: inventor of grocery scanner hacks into vote machines
Post by: DougMacG on December 31, 2020, 07:36:31 AM

WHY ARE THESE VOTING MACHINES CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET?

We don't want it to have updatable software.  We want it to count votes.

Title: Re: WSJ: President Trump's Embarrassing Hustle
Post by: DougMacG on December 31, 2020, 07:51:29 AM

I like the WSJ editorialists but this contains more than a hint of establishment bias here.

"grown-ups in the Republican Senate are unlikely to play along"

First in line will be Romney, the 'grown up' who voted for bogus impeachment.

"If Democrats tried a similar Electoral College stunt..."

I like the exercise of asking what if the shoe were on the other foot but it is totally inapplicable here.  What if Republicans had created and executed six dimensions of fraud across six swing states, swinging an otherwise lost election to a win?  They would be in jail, not presenting their electors to the Electoral College. MHO.

(update) The argument that the courts have already looked at it is quite unoriginal.  Where did a 'Trump appointed judge' or any court see all the evidence and rule on the merits?  I missed that.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 31, 2020, 08:02:27 AM

"grown-ups in the Republican Senate are unlikely to play along"

Yes agreed
the WSJ if full of elites
and whom all think they know better than the plebes
I don't read it anymore
for politics

Wall st cares only about Wall st.
not us

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, just keeps dripping out - by the thousands
Post by: DougMacG on December 31, 2020, 02:47:49 PM

Arizona Citizens Investigation Discovers Thousands of Phantom Voters in State – Up to 30% of Addresses in Investigation Were Fraudulent

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/update-arizona-citizens-investigation-discovers-thousands-phantom-voters-state-30-addresses-investigation-fraudulent/
--------------------------------------

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, What is the threshold? The lettuce rule
Post by: DougMacG on December 31, 2020, 02:57:07 PM

Previously I posted the NFL replay rule where evidence beyond doubt must be seen on video for the officials to overturn the ruling on the field.  That is NOT the criterion in the Electoral College.

The constitution provides a backup way of choosing a President if the first method fails.  So what constitutes election failure?  Where there is no confidence in the outcome.  Think of the lettuce rule described by a caller on Mark Steyn (Rush).  How many instances of ecoli contamination for example does it take to pull the entire batch of lettuce off the market?  Not very many.  One instance?  You don't have anything to tie it to the rest of the batch.  Two instances?  Not much of a pattern.  Thousands of 'contaminations' across half a dozen states that leave you with no confidence in any of the rest of it?  Take the whole batch off the market.  Go to phase two in the constitution. 

Title: Does this mean that GA actually verified signatures?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 31, 2020, 03:26:17 PM

https://dailycaller.com/2020/12/31/signature-audit-georgias-cobb-county-no-evidence-voter-fraud/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=iOc89vJKG1yNWBnSRTIESnFl37qKepWBF371Xpxv

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Georgia Subcommittee testimony
Post by: DougMacG on December 31, 2020, 05:02:38 PM

5 hours under oath.  No I haven't watched.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5ZP_HpBKos

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 01, 2021, 05:53:27 PM

And you take this guy seriously GM?

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/01/lin-wood-claims-vp-mike-pence-faces-arrest-for-treason-execution-by-firing-squad/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 01, 2021, 06:32:30 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 01, 2021, 05:53:27 PM

And you take this guy seriously GM?

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/01/lin-wood-claims-vp-mike-pence-faces-arrest-for-treason-execution-by-firing-squad/

Lin Wood, sabotaging his own case on voter fraud.  Isn't that the same thing he is accusing?  Treason.

Among others, I don't like his attack on Chief Justice John Roberts. Can't you just say you don't like his opinions or that he's been a big disappointment? The firing squad seems over the top.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 01, 2021, 06:57:49 PM

A lot of damage to our cause with this sort of excrement.  Our legit claims are painted with this brush.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 01, 2021, 07:33:14 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 01, 2021, 05:53:27 PM

And you take this guy seriously GM?

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/01/lin-wood-claims-vp-mike-pence-faces-arrest-for-treason-execution-by-firing-squad/

Well, I did...

 :-o

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 01, 2021, 07:49:57 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 01, 2021, 06:57:49 PM

A lot of damage to our cause with this sort of excrement.  Our legit claims are painted with this brush.

Very damaging.


FK!

Title: Lin Wood has become a total kook
Post by: ccp on January 01, 2021, 07:52:08 PM

sounds like Nancy Pelosi

now

Title: International standards
Post by: G M on January 01, 2021, 09:12:56 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/voter%20id%2001.jpg

(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/voter%20id%2001.jpg)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 01, 2021, 09:31:47 PM

https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/12/what-youve-been-asking-for-a-fairly-complete-list-of-some-of-the-most-significant-claims-of-2020-election-miscounts-errors-or-fraud/

Title: Someone please paste the content of this ASAP
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 02, 2021, 12:52:32 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/cruz-letter-calls-for-rejection-of-electoral-college-results/

Title: Post-Election violence coverage globally
Post by: G M on January 02, 2021, 01:43:44 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/stores-brace-for-post-election-unrest-and-possibility-of-violence-damage-to-businesses-after-presidential-results/ar-BB1aC9N5

From Vox (Official website of below average IQ leftists):

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/2/21546327/boarded-up-business-election-day-protests

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/02/nyregion/nyc-election-unrest.html

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1719045/national-guard-standby-shops-boarded-us-election-violence/

https://www.kboi.com/news/retailers-brace-for-election-day-violence-board-up-stores/

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/01/politics/extremism-violence-election-preparations-invs/index.html

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2020/nov/02/las-vegas-gun-stores-brace-for-worst-on-election-d/

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/10/people-are-already-being-targeted-america-braces-for-violence-as-election-day-draws-closer/

https://www.kitv.com/story/42856427/as-mainland-businesses-brace-for-election-day-violence-hawaii-lawmakers-are-confident-the-aloha-spirit-will-prevail

https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/fashion-beauty/article/3106622/fashion-stores-increase-security-fearing-us-election

https://turkishpress.com/us-cities-businesses-brace-for-post-election-violence/

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/atlanta-businesses-brace-possible-unrest-following-election-results/7LT6YRRJ5VA2BPKJQ5PZYIRSLM/

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54788626

https://www.newyorker.com/news/current/washington-dc-braces-for-election-night

https://www.cbs17.com/news/your-local-election-hq/as-some-prep-for-election-night-violence-in-raleigh-faith-leaders-call-for-calm/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8882091/Texas-prepares-send-1-000-troops-DC-begins-board-stores-ahead-election.html

https://www.ibtimes.com/election-violence-fears-rise-california-prepares-civil-unrest-walmart-pulls-guns-3072900

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-luxury-buildings-armed-guards-election-day-unrest

https://www.kbc.co.ke/us-businesses-brace-for-election-unrest/

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/us-election-business-leaders-disputed-result-calm-security-13447762

https://www.policemag.com/581259/american-law-enforcement-braces-for-election-riots

https://www.deccanherald.com/international/world-news-politics/anxious-americans-brace-for-election-day-with-faces-masked-stores-boarded-up-910759.html

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/marion-county/2020/11/02/indiana-election-2020-downtown-indianapolis-braces-unrest/6126603002/

https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30396714

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/election-results-2020-riots-trump-biden-b1700559.html

https://www.dawn.com/news/1588233

https://gizmodo.com/facebook-gears-up-for-possible-election-chaos-with-tool-1845479148

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 02, 2021, 01:50:26 PM

Thank you very much GM!

Title: Cruz brings the Trump hot air balloon in for a landing
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 02, 2021, 02:44:29 PM

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=5541&fbclid=IwAR2ko2JYrpgfDZxfG1r6VMEXpZXUECeuGr3KmhedH0KsqpYbP-PDO7hB_SU

Title: Re: Cruz brings the Trump hot air balloon in for a landing
Post by: DougMacG on January 02, 2021, 10:12:56 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 02, 2021, 02:44:29 PM

https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=5541&fbclid=IwAR2ko2JYrpgfDZxfG1r6VMEXpZXUECeuGr3KmhedH0KsqpYbP-PDO7hB_SU

The letter:

"America is a Republic whose leaders are chosen in democratic elections. Those elections, in turn, must comply with the Constitution and with federal and state law.

"When the voters fairly decide an election, pursuant to the rule of law, the losing candidate should acknowledge and respect the legitimacy of that election. And, if the voters choose to elect a new office-holder, our Nation should have a peaceful transfer of power.

"The election of 2020, like the election of 2016, was hard fought and, in many swing states, narrowly decided. The 2020 election, however, featured unprecedented allegations of voter fraud, violations and lax enforcement of election law, and other voting irregularities.

"Voter fraud has posed a persistent challenge in our elections, although its breadth and scope are disputed. By any measure, the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes.

"And those allegations are not believed just by one individual candidate. Instead, they are widespread. Reuters/Ipsos polling, tragically, shows that 39% of Americans believe ‘the election was rigged.' That belief is held by Republicans (67%), Democrats (17%), and Independents (31%).

"Some Members of Congress disagree with that assessment, as do many members of the media.

"But, whether or not our elected officials or journalists believe it, that deep distrust of our democratic processes will not magically disappear. It should concern us all. And it poses an ongoing threat to the legitimacy of any subsequent administrations.

"Ideally, the courts would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud. Twice, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to do so; twice, the Court declined.

"On January 6, it is incumbent on Congress to vote on whether to certify the 2020 election results. That vote is the lone constitutional power remaining to consider and force resolution of the multiple allegations of serious voter fraud.

"At that quadrennial joint session, there is long precedent of Democratic Members of Congress raising objections to presidential election results, as they did in 1969, 2001, 2005, and 2017. And, in both 1969 and 2005, a Democratic Senator joined with a Democratic House Member in forcing votes in both houses on whether to accept the presidential electors being challenged.

"The most direct precedent on this question arose in 1877, following serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct in the Hayes-Tilden presidential race. Specifically, the elections in three states-Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina-were alleged to have been conducted illegally.

"In 1877, Congress did not ignore those allegations, nor did the media simply dismiss those raising them as radicals trying to undermine democracy. Instead, Congress appointed an Electoral Commission-consisting of five Senators, five House Members, and five Supreme Court Justices-to consider and resolve the disputed returns.

"We should follow that precedent. To wit, Congress should immediately appoint an Electoral Commission, with full investigatory and fact-finding authority, to conduct an emergency 10-day audit of the election returns in the disputed states. Once completed, individual states would evaluate the Commission's findings and could convene a special legislative session to certify a change in their vote, if needed.

"Accordingly, we intend to vote on January 6 to reject the electors from disputed states as not ‘regularly given' and ‘lawfully certified' (the statutory requisite), unless and until that emergency 10-day audit is completed.

"We are not naïve. We fully expect most if not all Democrats, and perhaps more than a few Republicans, to vote otherwise. But support of election integrity should not be a partisan issue. A fair and credible audit-conducted expeditiously and completed well before January 20-would dramatically improve Americans' faith in our electoral process and would significantly enhance the legitimacy of whoever becomes our next President. We owe that to the People.

"These are matters worthy of the Congress, and entrusted to us to defend. We do not take this action lightly. We are acting not to thwart the democratic process, but rather to protect it. And every one of us should act together to ensure that the election was lawfully conducted under the Constitution and to do everything we can to restore faith in our Democracy."

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Hayward on Lin Wood
Post by: DougMacG on January 02, 2021, 10:31:07 PM

Steven F. Hayward  (twitter)
@stevenfhayward
·
Dec 30, 2020
Starting to think Lin Wood is a double agent planted to discredit any reasonable doubts about the vote count.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Hayward on Lin Wood
Post by: G M on January 02, 2021, 10:40:17 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on January 02, 2021, 10:31:07 PM

Steven F. Hayward  (twitter)
@stevenfhayward
·
Dec 30, 2020
Starting to think Lin Wood is a double agent planted to discredit any reasonable doubts about the vote count.

Can't say that's not the case.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2021, 02:48:38 AM

Agreed.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2021, 03:29:44 AM

Putting GM's post of post election violence to good use!

Title: Re: Post-Election violence coverage globally
Post by: DougMacG on January 03, 2021, 06:34:23 AM

Pretty amazing post, bringing this forward.

Let me see if I have this right. It's terrible and a threat to our democracy that Republicans are making LEGAL challenges to the obvious and unexplainable anomalies in this election, but if Trump had won fairly in the vote counts same opponents were promising to burn down the whole country literally. Which side again is recklessly threatening the peaceful transfer of power?

Quote from: G M on January 02, 2021, 01:43:44 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/stores-brace-for-post-election-unrest-and-possibility-of-violence-damage-to-businesses-after-presidential-results/ar-BB1aC9N5

From Vox (Official website of below average IQ leftists):

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/2/21546327/boarded-up-business-election-day-protests

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/02/nyregion/nyc-election-unrest.html

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1719045/national-guard-standby-shops-boarded-us-election-violence/

https://www.kboi.com/news/retailers-brace-for-election-day-violence-board-up-stores/

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/01/politics/extremism-violence-election-preparations-invs/index.html

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2020/nov/02/las-vegas-gun-stores-brace-for-worst-on-election-d/

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/10/people-are-already-being-targeted-america-braces-for-violence-as-election-day-draws-closer/

https://www.kitv.com/story/42856427/as-mainland-businesses-brace-for-election-day-violence-hawaii-lawmakers-are-confident-the-aloha-spirit-will-prevail

https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/fashion-beauty/article/3106622/fashion-stores-increase-security-fearing-us-election

https://turkishpress.com/us-cities-businesses-brace-for-post-election-violence/

https://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/atlanta-businesses-brace-possible-unrest-following-election-results/7LT6YRRJ5VA2BPKJQ5PZYIRSLM/

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54788626

https://www.newyorker.com/news/current/washington-dc-braces-for-election-night

https://www.cbs17.com/news/your-local-election-hq/as-some-prep-for-election-night-violence-in-raleigh-faith-leaders-call-for-calm/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8882091/Texas-prepares-send-1-000-troops-DC-begins-board-stores-ahead-election.html

https://www.ibtimes.com/election-violence-fears-rise-california-prepares-civil-unrest-walmart-pulls-guns-3072900

https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-city-luxury-buildings-armed-guards-election-day-unrest

https://www.kbc.co.ke/us-businesses-brace-for-election-unrest/

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/us-election-business-leaders-disputed-result-calm-security-13447762

https://www.policemag.com/581259/american-law-enforcement-braces-for-election-riots

https://www.deccanherald.com/international/world-news-politics/anxious-americans-brace-for-election-day-with-faces-masked-stores-boarded-up-910759.html

https://www.indystar.com/story/news/local/marion-county/2020/11/02/indiana-election-2020-downtown-indianapolis-braces-unrest/6126603002/

https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30396714

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election-2020/election-results-2020-riots-trump-biden-b1700559.html

https://www.dawn.com/news/1588233

https://gizmodo.com/facebook-gears-up-for-possible-election-chaos-with-tool-1845479148

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2021, 07:50:22 AM

Yes!  This is a huge point and one that we need to be making emphatically.

Great work by our GM!

Title: the scam as per Ritchie the scammer
Post by: ccp on January 03, 2021, 10:23:40 AM

https://townhall.com/columnists/wayneallynroot/2021/01/03/biggest-horserace-fixer-of-all-time-says-democrats-stole-election-heres-how-n2582383

Title: The stupid is strong with Sen. Cornyn
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2021, 03:11:38 PM

https://nationalfile.com/january-6-john-cornyn-indicates-he-doesnt-know-how-contingent-elections-work-hasnt-read-constitution/ :-P

Title: Re: The stupid is strong with Sen. Cornyn
Post by: G M on January 03, 2021, 03:37:25 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2021, 03:11:38 PM

https://nationalfile.com/january-6-john-cornyn-indicates-he-doesnt-know-how-contingent-elections-work-hasnt-read-constitution/ :-P

We really aren't too far from this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGUNPMPrxvA

Title: The Cheat in Plain Sight
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2021, 03:42:03 PM

This sort of stuff is a gap for me, and the source is not, IMHO, first tier; but FWIW here it is:

https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2021/01/03/the-cheat-in-plain-sight-n2582470

Title: Re: The stupid is strong with Sen. Cornyn
Post by: G M on January 03, 2021, 09:38:42 PM

Quote from: G M on January 03, 2021, 03:37:25 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2021, 03:11:38 PM

https://nationalfile.com/january-6-john-cornyn-indicates-he-doesnt-know-how-contingent-elections-work-hasnt-read-constitution/ :-P

We really aren't too far from this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGUNPMPrxvA

https://twitter.com/breannamorello/status/1345867264277553153?s=21

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 04, 2021, 03:24:01 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/6-person-team-briefed-hundreds-of-state-senators-on-election-theft-evidence-navarro-says_3641503.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-01-04

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 04, 2021, 08:55:51 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 04, 2021, 03:24:01 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/6-person-team-briefed-hundreds-of-state-senators-on-election-theft-evidence-navarro-says_3641503.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-01-04

Thumbs up on that.  Next, what is wrong with the idea of a 10 day audit that does not change the inauguration date or hinder the transition?  Didn't Democrats demand one more week investigation on Brett Kavanaugh, because it was a 'lifetime appointment'?  This election determines who makes the lifetime appointments.  Verifying the honesty and accuracy of the election does not undermine democracy. 

Title: Pravda on the Potomac goes fake news yet again
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 04, 2021, 09:36:52 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/trump-georgia-raffensperger/2021/01/03/id/1004057/

Title: NRO vs. Hawley and Cruz
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2021, 03:11:41 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/the-folly-of-the-cruz-eleven/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202021-01-04&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Josh Hawley is nothing if not a leader.

The Missouri Republican’s announcement last week that he would object to Biden electors from Pennsylvania immediately caused another eleven Republican senators, organized by Ted Cruz, to play catchup and declare they’d object to Biden electors from all the battleground states Trump is contesting.

Like Hawley, the Cruz group cites the precedent of 2005, when Senator Barbara Boxer joined objecting House Democrats to force a debate over whether to count George W. Bush electors from Ohio, the state that provided Bush’s margin of victory.

MORE IN ELECTORAL COLLEGE
A Week That Will Change America
Trump’s New Year’s Resolution: ‘Find 11,780 Votes’ in Georgia
Wednesday’s Electoral College Debate: All Eyes on Pence
It has always been axiomatic that Republicans shouldn’t emulate the former progressive senator from California, and never more so in this case. If the Cruz-led objectors somehow actually got their way, they’d trample federal law and state sovereignty and blow a hole in the hull of American democracy.

The Cruz eleven issued a statement justifying their position. Like Hawley’s statement last week, it doesn’t directly say that the election was stolen — the only possible basis for contesting the counting of electors. Presumably written carefully to allow the signatories plenty of wiggle room if their conduct doesn’t wear well, it instead says only that “the allegations of fraud and irregularities in the 2020 election exceed any in our lifetimes.”

NOW WATCH: '$600 Stimulus Relief Checks May Be Added to New Coronavirus Relief Proposal'

Of course, this is true only because the sitting president of the United States is amplifying such allegations every day, without regard to their truthfulness or connection to reality. The allegations themselves aren’t so different from those that fueled Democratic doubts about the outcome in Ohio in 2005 — e.g., voting machines have been used to switch votes. The difference is that back then, the losing candidate wasn’t promoting the outlandish charges, with many officeholders in his own party too frightened or cynical to contradict him.

Cruz et al. must know that nothing can be reasonably done to put the allegations to rest because Trump would keep repeating them until the election was overturned and he was awarded a second term (and even then, he still wouldn’t stop decrying the alleged crimes perpetrated against him on November 3).

The letter from the Cruz eleven states that “ideally, the courts would have heard evidence and resolved these claims of serious election fraud.” In point of fact, federal courts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Nevada did consider the Trump campaign’s claims on the merits, and they all found them wanting. The letter laments that the Supreme Court didn’t take up the factual questions, but the highest court in the land isn’t a random fact-finding body. The most prominent suit that landed on its desk was an attempt by Texas to throw out the results in key battlegrounds won by Biden. The court declined to hear the suit because it was so flagrantly constitutionally flawed.

The letter cites the contention over the notorious 1876 presidential election between Democrat Samuel Tilden and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes. Trying to draw an analogy to today, it refers to “serious allegations of fraud and illegal conduct” in 1876, but this significantly understates it.

ALSO FROM
THE EDITORS
Britain’s Brexit Triumph
The Preposterous Louie Gohmert Lawsuit
A Necessary Relief Bill


In 1876, there weren’t just allegations; there was honest-to-God evidence of bribery and ballot stuffing on both sides in the chaotic atmosphere of Southern states still under Reconstruction. There were rival slates of electors from Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina. Black voters were subjected to horrific violence and intimidation to keep them from the polls.

To compare any of this to today is perverse. In Georgia, for instance, machine and hand recounts have confirmed the results, while a signature audit has found no evidence of endemic mismatches. Yet, the president of the United States is still calling the Republican secretary of state of Georgia to try to browbeat him into awarding him victory in the state based on misinformation and conspiracy theories.

JOIN THE TUESDAY
Get Kevin D. Williamson’s newsletter delivered to your inbox each Tuesday.


Email Address
The Cruz eleven call for an electoral commission on the model of the one that determined the outcome in 1877. Never mind that this commission was a travesty. The original idea was that the commission of five senators, five representatives, and five Supreme Court justices would be split 7–7 between Republicans and Democrats with Justice David Davis, an independent, providing the decisive vote. As it happened, though, the Illinois legislature elected Davis to the Senate, and his spot on the commission was taken by the Republican justice Joseph Bradley, who reliably voted with his GOP colleagues, giving Hayes an 8–7 victory on every contested question to get him the 20 additional electoral votes he needed to win. Hayes served only one term, which was overshadowed by the odor of the backroom deals that ensured his election.

Trump may like this model, assuming it is stacked in his favor. The problem is that, in reaction to the debacle of 1877, Congress adopted a statute giving states a “safe harbor” for their electors, i.e., assurance that they’d be considered conclusive by the federal government, if appointed six days prior to the Electoral College. All the contested states (except for Wisconsin) met this standard. No competing slate of electors was appointed by any legitimate body of any state government. The Cruz eleven propose to call into doubt the sole slate of state-appointed electors in each state anyway, and to essentially attempt to usurp what is supposed to be the state function of appointing electors. The federalists among the Cruz eleven know all this — at least they do when they aren’t currying favor with Donald Trump.

The Cruz eleven realize that their effort isn’t going anywhere. Both houses of Congress would have to vote to uphold objections to electors. Neither will, and neither should. If all they want to do is signal that they are upset that Biden won, this isn’t the manner or the forum to do it. Nor is this the proper way to examine underhanded electoral practices that did not alter the outcome, or to propose election reforms, however needed.

Barbara Boxer shouldn’t be a conservative role model.

Title: Trump makes his vote fraud case
Post by: DougMacG on January 05, 2021, 09:00:41 AM

In the middle and throughout his speech in Georgia last night, Trump laid out his case of vote fraud that swung the election.

https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-speech-transcript-dalton-georgia-senate-runoff-election
... We won Iowa by 8.2%. Nobody’s ever won those three States and lost. Never happened before. It’s almost impossible unless people do a lot of … Either get very lucky or they cheat. We’re up 293,000 votes in Michigan, 112,000 votes in Washington. In Wisconsin we were way up, 356,000 votes. In Georgia, 356,000 and 700,000 votes in Pennsylvania. It was over. I should have run up to the podium and said, thank you very much for this wonderful victory. Then maybe they wouldn’t have had time to close those booths, the counting rooms, and do what they did. But then it all started to disappear. I tell this story because we can’t let this happen tomorrow, Kelly. So keep your eyes open. Since the election, we have put forth indisputable evidence documenting the rampant fraud, which will be announced on Wednesday as you know.

And I want to thank Senator Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz and all of the incredible senators that have stepped up to fight, because they’ve seen what happens. They know it’s a fraud and not just here. I watched some of the people on Fox. I had no choice. I had no choice. I had to. I didn’t have enough channels. And they said, “Why is he fighting for Georgia? It’s not enough.” And I need three. I’m fighting in eight, actually, but six and we’re going to win them all. But they said, “Why?” So one of the people, a very fine woman actually, but she said, “Why is he fighting Georgia? It doesn’t get him there.” I said, “No, but Georgia and Pennsylvania and one other get me there. And we have six and maybe eight, if you look at them and we were leading all of them by a lot, until, like a miracle, it started to quickly disappear.”

Right here in Georgia there were tens of thousands of illegal votes cast and counted. You know that. And here are just a few examples. Watch this for tomorrow. We were up 10,315 ballots were cast by individuals whose name and date of birth matches a Georgia resident who died in 2020 prior to the election. Then your wacky secretary of state said two people, two people. Now, I don’t know how many people are on that list, but it’s a lot of people. 2,506 ballots were cast by individuals whose name and date of birth matches an incarcerated felon in a Georgia prison. Maybe they aren’t all there, but they did a lot of work. They paid a lot of money to a lot of people. I can tell you that. 4,502 illegal ballots were cast by individuals who do not appear on the state’s voter rolls. Well, that’s sort of strange. 18,325 illegal ballots were cast by individuals who registered to vote using an address listed as vacant according to the postal service. At least 86,880 ballots were cast by people whose registrations were illegally backdated. Oh, I can’t believe that happened.

66,000 votes … You have to understand, we’re down by a little more than 11,000. So every one of these is determinative. 66,000 votes in Georgia were cast by people under the legal voting age. At least 15,000 ballots were cast by individuals who moved out of the state prior to the November 3rd election, or maybe they moved back in. I don’t know. I mean, I can’t tell. They moved out, ah, let’s go back. Usually takes a little time, right? We moved out. Let’s go back, darling. Georgia’s absentee ballot rejection rate went from an average of 3% in 2016, and then went down very low to almost zero now. Think of it, almost zero. If you multiply that out. And this is with many, many more ballots pouring in. Went to almost zero. 48 out of 159 counties in Georgia rejected no ballots at all. These absentee ballot rejection rates prove that the tens of thousands of illegitimate ballots were counted. There were more absentee ballots in 2020 than ever before by [inaudible 00:53:36]. But magically far fewer ballots were rejected. This alone is more than enough to swing the election to us. This one thing. I’m going over individual. In all of the swing States. Now they’ll check this out and that’s fine, but you take a look at it. Officials, egregiously violated state laws in order to solicit, facilitate and promote cheating and theft on a scale never seen before. These crooked and incompetent official suspended signature verification. I said, I want you to go to Fulton County to check the signatures, because hundreds of thousands of ballots came in. I want you to check the signature to see if it compares to somebody that lived there two years, four years or six years ago. They don’t want to do it. The secretary of state and your incompetent governor. Although he thinks I’ve been a great president. They illegally flooded their States with absentee ballots and they deployed hundreds of elicit ballot drop boxes and corrupt Democrat run cities, among many other flagrant violations of law.

They put these drop boxes there. And in a number of they’d be gone for three days. They’d take them up and where are they? Where are they? They were gone. Georgia secretary of state agreed to a litigation settlement, which is something that nobody’s ever seen one like this. I want to just tell you that Stacey Abrams took him to the cleaners. That drastically and illegally changed the states election procedures. They never got the mandated approval from your state legislature, who, by the way, you have some great people in your legislature. Some great, great people who agree with what we’re saying and even more so.

But think of it. They never got the approval. You have to, by law, under the constitution, you can’t just do these deals and not get the approval and your secretary of state or whoever it was, made this horrible consent decree, horrible, which got rid of so much safety. It’s a disgraceful thing. And it was only approved by your local politicians, him, and local judges. You can’t do that. You have to have your state legislatures do it. That’s true with all States. Tens of thousands of votes are missing. We go all over the world telling people how to run their elections and we don’t even know how to run ours. The most unhappy person right now, anywhere in the United States is Hillary Clinton. Because she’s asking the Democrat party, why the hell didn’t you do this for me? True. Why didn’t you do it for me? Why the hell didn’t you? You notice how quiet she’s been? I shouldn’t have said that, not tonight Jill. But you notice how quiet … she’s furious, because she said, “Don’t forget, I won Michigan by 10,000 votes.” We did much better. As I said, this time. Much, much better, but I won Michigan from her by 10,000 votes. I won Wisconsin by a small … I mean, they could have done that one and not get caught. We caught him, we caught him.

And I say to people like Mike Lee, that here at Lindsey, I say, if they got approved and verified, they use the word verified, votes that are fraudulent. And then we find out after, because you can’t do it that quickly. It doesn’t go that quickly. It’s a lot of work and a lot of votes and a lot of people. And then we find out that they were frauds like in one state where you had, let’s say you lost by 25,000 votes. They verify it. And that’s supposed to be the end. But shortly thereafter, we find out that we actually won the state by 250,000 votes. Does that mean that that state plus others adds up to being your president? I don’t think it should. I don’t think it should. I don’t think that Kelly feels it should. I don’t think that Marjorie feels it should. In Wisconsin over 90,000 ballots where illegally harvested. Can’t do that. Not allowed to.

Through so-called human drop boxes and over 500 illegal unmanned drop boxes were put out statewide. In addition, over 170,000 absentee votes were counted that are blatantly illegal under Wisconsin law and should never have been included in the tally. By the way, I lost the … It was razor thin. There’s 170,000 votes. The margin in Wisconsin is only 20,000 votes. So this issue alone would have won that state for us many times over, we were leading at 10 o’clock in the evening by a lot. In Pennsylvania, there were 205,000 more ballots cast than there were voters. How do you get around that one?

Which remains completely unexplained. You have great senators and representatives there and nobody can explain it, but think of that. And in other places too, you had more ballots than you had voters. You had more votes, think of it, then you had voters by a lot. In addition, Democrats, state Supreme court judges and Democrat secretary of state effectively abolished the signature verification process right here. They counted ballots cast after deadlines and they allowed ballots to be illegally fixed in Democrat controlled areas. And I say this because you can’t let this happen tomorrow. And I hope all the politicians are listening. There’s an unexplained 400,000 vote discrepancy between the number of mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania sent out reported on November 2nd, 2020. And the number reported on November 4th. They can’t explain it. 400,000 previously unreported mail-in ballots, magically appeared. They couldn’t explain it. And all of a sudden they just happened to find 400,000. That’s a lot of people.

Amazing. And the Pennsylvania legislature is not happy. Pennsylvania also had an estimated 8,000 dead voters, 55,000 ballots received back before they were even sent. How about that? The ballots were received, but they weren’t sent yet. Oh, get them out fast please. Many more with no mail date and 14,000 ballots illegally cast by out of state voters. Those are the numbers and those are the numbers we got from them. So they can’t say, Oh, the numbers aren’t so good. In Clark County, Nevada, over 130,000 ballots, this is far, just so you know, all these numbers, these are far more than we need, we’re processed on machines where the signature matching threshold was intentionally lowered to a level that you could sign your name, Santa clause, and it wouldn’t pick it up. Didn’t pick up anything. More than 42,000 people in Nevada double voted. That’s more than we needed, by far.

In Arizona more than 36,000 votes were cast by non citizens. And there were 11,000 more ballots than there were voters. It seems to be a trait, doesn’t it? This was like at the Super Bowl, where you have 15 cameras and they’d say camera number four, you’re on. Camera number three, you’re on. In Michigan, according to one analyst, over 35,000 ballots listed no address, over 13 ballots were cast by non-residents and an estimated 17,000 ballots were cast by dead people. Some dead people, by the way, also requested an application through. Those are the ones that really bothered me. They not only vote, but they request an application. That’s a double. In addition, there is the highly troubling matter of Dominion voting machines.

And I want you to watch this very carefully tomorrow everybody, you have to watch it carefully. I want to read you from a letter from Georgia state Senator William Ligon. You know who he is, right? Highly respected guy. “Dear Mr president, as chairman of the Georgia Senate judiciary committee on elections. I request that you immediately send an outside team of cyber experts to investigate potential hacking and other irregularities associated with Dominion voting systems, scanners, ballot marking devices, ballots, polling pads used in the 2020 general election in Georgia.” You don’t hear this from your secretary of state and you don’t hear this from your governor and you do have a great legislature. I have to tell you, but the governor won’t let him hold the session to decertify. On December 30th, 2020, the committee held a hearing investigating potential fraud and other irregularities during Georgia’s 2020 general election.

The committee first unanimously approved a report dated December 17th, 2020, discussing a myriad of voting irregularities and potential fraud in Georgia 2020 general election, disgusted in an earlier hearing held on December 3rd. Notably the committee stated in the executive summary that the November 3rd 2020 general election was chaotic and reported results must be viewed as untrustworthy. They are untrustworthy, despite the line of crap that you hear from these people that represent you. I don’t know where they come from. The committee then heard, and this is from one of your most highly respected political representatives, the committee then heard additional testimony concerning voting irregularities during the 2020 general election, including testimony and a real time test demonstrating serious irregularities with Dominion’s voting machines. Three events discussed at this hearing standout and require a forensic auditor of the Dominion voting machines in Georgia to be immediately conducted.

The governor will not let us do it. We’ve been asking them now since November 4th, the day after the election, he won’t let us do it. Why won’t he let us do it? There’s only one reason I can think of. First the Dominion voting machines employed in Fulton County. That’s the home of Stacey. Had an astounding 93.67 error rate. 93.67 error rate in the scanning of ballots requiring a review panel to adjudicate or determine the voters intent. So they’re going to a voter intent. What did the voter mean by this vote? Somebody votes for Trump. I think that voter meant something other. He doesn’t want Trump. Let’s just switch it around.

Think of that. They’re trying to determine the voters intent in over 106,000 ballots out of a total of 113,000 ballots. This is from your representative, highly respected. The national average for such an error rate is far less than 1.2%. So, that was 93%. The source of this astronomical error rate must be identified to determine if these machines were set up were designated to allow for a third party to disregard the actual ballot cast by the registered voter. This is what I have. There was no way. Look at this crowd we have here. Biden came here. He had nobody.
...
Second, again from this very respected political leader, second, there is clear evidence that tens of thousands of votes were switched from president Trump to former vice president Biden in several counties throughout Georgia. For example, in Bibb County, anybody live in Bibb County? Bibb, Bibb, B-I-B-B. President Trump was reported to a 29,391 votes at 9:11 PM, while simultaneously former vice-president Joe Biden was reported to have 17,000 to 18. Minutes later at the next update these vote numbers switched with president Trump now having 17,000. And Biden now having 29,391. That was a switch of over 12,000 votes. It was like a miracle. Third, during this hearing, a presenter demonstrated that a Dominion Poll could be hacked into in real time because it was connected to the internet. Now, anything connected to the internet, that’s not good, but this demonstration proved that these machines could allow votes to be siphoned off or added during the voting process because they’re connected to the internet.

Cybersecurity experts agree that voting machines should not be connected to the internet at any time and in any way, shape or form. Did you see that during the hearing? This guy sitting there. Well, can you connect into the machines? Yes. How do you do that? Within about 25 seconds, he controlled the internet. Former vice-president Biden led Georgia by only 11,779 votes. Every one of the things I told you about almost is more votes than what we’re talking about. The crime that was committed in this state is immeasurable and immediate forensic audit of an appropriate sampling of Dominion’s voting machines and related equipment is critical to determine the level …

… Machines and related equipment is critical to determine the level of illegal fraudulent ballots, improperly counted in Georgia during the 2020 general election and during tomorrow’s race. You’ve got to be very careful. And, let me also quickly read a letter from Mark Finchem, chairman of the Arizona House, a very respected man, Federal Relations Committee. “Dear Mr. President, subsequent to the election, members of the legislature were inundated with complaints from constituents relating to the intensity of the general election, and the integrity more important than anything else, and the accuracy of canvassed results.” “In many instances, constituents reported that their earlier in-person ballots may not have been correctly processed, or tabulated in Maricopa County officials.” “Members of the legislature have conducted two public hearings in recent weeks during which significant evidence of fraudulent and illegal voting in Arizona has been demonstrated through expert and eyewitness testimony, for example, in Pima County and Maricopa County, it appears that 143,000 illegal votes were actually injected into the ballot system.” Think of that. No, but think of this.

Also, the press won’t report this, they probably turn it off, oh, we don’t like this. They don’t like this. They don’t want to talk about numbers. They talked about my phone call. They don’t like my phone call, everyone loved my phone call. They don’t like talking about numbers, because nobody knew the numbers were so egregious. Also, an expert mathematician concluded that the only explanation for the actual voting results in Arizona is that 100%… Think of this, 130% of Democrats voted for candidate Biden, and a negative 30% voted for President Trump. Now, think of that. In order to get to the numbers 130% of the voters, that’s a little tough to get, okay, had to vote for him, and minus 30 had to vote for me, and that gets you to a 100%. And, nobody has a 100% voting.  ...
------------
I can't pull it up but Wash Post 'Fact Check' says this speech contains nearly 20 falsehoods.  But all too often, the debunk is the bunk.

Title: Was there signature verification in GA?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2021, 10:03:51 AM

GA had two recounts without signature verification.  Now I am hearing it asserted that after the recounts there was a signature verification that showed everything was fine.  True or false?

======================

https://townhall.com/columnists/markdavis/2021/01/05/as-the-electoral-challenge-approaches-dishonesty-abounds-on-both-sides-n2582564

Title: Re: Was there signature verification in GA?
Post by: G M on January 05, 2021, 02:49:57 PM

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2021/01/05/stacey-abrams-brags-about-lack-of-signature-verification-in-georgia-n1308009

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2021, 10:03:51 AM

GA had two recounts without signature verification.  Now I am hearing it asserted that after the recounts there was a signature verification that showed everything was fine.  True or false?

======================

https://townhall.com/columnists/markdavis/2021/01/05/as-the-electoral-challenge-approaches-dishonesty-abounds-on-both-sides-n2582564

Title: Larry Correra on electoral fraud
Post by: G M on January 05, 2021, 08:05:07 PM

https://monsterhunternation.com/2021/01/05/one-of-these-things-is-not-like-the-other/

Title: finger pointing begins
Post by: ccp on January 06, 2021, 06:24:08 AM

https://news.yahoo.com/republicans-turn-trump-georgia-loss-083619753.html

never trumpers getting ready to pounce of course

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 06, 2021, 10:24:16 AM

https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/061/332/559/original/860cd399130845d5.jpeg

(https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/061/332/559/original/860cd399130845d5.jpeg)

Title: Sen. Tim Scott bill
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 06, 2021, 01:57:02 PM

https://dailycaller.com/2021/01/05/south-carolina-senator-tim-scott-election-integrity-commission-fraud/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=g.FhqKVGVwmNP5wJ.1DnNTzQ.vyidLwiJ9vr.2mR

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 07, 2021, 05:59:49 AM

Looks like yesterday marks the season finale of the 2020 election fraud investigations.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud? Take it back to the State Lergislatures
Post by: DougMacG on January 07, 2021, 09:47:35 AM

Congress just certified this election and sent the election system fraud system back to the state legislatures where it should have been fought in the first place.

Posted yesterday, 30 state legislatures are controlled by Republicans. 
https://ballotpedia.org/Partisan_composition_of_state_legislatures
Unfortunately, not all are run by the right Republicans.  Minnesota has a divided legislature.  The State Senate has the power to withhold their authorization for a lot of other things until change and compliance is enacted and enforced. That makes 31 states.  In the other 19 states, we are losing the elections there anyway, no need to cheat.

Phoenix, Atlanta, Detroit, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, Milwaukee are Democrat-run cities in Republican controlled or partly controlled states.  There is no excuse for any of this to happen there again!

State legislatures have 'standing' under the constitution, as I understand it, to ensure the election is conducted exactly as they prescribe.  It's time to do that!  Not after the next cheat.

Title: Cong. Dan Crenshaw
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 08, 2021, 09:13:21 AM

It would have been nice if he mentioned the Dems objecting in 2001 and 2005, but the rest reads pretty well:


On Wednesday the Capitol of the most powerful nation the world has ever known was stormed by an angry mob. Americans surely never thought they’d see such a scene: members of Congress barricaded inside the House chamber, Capitol Police trampled, and four Americans dead. A woman was shot near the elevator I use every day to enter the House floor. It was a display not of patriotism but of frenzy and anarchy. The actions of a few overshadowed the decent intentions of many.

Why?

Perhaps we should ask our Founders. They were not oracles, but they were borderline prophets. In Federalist No. 68, Alexander Hamilton lays out the purpose of the Electoral College, arguing that an independent and decentralized body of electors should elect the president. “The choice of several, to form an intermediate body of electors, will be much less apt to convulse the community with any extraordinary or violent movements.” According to Hamilton, the only people in America who should not be allowed to be named an elector would members of the House and Senate and any “other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States.” Electors would “exclude from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office.”


Our Founders thought it crucial to entrust a temporary body with electing the president for the simple reason that a standing body like Congress would face enormous pressure from voters, officeholders and interest groups. That could be, for example, pressure from a president or from 10,000 protesters outside the Capitol. For this reason, the Founders opted to diffuse responsibility to electors from each state.


They sought to avoid the exact situation we saw on Jan. 6. Millions of Americans were falsely led to believe that the final say in the election of our next president lay with a single body, Congress. And so it was no surprise that thousands showed up to make their voices heard. But the belief that Congress has any say whatever in the “certification” of electoral votes has never been true. It has always been unconstitutional and against our Founders’ intent, as it was when Democrats attempted the same stunt in 2005.

Article II of the Constitution lays out a clear role for Congress. “The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” It does not say “certify.” It does not say “object if you disagree.” It does not say “object and decertify if you feel the state’s certification is wrong.” The only contingency the Constitution provides is in the case of a failure of any candidate to reach an electoral majority.


The right of objection that members of Congress now invoke is derived from a misreading of the Electoral Count Act of 1887. It was passed in the wake of the disastrous presidential election of 1876, in which states certified competing slates of electors and sent both to Congress; a governor might send one slate and the legislature another. The 1887 law was meant to allow members of Congress to object to one of the competing slates of electors. But no state after the 2020 election has approved multiple slates, nor has any state legislature petitioned Congress to consider different electors. In fact, the law clearly states that so long as the final determination of electors is “made at least six days prior to the said time of meeting of the electors,” that slate of electors “shall be conclusive, and shall govern in the counting of the electoral votes as provided in the Constitution.” Thus the objections being considered on Jan. 6 had no legal basis.

The real cause of Wednesday’s unrest was that many officeholders and commentators misled millions of Americans to believe that the vote count was their final chance to have a say, and their last, best chance to fight for election integrity. Millions were lied to and told they had to fight at our Capitol or all would be lost. But Jan. 6 was merely ceremonial—with or without the protesters, the unconstitutional right of objection some lawmakers invoked would have resulted in nothing more than a couple of hours of debate.

The good news for those millions of Americans is this: It wasn’t your final say. It wasn’t your last chance. In our system of government, it never is. The concerns about election integrity are real, and they must be heard. The merits of these objections are real and substantive. There have been countless examples of states engaging in irresponsible and unverifiable election practices, casting doubt on election outcomes. Whether it is unverified signatures on mail-in ballots or lax voter-ID laws, a refusal to update registration rolls or a refusal to allow partisan observers to witness counting, there are many practices that must be changed.

The fight for these changes must be America’s greatest priority, because faith in democracy is our most urgent need. Republicans must champion these changes in the states, which the Constitution invests with primary responsibility for conducting elections. That is where our fight is. That is the hard work. And that must be our priority.

Mr. Crenshaw, a Republican, represents Texas’ Second Congressional District.

Title: Very good piece on electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 09, 2021, 04:02:00 AM

he Electoral College Saved the Election
From the 2020 primaries to the post-election furor, the founders’ system of election by states proved its democratic value.
By Christopher DeMuth
Jan. 8, 2021 2:22 pm ET

Scholars, pundits and progressives widely despise the Electoral College. They think it antiquated, irrational and undemocratic and argue for scrapping it in favor of a national popular vote.

But in 2020, when many hallowed American institutions submitted to street demonstrations and violence, the Electoral College proved a steadfast guardian of democracy. It can’t solve our problems on its own, but has given us a measure of stability to try for ourselves. A national popular election in 2020 would have made our problems immeasurably worse.

The essential feature of the Electoral College is voting for president by states. Each state has electoral votes equal to its delegation in the U.S. Congress—representatives (one for Vermont, 14 for Michigan, 53 for California, etc.) plus two senators. State legislatures determine the “manner” of casting their electoral votes, and 48 of them allocate those votes on a winner-take-all basis to the national ticket that receives the highest state popular vote. Maine and Nebraska select two electors by statewide vote and the remainder by congressional district.

As part of this design, states manage presidential elections along with those for other offices. They establish standards and procedures for voter eligibility, candidate ballot listing, mail-in voting, vote counting, challenges and recounts. The Constitution sets Inauguration Day as Jan. 20; federal statutes set a uniform Election Day in early November and a careful sequence of intermediate dates—for states to certify their election results and cast their electoral votes in December, and for their receipt by a joint session of Congress Jan. 6. To be elected president, a candidate must receive a majority of the electoral votes—at least 270 of the total 538.

Electoral votes are cast individually by electors, who gather in their state capitals in December. The Constitution’s framers conceived of electors as intermediaries between voters and candidates, but political parties soon assumed this role, choosing party stalwarts as electors pledged to their candidates. That has made the Electoral College assemblies largely ceremonial (there have been occasional “faithless electors,” but states can replace or penalize them). Still, newspapers ran many stories about electors who trekked to their state capitals to cast their votes on Dec. 14—diligently engaged in a constitutional practice that runs back to the election of George Washington in 1789.

The main complaints against the Electoral College are that it can elect someone who didn’t win the nationwide popular vote and that it causes candidates to campaign heavily in “battleground states” while ignoring those they think they are certain to carry or not. The winner almost always finishes first in the popular vote but has failed to do so a few times, including in 2000 and 2016.

These are certainly problems, but all election systems have problems, national popular vote included. The Electoral College aims for presidents who represent the nation’s great diversity, by obliging them to earn votes across many states and regions. It frequently bestows a broad-based majority mandate on a candidate who has won only a plurality of the national popular vote, which is particularly important in messy elections with three or more candidates. Abraham Lincoln received only 40% of the popular vote in 1860—but 59% of the Electoral College. Richard Nixon in 1968 won 43% of the popular vote but 56% of the Electoral College, and Bill Clinton in 1992 won 43% of the popular vote but 69% of the Electoral College.

Election by national popular vote would dispense with the need for continental diversification. Campaigns would focus on large, voter-rich metropolitan areas and media markets, and on appeals to national demographic and occupational groups. Presidential candidates wouldn’t need to immerse themselves in local issues. States, battleground or not, would disappear from the electoral calculus. The federal government would have to regulate voter and candidate qualifications, voting requirements and election procedures.

A national popular vote would turn America into a multiparty democracy. The two-party system, which took form as soon as Washington left the stage, is an artifact of the Electoral College and the states’ winner-take-all rules: Third parties have no chance of winning the electoral vote, and symbolic parties (the Libertarians) and personal crusaders ( Ross Perot, Ralph Nader ) hurt the major-party candidate closest to their own views. To achieve real influence, issue-driven groups make peace with one or both of the major parties, knowing that their candidates will need to compete for the nation’s political center in the general election. With a national popular vote, ideological movements and ambitious personalities would seek independent electoral mandates through distinctive, unmuddled parties. Incentives for party creation would be reinforcing: Each additional party would reduce the popular plurality needed to win the White House.

This problem has been a perennial stumbling block for national popular vote advocates. Their standard solution is a runoff election between the top two candidates. But a second national election would be costly and polarizing. Candidates would differentiate themselves with adamant appeals in the first election, and then, in the period before the runoff, bargain with the two frontrunners for support in exchange for cabinet appointments and policy commitments. But without a runoff, we are left with the miserable prospect of presidents with narrow parochial pluralities in elections with large majorities voting for others.

In 2020, the Electoral College began showing its stuff in March, when Joe Biden, who had done poorly in early primaries, suddenly emerged from a pack of far more vivid candidates to become the presumptive Democratic nominee. Party elders, led by Barack Obama, realized the key to the general election would be moderate suburban voters, including Trump-weary Republicans—many of whom were terrified of Bernie Sanders’s socialism and Elizabeth Warren’s economic populism. Mr. Biden’s opponents soon abandoned their campaigns.

A national popular vote would have accentuated rather than moderated the zealous enthusiasms roiling the Democratic Party. Mr. Sanders, Ms. Warren and Mike Bloomberg could have run as standard-bearers for their own parties in November, with bold platforms and energized followers clashing with each other and with Mr. Biden. With a multicandidate race looming, with or without a runoff, others would have been tempted to join the fray—perhaps Pete Buttigieg as millennial problem-solver, Tom Steyer as Green Party candidate, or Kamala Harris as Black Lives Matter champion.

These particulars are pure speculation. The important point is that the Electoral College consolidated and steadied a raucous, unsettled political situation, while a national popular vote would have given rein to the divisions and confusions of a stressed-out nation, including those in the Republican Party. Mr. Biden presented a public face of moderation, someone who could manage his party’s left wing and calm the streets. His campaign emphasized a return to presidential normalcy.

The great puzzle of 2020 is that President Trump didn’t follow the Electoral College logic. He certainly understood its power. As an outsider in 2016, he had spied a strategic minority in the Midwestern battleground states—disenchanted working-class voters, prominently white men, who had been left behind by globalization and ignored by both parties. Their pivotal role converted Mr. Trump, once a popular-vote advocate, to the Electoral College.

But he reprised his 2016 strategy without seeming to realize that circumstances had changed. His base was rock solid, and the swing voters were now the upmarket suburban moderates, especially women, in the states that proved decisive in 2016. Broadly speaking, these voters appreciated Mr. Trump’s record on the economy and employment (before the pandemic), judicial appointments and breakthrough policies toward China and the Middle East—but were offended by his rowdy, abusive comportment and exhausted by his incessant tweeting and 24/7 domination of national life.

The Electoral College strategy would have been for Mr. Trump to adopt a thoroughly presidential mien as an incumbent who had outfoxed a hostile political establishment, delivered many policy successes, learned from his mistakes and earned a second term. The brilliant GOP convention in August—with its emphasis on opportunity, diversity and faith—pointed the way to an optimistic campaign rather than an angry one. But the president stuck with his rancorous persona. He ended up doing better than in 2016 with his working-class base and with black and Latino voters—but decisively worse with suburban Republicans and independents and in middle-class communities across the battleground states.

The Electoral College—having done all it could do to mediate the campaign, having delivered in classic fashion on Election Day—saved its strongest performance for last. In the days following the election, Mr. Trump proclaimed he had won in a landslide only to have victory snatched away by massive election fraud. Many of his supporters—aware that the Democrats, media, and permanent government were willing to play dirty—rallied boisterously to his side.

The president’s claims were then adjudicated over several weeks in scores of local forums by hundreds of state and local election officials and state and federal judges, in six battleground states whose initial returns had gone narrowly for Mr. Biden—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The Trump team won a few procedural rulings, but ultimately lost every significant claim, drawing sharp rebukes for the flimsiness of its claims from several judges, including Trump appointees.
As the court losses mounted, Mr. Trump called on Republican legislatures to cast their states’ electoral votes directly for him, and on state governors and election officials to recalibrate their election results in his favor. In every case, he was firmly rebuffed. The states certified their final election results, and the 538 electors, meeting on Dec. 14, elected Mr. Biden, 306–232. Their votes were counted before a joint session of Congress on Jan. 6-7, where vote challenges were rejected on grounds of constitutional deference to the state certifications, even as a mob of Trump partisans stormed the Capitol, incited by the president’s mad claim that the session might reverse the election result.

This was the Electoral College system of diversified, independent, state-centered authority in action—steering sturdily through gales of hysteria, settling an election in an exceedingly dangerous storm. There had been more than the usual election irregularities, arising from lax procedures for mail-in voting and late counting introduced shortly before the election, and these certainly justify a commission of inquiry and tighter procedures in future elections. But if enough fraud and chicanery had existed to steal the election, hard evidence would have turned up somewhere. The most conspicuous irregularities were Mr. Trump’s own egregious efforts to subvert the Electoral College’s structure and procedures, which are ending his presidency in ruination and disgrace.

It wasn’t a pretty picture—but consider the picture under a national popular vote with national election standards and procedures. Incentives for vote rigging would be nationwide rather than limited to battleground states, and any recount would have to be nationwide as well. Election administration would perforce be vested in an executive-branch agency headed by the president. The agency might be a bipartisan commission with lengthy terms of office, but to be effective it would need a tie-breaking vote, cast by an official from one party or the other (or from one of multiple parties). It would be widely assumed that the president exercised significant control—and a president who would publicly berate state legislators and governors, and the Supreme Court and his own attorney general, as Mr. Trump did, would certainly try to exert such control.

We can only guess where such a spectacle might lead. Clearly, however, the settlement of a tumultuous election against a defiant incumbent shouldn’t be left to the government he leads. Even in more-normal times, a uniform national election would give Washington troublesome leverage over the succession of the country’s presidency. Succession is a difficult problem in a fractious democracy, but no one has come up with a better approach than the dispersed local stewardship embodied in the Electoral College. It is, indeed, one of our strongest defenses against the centralization of power in the federal capital and the administrative state, which is an important source of our current distempers.

Mr. DeMuth is a distinguished fellow at the Hudson Institute. This article draws on his essay, “The Electoral College by Dawn’s Early Light,” appearing in the Winter 2020–21 issue of the Claremont Review of Books.
Comments

Title: In the code hanky panky in VA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 09, 2021, 09:48:08 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/11/its_in_the_code_hankypanky_in_virginias_votes.html?fbclid=IwAR3wxR2GWSU6PKjBMFyD64wejiAaDgDOtQkhangFeVl3CShCIpQhy7yyKZQ#ixzz6fDQteXNC

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 09, 2021, 11:17:02 AM

".In the code hanky panky in VA"

yes how can it be the vote totals go down rather then up during the count

unless someone erases them ?

Title: FBI comes to DC elite rescue again
Post by: ccp on January 10, 2021, 12:02:42 AM

got to preserve democracy!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/breaking-fbi-claims-jurisdiction-yesterday-took-control-shredded-ballots-analyzed-georgia-sends-back-shredder/

Title: Re: FBI comes to DC elite rescue again
Post by: DougMacG on January 10, 2021, 07:07:14 AM

Quote from: ccp on January 10, 2021, 12:02:42 AM

got to preserve democracy!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/breaking-fbi-claims-jurisdiction-yesterday-took-control-shredded-ballots-analyzed-georgia-sends-back-shredder/

"The FBI demanded that they had jurisdiction of the review of ballots in Georgia.  Then yesterday the FBI took control of the shredding truck and materials and demanded the shredding operation be completed."

I thought the point of the failed federal legal challenges was that these election are state run.

Title: Re: FBI comes to DC elite rescue again
Post by: G M on January 10, 2021, 08:14:04 AM

https://www.justice.gov/usao-nh/pr/federal-election-fraud-fact-sheet

If only there were some federal laws that the DOJ/FBI could use to investigate/prosecute electoral/vote fraud....

Quote from: DougMacG on January 10, 2021, 07:07:14 AM

Quote from: ccp on January 10, 2021, 12:02:42 AM

got to preserve democracy!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/breaking-fbi-claims-jurisdiction-yesterday-took-control-shredded-ballots-analyzed-georgia-sends-back-shredder/

"The FBI demanded that they had jurisdiction of the review of ballots in Georgia.  Then yesterday the FBI took control of the shredding truck and materials and demanded the shredding operation be completed."

I thought the point of the failed federal legal challenges was that these election are state run.

Title: Some excellent data in here on the election lawsuits
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 13, 2021, 08:48:39 AM

https://directorblue.blogspot.com/2021/01/are-there-really-60-failed-gop-lawsuits.html?fbclid=IwAR02P9YeUTt-i5gMcevv_5JhBQPJDFKNbsGeHkHi6x6fSBhtpIRTQuoNwdY

Title: Ballot harvesting charges in Texas
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 14, 2021, 02:56:41 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/13/woman-charged-with-operating-massive-ballot-harvesting-scheme-in-texas/

Title: "Ballot harvesting charges in Texas"
Post by: ccp on January 14, 2021, 05:22:11 AM

amazing
buy votes for *$5 *. !!!!

multiply that by $50,000.
that would be enough for 10,000 illegal votes

OF COURSE this election was stolen!
And judges paying her to get name on ballots too.

YET ->

The zucker news mafia reply:

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/01/13/cnns-tapper-questions-double-amputee-purple-heart-recipient-gop-rep-masts-commitment-to-democracy/

Title: election fraud , or not?
Post by: ccp on January 15, 2021, 12:53:02 PM

https://populist.press/bombshell-fulton-county-elections-caught-on-video-discussing-stealing-votes/

I have to admit after watching and reading the subtitles
I cannot say with any degree of certainty
that these polls workers are talking about falsifying ballots

they might be .

I can't tell .  Am I missing something ?

Title: Re: election fraud , or not?
Post by: G M on January 15, 2021, 01:03:55 PM

Well, the dems are insisting on a serious investigation of all allegations of electoral/voting fraud, right? After all, they won fair and square, so of course they are demanding one, right?

Quote from: ccp on January 15, 2021, 12:53:02 PM

https://populist.press/bombshell-fulton-county-elections-caught-on-video-discussing-stealing-votes/

I have to admit after watching and reading the subtitles
I cannot say with any degree of certainty
that these polls workers are talking about falsifying ballots

they might be .

I can't tell .  Am I missing something ?

Title: Not protected speech!
Post by: G M on January 15, 2021, 01:34:58 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/democrat-pennsylvania-lt-gov-not-right-say-election-rigged-not-protected-free-speech-video/

Title: Re: election fraud , or not?
Post by: DougMacG on January 15, 2021, 02:44:35 PM

They're crooked.

Title: Re: election fraud , or not?
Post by: G M on January 15, 2021, 04:16:40 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on January 15, 2021, 02:44:35 PM

They're crooked.

At least we still have the constitution!

Title: Thief in Chief
Post by: G M on January 16, 2021, 12:26:35 PM

https://cdn.locals.com/images/posts/originals/135341/135341_xx8fngw1iuvxr36.jpeg

(https://cdn.locals.com/images/posts/originals/135341/135341_xx8fngw1iuvxr36.jpeg)

Title: Re: Thief in Chief
Post by: G M on January 16, 2021, 08:25:42 PM

Quote from: G M on January 16, 2021, 12:26:35 PM

https://cdn.locals.com/images/posts/originals/135341/135341_xx8fngw1iuvxr36.jpeg

(https://cdn.locals.com/images/posts/originals/135341/135341_xx8fngw1iuvxr36.jpeg)

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/062/122/587/original/70bb99e9eee595aa.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/062/122/587/original/70bb99e9eee595aa.jpg)

Title: GA signature verification audit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 17, 2021, 04:41:00 AM

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/audit-of-georgia-countys-15-000-absentee-ballot-signatures-turns-up-zero-fraud-01609368663?fbclid=IwAR1Dr_eaNjdSDjMoi-OZbXpowWEuKMVJW2qOQrXMoJBPpXevIiFYePuM_f0

Does this mean an end to this issue for GA?

Title: Re: GA signature verification audit
Post by: DougMacG on January 17, 2021, 05:24:04 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 17, 2021, 04:41:00 AM

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/audit-of-georgia-countys-15-000-absentee-ballot-signatures-turns-up-zero-fraud-01609368663?fbclid=IwAR1Dr_eaNjdSDjMoi-OZbXpowWEuKMVJW2qOQrXMoJBPpXevIiFYePuM_f0

Does this mean an end to this issue for GA?

That's a start. Let's hunt down and prosecute every incident of vote fraud after every election.  The investigation is the deterrent.

Title: Re: GA signature verification audit
Post by: G M on January 17, 2021, 10:27:37 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on January 17, 2021, 05:24:04 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 17, 2021, 04:41:00 AM

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/audit-of-georgia-countys-15-000-absentee-ballot-signatures-turns-up-zero-fraud-01609368663?fbclid=IwAR1Dr_eaNjdSDjMoi-OZbXpowWEuKMVJW2qOQrXMoJBPpXevIiFYePuM_f0

Does this mean an end to this issue for GA?

That's a start. Let's hunt down and prosecute every incident of vote fraud after every election.  The investigation is the deterrent.

Dem controlled AG/DA offices will do no such thing.

Title: When is ID required?
Post by: G M on January 17, 2021, 10:28:17 AM

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/062/211/887/original/e78a1b98fe20221d.png

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/062/211/887/original/e78a1b98fe20221d.png)

Title: ballot harvesting by state
Post by: ccp on January 17, 2021, 10:57:57 AM

https://ballotpedia.org/Ballot_harvesting_laws_by_state

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/audit-of-georgia-countys-15-000-absentee-ballot-signatures-turns-up-zero-fraud-01609368663?fbclid=IwAR1Dr_eaNjdSDjMoi-OZbXpowWEuKMVJW2qOQrXMoJBPpXevIiFYePuM_f0

lets take a look at Fulton County

still does answer machine questions
still not convinced by any means

Title: Lindell thinks he has "proof" of machine fraud
Post by: ccp on January 17, 2021, 11:20:50 AM

https://populist.press/my-pillow-ceo-explains-his-meeting-with-trump-its-huge/

again more claims that wind up being hearsay

Title: Not allowed to discuss this
Post by: G M on January 17, 2021, 11:54:38 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/five-obvious-acts-fraud-2020-election/

Title: Coup
Post by: G M on January 18, 2021, 02:01:52 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/coup%2020210118%2006.jpg

(http://ace.mu.nu/archives/coup%2020210118%2006.jpg)

Title: Bill Barr : election fraud is BS
Post by: ccp on January 19, 2021, 05:21:34 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/18/bill-barr-challenging-election-legitimacy-precipitated-capitol-siege/

I still think election was stolen

the whole thing was rigged in favor or Dems

Title: Re: Bill Barr : election fraud is BS
Post by: DougMacG on January 19, 2021, 07:38:02 AM

Quote from: ccp on January 19, 2021, 05:21:34 AM

...
I still think election was stolen
...

I would like to know, one way or the other.  More importantly, I would like EVERYONE to know, one way or the other. 

There aren't two sets of facts on this question.

One lesson learned is that the real power with elections lies with the state legislatures, and with the people.  Where we had Republican State Legislatures, they failed to act to ensure a clean election.  Besides winning better representation there, the people who care need to penetrate these six or eight cities that hold the balance in the country, like James O'Keefe and Project Veritas do.  Get behind enemy lines, get inside the enemy camp, find out how they do it and blow their whistles.

If there was no significant fraud, the answer is simple.  Win 40,000 more votes in these states and precincts.

Obama rose up as a community organizer.  Stacey Abrams changed the balance of power in Georgia.  When she lost her race, she didn't quit her fight.  Conservatives and Republicans, OTOH, stay to themselves, retreat, maybe buy a gun, but then just bitch, moan, whine, complain and don't organize or act.  From G M's recently posted article, “Neutrality helps the oppressor".  In this moment, they are oppressors and we are the oppressed.  Know that when you don't act to stop them, you are helping them.

Title: Re: Bill Barr : election fraud is BS
Post by: Tordislung on January 19, 2021, 02:55:03 PM

I'd use a word a little stronger than "think."
I know it was.
They've resisted every form of restoring confidence in the electoral system that they've been presented with.

When one's marital partner doesn't answer calls and it becomes habitual, it isn't a coincidence; nothing ever is.

Quote from: ccp on January 19, 2021, 05:21:34 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/18/bill-barr-challenging-election-legitimacy-precipitated-capitol-siege/

I still think election was stolen

the whole thing was rigged in favor or Dems

Title: Re: Bill Barr : election fraud is BS
Post by: G M on January 19, 2021, 04:23:53 PM

Quote from: ccp on January 19, 2021, 05:21:34 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/18/bill-barr-challenging-election-legitimacy-precipitated-capitol-siege/

I still think election was stolen

the whole thing was rigged in favor or Dems

You believe Deep State Barr?

Title: "You believe Deep State Barr?"
Post by: ccp on January 19, 2021, 04:51:52 PM

I would like to think he is honest
but who knows any more

I think fraud was committed
but no one is able to prove it
and few are even letting anyone research it.

so worse case Bill Barr is lying
best case he is being snookered

another case
he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective - it is over
should he have demanded FBI to seize the machines
could he
I don't know

Title: Re: "You believe Deep State Barr?"
Post by: G M on January 19, 2021, 04:57:38 PM

Remember when Barr sent the FBI to secure the voting machines and ballots for forensic analysis?

Quote from: ccp on January 19, 2021, 04:51:52 PM

I would like to think he is honest
but who knows any more

I think fraud was committed
but no one is able to prove it
and few are even letting anyone research it.

so worse case Bill Barr is lying
best case he is being snookered

another case
he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective - it is over
should he have demanded FBI to seize the machines
could he
I don't know

Title: See something, say something!
Post by: G M on January 19, 2021, 09:34:56 PM

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/062/462/902/original/a4cb554a70465910.png

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/062/462/902/original/a4cb554a70465910.png)

Report all badthinkers to the DNC Bureau of Investigation!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 20, 2021, 09:19:17 AM

I would like to think he is honest
but who knows any more

I think fraud was committed
but no one is able to prove it
and few are even letting anyone research it.

so worse case Bill Barr is lying
best case he is being snookered

another case
he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective - it is over
should he have demanded FBI to seize the machines
could he
I don't know
=============

Remember he thinks Epstein killed himself.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 20, 2021, 09:28:49 AM

Bill "Deep State" Barr's job was to run out the clock and pretend to be fighting for us while protecting the deep state.

The FBI did NOTHING to shut down BURNLOOTMURDER/Protofa. The FBI did NOTHING to investigate electoral/vote fraud.

Why? Because those were parts of the coup THEY were involved in from the start.

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 20, 2021, 09:19:17 AM

I would like to think he is honest
but who knows any more

I think fraud was committed
but no one is able to prove it
and few are even letting anyone research it.

so worse case Bill Barr is lying
best case he is being snookered

another case
he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective - it is over
should he have demanded FBI to seize the machines
could he
I don't know
=============

Remember he thinks Epstein killed himself.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 20, 2021, 10:34:34 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 20, 2021, 09:19:17 AM

I would like to think he is honest
but who knows any more

I think fraud was committed
but no one is able to prove it
and few are even letting anyone research it.

so worse case Bill Barr is lying
best case he is being snookered

another case
he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective - it is over
should he have demanded FBI to seize the machines
could he
I don't know
=============

Remember he thinks Epstein killed himself.

He acted with great courage earlier.  Less or none now.  We may never know what changed.  If there was not evidence of vote fraud, give us real information to back that up.  We might have avoided all the unrest and uncertainty now.

"he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective"

   - Yes, top staff is likely saying this and he doesn't have evidence to override their official advice.  To do so on behalf of Trump would be "political".  Same for McConnell and Liz Cheney staff.  If no investigation is ever done, they will never be proven wrong.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 20, 2021, 11:27:56 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on January 20, 2021, 10:34:34 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 20, 2021, 09:19:17 AM

I would like to think he is honest
but who knows any more

I think fraud was committed
but no one is able to prove it
and few are even letting anyone research it.

so worse case Bill Barr is lying
best case he is being snookered

another case
he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective - it is over
should he have demanded FBI to seize the machines
could he
I don't know
=============

Remember he thinks Epstein killed himself.

He acted with great courage earlier.  Less or none now.  We may never know what changed.  If there was not evidence of vote fraud, give us real information to back that up.  We might have avoided all the unrest and uncertainty now.

"he doesn't have enough evidence so he is just saying from lawyers perspective"

   - Yes, top staff is likely saying this and he doesn't have evidence to override their official advice.  To do so on behalf of Trump would be "political".  Same for McConnell and Liz Cheney staff.  If no investigation is ever done, they will never be proven wrong.

That's how the game is played. If it's never investigated, then you don't have to worry about hiding the evidence.

Title: The Devil is down in GA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2021, 02:00:19 AM

https://webmail.earthlink.net/wam/index.jsp?x=1732409148

Synergy here with ballot harvesting and mass mail and same day voter registration is devastating.

Title: It's almost like they have something to hide...
Post by: G M on January 22, 2021, 09:31:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/breaking-exclusive-arizonas-maricopa-board-supervisors-playing-games-trying-block-legitimate-forensic-audit-2020-election-ballots/

Title: Dem bill will cement the one party control in usa for a generation or forever
Post by: ccp on January 24, 2021, 09:26:42 AM

https://populist.press/democrats-introduce-bill-that-will-destroy-america-with-one-swipe/

Title: POTP against mass mail ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 24, 2021, 04:55:24 PM

Somehow this did not occur to Bezos' "Pravda on the Potomac" (Washington Post) during the election.

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/amazon-demands-person-union-vote-after-arguing-mail-ballots-raise-risk-fraud?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Title: We have ALWAYS had honest elections!
Post by: G M on January 29, 2021, 06:20:37 PM

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/063/679/171/original/7278974dc639630e.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/063/679/171/original/7278974dc639630e.jpg)

Title: VA judge rules election changes in 2020 were illegal
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 30, 2021, 08:58:22 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/nine-days-biden-inauguration-judge-rules-late-changes-va-election-law-allowed-late-mail-ballots-without-postmark-counted-illegal/?fbclid=IwAR0lcfXaYUj8L9FT5p23kVJhLCUNtcHUXgyOsaUiTBQE2NKrB3P6AOTvNwI

Title: AZ lawmaker seeks SCOTUS review challenging mail ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 30, 2021, 02:26:49 PM

https://rumble.com/vd7fl7-ariz.-lawmaker-seeks-scotus-review-of-lawsuit-challenging-mail-in-ballots.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=1

Title: Portman - we must admit Trump lost
Post by: ccp on January 31, 2021, 10:09:16 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/31/portman-trump-supporters-have-to-acknowledge-that-this-election-was-lost/

after we have a complete battleground state independent non partisan audit

by people who are both not partisan AND don't have some sort of direct skin in the audit
such as election officials or work for or get paid by directly or indirectly
Diminion .

Why is that so hard?

Title: Re: Portman - we must admit Trump lost
Post by: G M on January 31, 2021, 10:10:56 AM

Exactly.

Quote from: ccp on January 31, 2021, 10:09:16 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/01/31/portman-trump-supporters-have-to-acknowledge-that-this-election-was-lost/

after we have a complete battleground state independent non partisan audit

by people who are both not partisan AND don't have some sort of direct skin in the audit
such as election officials or work for or get paid by directly or indirectly
Diminion .

Why is that so hard?

Title: Dem lawyer accuses NY voting machines
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 04, 2021, 05:05:13 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2021/02/03/democrat-lawyer-marc-elias-claims-faulty-voting-machines-in-new-york-race/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 04, 2021, 05:31:31 AM

"Democrat Lawyer Marc Elias Claims Faulty Voting Machines in New York Race "

if the Democrat was in the lead by ~ 120 votes
the election would be called for the Dem
and everyone in MSM
would scream no fraud
and anyone who questions it is a "threat to Democracy"

would not surprise me if the Dems get to forensically inspect the involve voting machines
since of course they are Dems in a Dem rothole state

Title: "We are guilty as charged!"
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 05, 2021, 08:05:45 AM

https://web.archive.org/web/20210205034403/https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/?amp=true

Title: Democrat union boss
Post by: ccp on February 05, 2021, 08:38:11 AM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Podhorzer

so this union boss man helps his union members by voting for Democrat policies
that hurt union workers

very logical

Title: Re: "We are guilty as charged!"
Post by: DougMacG on February 05, 2021, 10:01:05 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 05, 2021, 08:05:45 AM

https://web.archive.org/web/20210205034403/https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/?amp=true

Wow.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 05, 2021, 01:33:29 PM

I know. Starting to spread this around.

Title: Dems have no problem appealing decision 3 freaken months past election
Post by: ccp on February 05, 2021, 06:16:20 PM

and have nerve to complain about voting machines

yet we are spit on if we do this:

https://www.syracuse.com/politics/cny/2021/02/its-a-very-very-high-bar-to-delay-ny22-race-from-being-certified-judge-tells-brindisis-attorneys.html

I don't really want to post angry whining bitter posts
forever but I guess
when shoved into a corner
with no respite in my own country
this is what it has come to

news is nearly 100% " I am bad"
"suck it up and shut the F.. up like, it or not."

while we spend money when how and where we want
and forever control my life to the number of toilet tissues I use....

while elites all democrats and the rest of the liberals throw country into the garbage can

and yet speak of "Democracy"
"America", "the American people"
"this is who we are" or "not who we are"
on and on

let me go watch a Turner movie
and go back in time

Title: Re: "We are guilty as charged!"
Post by: G M on February 06, 2021, 07:55:21 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on February 05, 2021, 10:01:05 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 05, 2021, 08:05:45 AM

https://web.archive.org/web/20210205034403/https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/?amp=true

Wow.

https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/donald-trump-guns-pointed-at-media-deep-state-big-tech.jpg?resize=540%2C305&ssl=1

(https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/donald-trump-guns-pointed-at-media-deep-state-big-tech.jpg?resize=540%2C305&ssl=1)

Title: Re: "We are guilty as charged!"
Post by: G M on February 06, 2021, 09:22:33 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/392550.php

Quote from: G M on February 06, 2021, 07:55:21 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on February 05, 2021, 10:01:05 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 05, 2021, 08:05:45 AM

https://web.archive.org/web/20210205034403/https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/?amp=true

Wow.

https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/donald-trump-guns-pointed-at-media-deep-state-big-tech.jpg?resize=540%2C305&ssl=1

(https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/donald-trump-guns-pointed-at-media-deep-state-big-tech.jpg?resize=540%2C305&ssl=1)

Title: MI vote fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 07, 2021, 03:44:42 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/exclusive-tcf-center-election-fraud-newly-recovered-video-shows-late-night-deliveries-tens-thousands-illegal-ballots-michigan-arena/?fbclid=IwAR003gOZykBgTgzBuALTooVnfUM4_rFBF-tbaLrO3c4uUkSfyj99CVsfDoU

Title: Trump won 2/3 of election lawsuits where merits considered
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 08, 2021, 05:39:15 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-won-two-thirds-of-election-lawsuits-where-merits-considered_3688543.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-02-08

Title: Super Bowl update: 138,000 Points Suddenly Awarded To Losing Team At Halftime
Post by: DougMacG on February 08, 2021, 08:21:47 AM

https://babylonbee.com/news/138000-points-suddenly-awarded-to-losing-team-at-halftime

https://media.babylonbee.com/articles/article-7943-1.jpg

"After closer examination, we discovered several more points scored by the Chiefs that we had missed initially," said one official. "Sometimes these things show up in the instant replay footage."

Title: Re: "We are guilty as charged!"
Post by: G M on February 09, 2021, 06:47:38 PM

https://i0.wp.com/wilderwealthywise.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FALSE.jpg?w=577&ssl=1

(https://i0.wp.com/wilderwealthywise.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/FALSE.jpg?w=577&ssl=1)

Quote from: G M on February 06, 2021, 09:22:33 PM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/392550.php

Quote from: G M on February 06, 2021, 07:55:21 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on February 05, 2021, 10:01:05 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 05, 2021, 08:05:45 AM

https://web.archive.org/web/20210205034403/https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/?amp=true

Wow.

https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/donald-trump-guns-pointed-at-media-deep-state-big-tech.jpg?resize=540%2C305&ssl=1

(https://i0.wp.com/politicallyincorrecthumor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/donald-trump-guns-pointed-at-media-deep-state-big-tech.jpg?resize=540%2C305&ssl=1)

Title: Massive violations of state laws
Post by: G M on February 10, 2021, 04:54:21 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/must-read-democrats-able-win-2020-breaking-chain-custody-laws-every-swing-state/

Title: Well stated and documented article on 2020 election fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 11, 2021, 06:08:03 AM

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/12/yes-it-was-stolen-election-john-perazzo/?fbclid=IwAR2jSyrSwRfpLpcp2o1QL0iWr6kS6MbvVuHAozxU-C4XOEfjzxr-1RlyusU

PS:  I wish Gatewaypundit would take the time to improve the quality of its writing and address the obvious counter arguments that will be made.

Title: Dominion caught shorting Reps in NH
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 11, 2021, 07:55:31 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/huge-development-hand-recount-finds-dominion-voting-machines-shorted-every-republican-windham-new-hampshire-300-votes/

Title: Re: Well stated and documented article on 2020 election fraud
Post by: DougMacG on February 11, 2021, 08:09:16 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 11, 2021, 06:08:03 AM

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/12/yes-it-was-stolen-election-john-perazzo/?fbclid=IwAR2jSyrSwRfpLpcp2o1QL0iWr6kS6MbvVuHAozxU-C4XOEfjzxr-1RlyusU#.YAenmJvFE0F.facebook

Yes.  Best document on this I have seen.  Wouldn't it be nice if we could STILL have an investigation and real debate on all the points made here.

Title: Warnock chairman of board of Abrams election mobsters
Post by: ccp on February 11, 2021, 08:38:28 AM

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/02/10/georgia-sen-warnock-under-investigation-for-voter-registration-misconduct/?sh=6be2e8e46ea0

Title: Vote fraud, what happened to Sydney Powell? Baseless claims?
Post by: DougMacG on February 14, 2021, 09:20:02 AM

This story isn't over.  Dominion is doing exactly what they would do if they are innocent, suing those who defamed them, namely Sydney Powell.

Powell will presumably use truth as a defense and discovery as a tool.  Powell wants until March 22 to respond to Dominion's lawsuit.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/09/dominion-investigators-trump-sidney-powell-467954

Lin Wood representing her is not a good sign.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/02/12/lin-wood-is-representing-sidney-powell-in-dominion-defamation-case/?sh=3701970a1ac2

I guess there is more to come.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 14, 2021, 10:40:13 AM

"This story isn't over.  Dominion is doing exactly what they would do if they are innocent, suing those who defamed them, namely Sydney Powell."

If this is true I will always not believe that somethings were done to tamper with the votes

and that the evidence is already erased, destroyed
or otherwise hidden

I personally will never have confidence with these voting machines
or the mail in ballot system

Trusting the media the courts the government the intelligence people the FBI -  for me has vanished

I want to believe our system is trustworthy but that was probably always a fantasy

I don't even trust some  in medicine anymore

Perhaps I should add our government did keep us safe after 911
and deserve big credit
but once they are pitted to certain Americans based on politics  the it gets awfully tough......

Title: fewer Georgian Repubs voted in January election than November
Post by: ccp on February 15, 2021, 05:41:06 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/02/14/pinkerton-stacey-abrams-outlines-her-plan-for-democratic-domination-so-whats-the-republican-plan/

I would not call Abrams a genius
was it not always obvious if we had people going door to door and street corner to corner
promised them free stuff we could get hoards of people to vote

it is only Abrams did the opposite

after rigging the opportunity to do so

did Trump hurt the turnout in Georgia or help it?

can anyone give me an honest answer ?

Title: Re: fewer Georgian Repubs voted in January election than November
Post by: DougMacG on February 15, 2021, 05:29:11 PM

"did Trump hurt the turnout in Georgia or help it?
can anyone give me an honest answer ?"


He hurt it.  He tried to uido some of the damage aty the end but even his rally was screwed up.  That's when he turned on Pence for example, made what's her name promise to acquit him and so on.

The Republicans were screwed up in Georgia right when they needed to have the act fully together.  McConnell was part of it, playing games with checks.  The two candidates were part of it, stock scandal at the start of covid?  The Governor and the Sec of State were part of it and Trump was part of it.  Also Sydney Powell really laid into the Gov and Sec of State, forcing the divide.  Whoever was right, whoever was wrong, it was a screwed up mess.  They all turned against each other, divided the party and killed turnout when they needed to double it.

Title: vote fraud trials
Post by: DougMacG on February 15, 2021, 05:37:40 PM

https://neonnettle.com/features/1894-scotus-to-hear-election-fraud-cases-for-pennsylvania-michigan-georgia

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2021/02/12/lin-wood-is-representing-sidney-powell-in-dominion-defamation-case/?sh=1f0982e31ac2

The truth matters.  I hope it all comes out, either way.

Title: Vote Fraud, still coming out
Post by: DougMacG on February 18, 2021, 08:40:02 PM

Oh no, the voter rolls in Michigan were wrong and no one knew.  177,000 bad names purged Jan 2021 AFTER the election and certification.
[That's more than the margin of so-called victory.]

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/michigan-removed-177000-voters-voter-rolls-january-certifying-biden-won-michigan-154000-votes-november/

Title: Re: Vote Fraud, still coming out
Post by: G M on February 18, 2021, 11:00:40 PM

Try posting that on FaceHugger.

Quote from: DougMacG on February 18, 2021, 08:40:02 PM

Oh no, the voter rolls in Michigan were wrong and no one knew.  177,000 bad names purged Jan 2021 AFTER the election and certification.
[That's more than the margin of so-called victory.]

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/michigan-removed-177000-voters-voter-rolls-january-certifying-biden-won-michigan-154000-votes-november/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 19, 2021, 02:48:07 AM

I just did.  Let's see what happens.

Title: Serious Read: The Continuing Crisis
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 19, 2021, 03:02:35 AM

https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/the-continuing-crisis/?fbclid=IwAR1TWlfpWNZhTLWCDNg4wr27dDbAyKVYv60T0gdSZqUIwTZbmsh2B2HTRo0

Title: Amazing what you can't find when you won't look
Post by: G M on February 22, 2021, 02:42:29 AM

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/066/395/134/original/9c481cb246a80971.png

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/066/395/134/original/9c481cb246a80971.png)

Title: Morris suggests SCOTUS were intimidated
Post by: ccp on February 23, 2021, 08:53:26 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/newsmax-tv/dick-morris-packing-the-court-intimidation-justices/2021/02/22/id/1011090/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 23, 2021, 08:16:26 PM

In interesting possibility of deep implication.

Title: Louder with Crowder blocked
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 24, 2021, 01:24:01 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeWUi5yZEBY&fbclid=IwAR3HU14wUHFvyY92SlQY22rIFkBKQkHqKGWtsWwi7sjJ7X44OrKTAgM4DK8

Title: McConell says Dems plotting to nationalize elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2021, 07:31:36 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/feb/25/mitch-mcconnell-accuses-democrats-plot-nationalize/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=1hUsrqGg780j9%2FrzlnDOLtc6eiyOBQfnIo4JwKNMCiknWAPAgZCvbC0hP4ztAM%2Bs&bt_ts=1614304377618

Title: WSJ: Voting Rights at the SCOTUS
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 01, 2021, 01:01:14 PM

Voting Rights at the Supreme Court
The Justices have a rare chance to clarify federal election law.
By The Editorial Board
Feb. 28, 2021 6:00 pm ET



Election laws have become a dangerous political flashpoint, as Americans recently learned the hard way. On Tuesday the Supreme Court will hear a potentially landmark case (Brnovich v. DNC) that offers an opportunity to restore the Voting Rights Act to its original purpose.


At issue is Arizona’s requirement that voters cast ballots on election day in their assigned precinct and its ban on ballot harvesting by outside groups. A majority of states require in-precinct voting, and 20 or so limit ballot harvesting, which allows third parties to collect ballots in bunches. Both rules are intended to bolster ballot integrity.

Democrats say this violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits states from adopting voting qualifications, standards, or practices that result in “denial or abridgement” of the right to vote “on account of race or color.” But they provide no evidence that Arizona’s rules limit minorities’ ballot access.

Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to stop states from disenfranchising blacks with underhanded methods like poll taxes and literacy tests. But Democrats now argue that any state regulation that makes it a little harder for anyone to vote violates the law—even if it applies equally to minorities and whites.


Importantly, the Voting Rights Act (VRA) puts the burden on plaintiffs to show that minorities, based on the “totality of circumstances,” have “less opportunity” than others “to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.”

The High Court hasn’t provided a clear standard for lower courts to interpret Section 2. And many lower court judges have blocked voter ID requirements, early-voting curbs and same-day registration restrictions, among other rules, based on statistics that purportedly show that minorities are disparately impacted.


The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2014 enjoined Ohio’s reduction of early voting from five weeks to four. Ohio settled the case with the NAACP by agreeing to start early voting 29 days before Election Day. But the Ohio Democratic Party sued and said 29 days wasn’t enough.

In the current Arizona case, a federal judge ruled there is no evidence that the state’s in-precinct voting rule and ballot harvesting ban disproportionately burdens or discriminates against minorities. A Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel affirmed the ruling but was overruled en banc. Backers of Arizona’s ballot harvesting ban “had a sincere, though mistaken, non-race-based belief that there had been fraud in third-party ballot collection, and that the problem needed to be addressed,” the Ninth Circuit’s liberal judges held.

There’s no guiding legal principle to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, and any law that bolsters election integrity may violate the VRA if judges say so. Even the Biden Justice Department told the High Court last month that it doesn’t “disagree” with Arizona’s argument that its law is legal under Section 2’s “results test.”

The Court is highly likely to agree, and the shrewd liberal Justice Elena Kagan will no doubt tell Chief Justice John Roberts he can get a 9-0 ruling by holding that the Ninth Circuit committed a clear error in overturning the lower court findings of fact. But that would be a lost opportunity.

Arizona’s election laws are clearly not a violation of Section 2 as a matter of law, and the Court needs to protect state procedures that protect ballot integrity from electioneering lawsuits. But it would be even better if the Court goes further and clearly defines what the language of Section 2 means.

Courts have defined this so broadly that it has invited political mischief and judicial activism on an ad hoc basis. As the Chief Justice wrote in a memo when he served in the Reagan Justice Department, “Violations of Section 2 should not be made too easy to prove, since they provide a basis for the most intrusive interference imaginable by federal courts into state and local processes.”

That’s exactly what Americans saw in 2020, with enormous damage to public confidence in the election results. With so much political contention over voting access and election laws at the current moment, the Court needs to set proper parameters around Section 2 to distinguish between real and invented legal violations.

Title: GA election reform bills
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 03, 2021, 05:15:23 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/georgia-house-passes-omnibus-election-reform-bill_3716434.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-03

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 03, 2021, 11:05:23 AM

GA election reform bills

good start

now we need to block the dirty democrats
goal of nationalizing elections in a way it makes cheating even more of
the norm

which CNN makes a f'n point of every time anyone brings it up they label it the : "THE BIG LIE"

as though nothing happened though it was in plain sight fro 330 million to see
though many want to ignore it
for reparations free schooling
guaranteed income
and the rest

Title: 2nd post.
Post by: ccp on March 03, 2021, 11:25:07 AM

capital stormers
repent!

you must admit you were duped by orange man for believing the "big lie"
admit what you say for 2 weeks around election day
was imaginary
and maybe just maybe after you get on your knees and apologize on and for CNN
your sentence just might be commuted

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/bruno-cua-trump-capitol-attack-184019458.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on March 03, 2021, 05:31:29 PM

Agree.

Title: Patriot Post: Dems seek to end democracy with HR-1
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 03, 2021, 06:58:24 PM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/78116-hr-1-makes-election-fraud-and-chaos-permanent-2021-03-03?mailing_id=5671&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.5671&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: Pending SCOTUS election law cases
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 03, 2021, 07:01:28 PM

second

https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/03/supreme-court-ballot-harvesting-brnovich-dnc-election-integrity-mail-in-ballots/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=recaps&pnespid=1OJjqP1DGxCNkfUR05CKoPWthKgwJCe2GOA3sfIH

Title: 78% fraud in mail ballots in MS, election overturned
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 05, 2021, 04:02:10 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-orders-new-election-after-78-percent-mail-in-ballots-found-invalid-notary-arrested-for-voter-fraud_3720930.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-05

Title: aberdeen Miss demographics
Post by: ccp on March 05, 2021, 05:52:32 AM

Demographics
Historical population
Census   Pop.      %±
1870   2,022      —
1880   2,339      15.7%
1890   3,449      47.5%
1900   3,434      −0.4%
1910   3,708      8.0%
1920   4,071      9.8%
1930   3,925      −3.6%
1940   4,746      20.9%
1950   5,290      11.5%
1960   6,450      21.9%
1970   6,507      0.9%
1980   7,184      10.4%
1990   6,837      −4.8%
2000   6,415      −6.2%
2010   5,612      −12.5%
2019 (est.)   5,205   [3]   −7.3%
U.S. Decennial Census[16]
As of the 2010 United States Census, there were 5,612 people living in the city. 69.2% were African American, 28.8% White, 0.1% Native American, 0.2% Asian, 0.0% Pacific Islander, 0.6% from some other race and 1.0% of two or more races. 1.0% were Hispanic or Latino of any race.

Title: TX AG: No investigations explains "no fraud"
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 05, 2021, 07:06:43 PM

https://rumble.com/vedje5-texas-ag-no-election-fraud-myth-driven-by-lack-of-investigations.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=2

Haven't watched this yet

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 06, 2021, 10:54:24 AM

"Haven't watched this yet"

The Texas AG explains that they do have a voter fraud unit that it tiny but still more than other states that have NONE

He states voter fraud is rampant basically
from fraudsters bribing seniors to vote Democrat
illegals voting in droves

The BIG LIE  (up yours CNN and Zucker lying bastards) is really that there is no fraud which is easy to say
when law enforcement is not looking for it or simply looking the other way - or even in on it
Like in the "urban areas"

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 06, 2021, 05:12:46 PM

Thank you.

Title: Lots of details on HR-1
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2021, 02:37:47 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/indiana-ag-says-hr-1-makes-opportunities-for-voter-fraud-the-law-of-the-land_3723250.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-07

Title: Re: Lots of details on HR-1
Post by: DougMacG on March 07, 2021, 12:39:24 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2021, 02:37:47 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/indiana-ag-says-hr-1-makes-opportunities-for-voter-fraud-the-law-of-the-land_3723250.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-07

HR 1 Makes Opportunities for Voter Fraud ‘the Law of the Land’

What's the constitutionality of Congress regulating what the constitution left to the states?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2021, 04:29:17 PM

If I understand correctly the argument is that Congress can set rules for Federal elections and that State elections still can set whatever rules they want.  As a practical matter this means the States will fold.

Title: Law Breakers into Law Makers
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 08, 2021, 04:48:05 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-to-sign-election-executive-order-to-increase-voting-by-criminals_3723677.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-08

Title: connections between Clinton , Podesta, Brad Raffensperger, China
Post by: ccp on March 08, 2021, 09:10:07 AM

brad raffnsperger is a never trumper who posted on lincoln project often
it appears
he with Abrams did everything he could to hurt Trump in Nov election :

https://ellacruz.org/2021/03/07/shocking-a-call-for-attorney-lin-wood-very-dangerous-people-are-behind-georgias-corruption/

he needs to be ousted ASAP

Title: James Earl Carter
Post by: ccp on March 09, 2021, 02:02:33 PM

saddened by partisanship

( that would stop cheating , fraudulent ballot harvesting , phone ballots, likely voting machine fraud)

because of "SUPRESSION of the vote!)

no matter how hard he tries he was always the Democrat partisan loser and still is:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/jimmy-carter-says-hes-sad-184240501.html

He only gets press when he bashes Conservatives
never for anything else

Title: Dem operative in WI given keys to ballot room
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 10, 2021, 08:45:51 PM

https://conservativedailypost.com/democrat-operative-in-wisconsin-had-keys-to-ballot-room-senator-calls-for-resignation-as-hearing-called/

Title: Certification was sacred in December. Now? Not so much
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 13, 2021, 04:18:03 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/pelosi-says-shes-open-to-overturning-republican-win-in-iowa-district_3731093.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&email=craftydog@earthlink.net&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-13

Title: PP: The Dems true strategy
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 15, 2021, 09:36:42 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/78416-democrats-numbers-gambit-with-illegal-aliens-2021-03-15?mailing_id=5693&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.5693&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: .Tom Gallatin article
Post by: ccp on March 15, 2021, 10:49:58 AM

" Illegal aliens obviously do not have the right to vote, yet they still afford Democrats a sizable opportunity for greater political power if they count toward a district’s population."

Let us not forget that all their children (millions of anchor babies) thanks to the 14 th amendment are automatic citizens is one reason why Dems want to lower voting age to 16

anyone thinks the majority will vote Republican on the basis of "conservative values "
    (the GWB theory)

Title: Re: .Tom Gallatin article
Post by: DougMacG on March 15, 2021, 12:28:44 PM

quote author=ccp
" Illegal aliens obviously do not have the right to vote, yet they still afford Democrats a sizable opportunity for greater political power if they count toward a district’s population."

   - Right.  They are counted in the Census, use the schools and healthcare, receive payments, and some do vote.


"Let us not forget that all their children (millions of anchor babies) thanks to the 14th amendment one reason why Dems want to lower voting age to 16"

   - Dems say follow the science.  The latest science says the human brain is fully developed by age 26.  Let's change the voting age accordingly.

Title: Re: .Tom Gallatin article
Post by: G M on March 15, 2021, 12:31:37 PM

Funny how many stacks of Spanish language voter registration forms i've seen in public buildings. Surely that hasn't been abused!

Illegal aliens are known to be very law abiding!

Quote from: DougMacG on March 15, 2021, 12:28:44 PM

quote author=ccp
" Illegal aliens obviously do not have the right to vote, yet they still afford Democrats a sizable opportunity for greater political power if they count toward a district’s population."

   - Right.  They are counted in the Census, use the schools and healthcare, receive payments, and some do vote.


"Let us not forget that all their children (millions of anchor babies) thanks to the 14th amendment one reason why Dems want to lower voting age to 16"

   - Dems say follow the science.  The latest science says the human brain is fully developed by age 26.  Let's change the voting age accordingly.

Title: rest assured while Russia Iran and China tried to influence are election
Post by: ccp on March 16, 2021, 03:35:38 PM

they DID NOT

of course Biden won fair and square.  :wink:

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/election/2021/03/16/id/1014055/

Title: MI: Too late now
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 17, 2021, 09:38:05 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2021/03/16/mi-judge-rules-that-michigan-sec-of-states-unilateral-absentee-ballot-order-broke-the-law/

Title: HR 1 would end culling inactive voters
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 18, 2021, 09:11:11 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/17/democrats-elections-bill-would-end-culling-inactiv/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=6yUmpMt8LrFSKOmeYaEw4SQNVGa1hAMhSVcJnSot4XF69Oqg85yTYH6ijtthYVLS&bt_ts=1616081208168

Title: Re: HR 1 would end culling inactive voters
Post by: G M on March 18, 2021, 09:16:58 AM

You are obviously racist against dead people!

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 18, 2021, 09:11:11 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/17/democrats-elections-bill-would-end-culling-inactiv/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=6yUmpMt8LrFSKOmeYaEw4SQNVGa1hAMhSVcJnSot4XF69Oqg85yTYH6ijtthYVLS&bt_ts=1616081208168

Title: Pravda on the Potomac's take on the PA USPS employee reversal
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 18, 2021, 01:49:05 PM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/17/usps-ballot-fraud-investigation/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 18, 2021, 02:04:24 PM

Of course
he takes back what he said

look what happens
no democrat lawyers are gong to rush forward praise him for being a whistle blower and sell the con he is a saint and courageous to the left wing media

telling a story about something that supports anything on the right is met with threats

a mail man has no say
could be fired
lose benefits etc.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on March 18, 2021, 07:49:18 PM

He was not believable when he accused but he is fully believable when he retracts.  No bias in that.

Title: Epoch Times on HR-1
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 20, 2021, 07:27:32 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/what-republicans-and-democrats-want-to-change-about-elections_3739348.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&email=craftydog@earthlink.net&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-20

Title: This keep getting into yahoo headlines
Post by: ccp on March 21, 2021, 04:40:13 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sham-candidate-helped-flip-florida-141301334.html

only Republicans cheat

suddenly harvesting votes is "unlawful"

paid someone to run as 3rd party candidate - threat to election integrity - threat to democracy.

Title: AZ: The search for Truth continues
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 21, 2021, 06:43:51 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/arizona-state-senate-ordering-hand-recount-of-2-1-million-ballots-for-2020-presidential-election_3742329.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&email=craftydog@earthlink.net&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-21

Title: More on HR-1
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2021, 07:35:31 PM

Could someone post the actual content of the article please?

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/22/people-act-democrats-election-overhaul-extends-far/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=TMRqlDT6iGu9TI03CYlc5yWFi6tvuD%2Fbcu7TPaTM9sm%2BJJ%2F35rfExdDFI3eY1TwT&bt_ts=1616454424159

Title: Re: More on HR-1
Post by: DougMacG on March 23, 2021, 08:31:52 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2021, 07:35:31 PM

Could someone post the actual content of the article please?

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/22/people-act-democrats-election-overhaul-extends-far/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=manual&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=TMRqlDT6iGu9TI03CYlc5yWFi6tvuD%2Fbcu7TPaTM9sm%2BJJ%2F35rfExdDFI3eY1TwT&bt_ts=1616454424159

'Absolute power grab': Dems' election overhaul extends far beyond ballot box
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., meet with reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 12, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
 Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., meet with reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 12, 2020. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
By Alex Swoyer - The Washington Times - Monday, March 22, 2021


Democrats are championing their massive election overhaul as a voting rights bill, but their proposal reaches far beyond the ballot box, with dictates on how candidates may run for office and restrictions on how states can challenge the sweeping regulations in court.

At least six sections in the more than 800-page bill potentially run afoul of the Constitution, legal scholars say, including requirements that states offer automatic and same-day voter registration, rules on the expansion of mail-in voting and provisions for creating commissions charged with redrawing congressional districts. The bill also calls for an ethics code for the Supreme Court and mandates that presidential candidates disclose their tax returns.

The bill, which is titled the For the People Act, takes the unusual step of mandating a singular process for challenging the proposed laws.

The bill would require that legal challenges be filed in federal court in the District of Columbia, preventing states such as Texas, Georgia and North Carolina from contesting various aspects of the legislation at home, where the judges tend to be more conservative.

The bill requires all of the cases to be consolidated in the District to expedite judicial review, forcing every state that wants to challenge the law to do so in a single lawsuit.

“That sounds more like they are just trying to get, in a sense, rid of any challenges as quickly as possible,” said Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, a conservative activist group. “Ultimately, this is going to go to the Supreme Court anyway.”

Liberals said dictating where lawsuits must be filed is not new and that the For the People Act doesn’t mandate that all challenges be filed in one lawsuit — only that they should all be considered by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which has the most experience handling campaign finance litigation.

“Existing law already mandates that challenges to campaign finance law be filed in D.C.,” said Adav Noti, chief of staff at the Campaign Legal Center and a former attorney at the Federal Election Commission. “There is certainly no constitutional issue.”

The conflict over how and where litigation can be filed, and the constitutionality of the overall bill, will be examined when the Senate Rules Committee takes up the legislation at a hearing scheduled for Wednesday.

Democrats defend the bill by pointing to the elections clause of the Constitution, which gives Congress authority over the time, place and manner of congressional elections.

“Congress finds that the Constitution of the United States grants explicit and broad authority to protect the right to vote, to regulate elections for Federal office, to prevent and remedy discrimination in voting, and to defend the Nation’s democratic process,” the legislation reads.

The Democrats’ legislation also mandates that every state allow mail-in ballots to arrive and be counted up to 10 days after Election Day, tempting the type of chaos from the 2020 presidential election when a few states made allowances that delayed results in several states for nearly a week.

“The proposal would not only rig the elections; it would rig the litigation,” said J. Christian Adams, founder of the Public Interest Legal Foundation’s Election Law Center. “It just shows you the whole thing is about rigging a system.”

The Democrats’ overhaul also takes authority away from state legislatures on redistricting and requires every state to create an independent commission to draw congressional district lines.

The law does not specify who in the state will create the commission. However, in states that already use redistricting commissions rather than legislatures to draw district maps, the secretary of state’s office has the responsibility.

Conservatives say the Constitution explicitly bestows the power of drawing congressional districts on states and Congress can’t mandate how a state redraws congressional district lines.

“The Constitution gives the authority to do that to state legislatures,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission and senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation. “It is problematic for Congress to suddenly say state legislatures don’t get to do this.”

Liberals disagree. Mr. Noti said Congress has mandated the drawing of districts for congressional elections for generations.

“It’s a law of Congress that requires congressional districts to be single-member districts. That’s a federal law, not a state law,” he said. “Sticking just to the constitutional criticism, they strike me as pretty uniformly weak.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley, Oregon Democrat, said the legislation is legal and lawmakers have a duty to pass it and help Americans overcome barriers to voting.

“Every member of the Senate took an oath of office to defend the Constitution, and that means all 100 of us should be working to defend access to the ballot box,” he said. “It is our responsibility to ensure the ability of every American citizen to participate in the elections.”

After passing the House earlier this month, the legislation is moving through the Senate, where a 50-50 split between Democrats and Republicans presents a perilous path for most legislation.

House Democrats, particularly liberals, are increasing pressure on Senate Democrats to rewrite rules to force the legislation through the chamber on a party-line vote.

“This is really going to be Armageddon in the Senate,” said Michael E. Toner, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission. “This is a Democratic wish list to stay in office.”

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, introduced the bill in the upper chamber last week. He said it is needed to counter “racist” Republican-backed legislation in swing states that would suppress voter turnout. He pointed to a proposal in Georgia that would eliminate early voting on Sundays.

“It is to prevent African Americans from voting,” Mr. Schumer said. “It is not democracy when you disenfranchise people by passing Jim Crow laws. That’s not democracy; that’s dictatorship, and that’s where our Republican friends seem to be going.”

The Democrats’ legislation sets the stage for more revisions to election laws.

It orders a study of voter turnout in localities that allow residents younger than 18 to participate in some elections, suggesting Democrats are gearing up to lower the federal voting age.

The bill would require states to accept voter registration requests from anyone 16 and older.

Conservatives warn that allowing voters younger than 18 to participate in federal elections would tempt fraud. Registration rolls at polling places do not specify which voters are younger than 18, and some jurisdictions prohibit the request of photo IDs to review ages and other information.

The elections package also calls for overturning the Supreme Court’s Shelby County v. Holder ruling, which eliminated part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that required Southern states to get federal permission when implementing election laws, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which ended limits on political spending by corporations.

Though the act doesn’t specifically overturn the Supreme Court’s rulings, it lays out the reasons why they are problematic.

In the section targeting Citizens United, the bill blasts big money in politics and urges Congress to amend the Constitution to allow states to set limits on money used to influence elections.

To address the high court’s ruling in Shelby County, the bill says at least 10 federal courts have found intentional discrimination in elections since the decision was handed down, suggesting the problem persists.

The legislation references the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act enacted in 2019, which “would restore and modernize the Voting Rights Act, in accordance with language from the Shelby County decision.”

The John Lewis Act, championed as part of this major legislation, would renew a federal review process for election law and voting requirement changes nationwide.

Democrats also included a provision to require presidential and vice presidential candidates to disclose their tax returns. If the candidates don’t comply, then the Treasury secretary would be required to make the information public.

In a measure far removed from election law, the bill imposes a code of ethics for the Supreme Court. Currently, only lower federal courts operate with codes of ethics.

Conservatives said policing the Supreme Court would violate the Constitution’s separation of powers and aims to challenge Republican appointees over their speaking engagements at events hosted by conservative and libertarian groups.

Mr. Levey said left-wing activists file complaints claiming conservative justices violate ethics by speaking at events hosted by the Federalist Society, a conservative and libertarian group that advocates for a textualist and originalist interpretation of the Constitution.

“Given that the left uses that tool much more than the right, I’m sure putting some backbone behind it … will work to the left’s favor,” Mr. Levey said.

Democratic appointees would not be immune. Complaints could be filed against them too for speaking at events hosted by liberal organizations.

Fix the Court, a group that has long championed a code of ethics for the high court and increased transparency, conducted a poll in 2018 that found 86% of Americans support the idea.

“Even as some detractors have noted that a conduct code would not be fully enforceable at the Supreme Court, given there’s no real recourse for noncompliance, I still believe there’s inherent value in what it symbolizes,” said Gabe Roth, Fix the Court’s executive director.

Two provisions of the sprawling bill do not run into much pushback from conservatives. One makes Election Day a legal public holiday, and the other requires that all voting machines be made in America.

Still, a group of Republican senators introduced legislation, the Protect Electoral College Act, which would guarantee authority to state legislatures on setting election laws.

“The Constitution is very clear in Article II Section 1, that state legislatures have the sole responsibility for setting the election laws. They are directly responsible to their state’s voters,” said Sen. Bill Hagerty, Tennessee Republican.

He said the Democrats’ For the People Act is a “power grab.”

“They want to take all of that away through an absolute power grab by incentivizing dangerous behavior: internet registration, no photo ID requirement, automatic felon voting. One of the things that concern me the most is the ability for people to ballot-harvest. It’s going to create a lot more concern about the election at a time when we need to be creating more confidence in our elections,” Mr. Hagerty said.


Copyright © 2021 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 23, 2021, 09:11:56 AM

Some actual proper journalism in that article.

Thanks for pasting it here for us.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on March 23, 2021, 09:46:00 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 23, 2021, 09:11:56 AM

Some actual proper journalism in that article.

Thanks for pasting it here for us.

Really scary legislation. Wonder when, where, by whom it was written. Anyone who underestimates the enemy within now should read this. I'm surprised it doesn't say, when the power grab is complete the new permanent order shall be called the third (fourth?) reich.

Title: Shame on Sydney Powell!!!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 23, 2021, 07:48:26 PM

https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/22/sidney-powell-dominion-voting-systems-voter-fraud-statements-were-not-factual/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jLgwsKRSGAiNRne1HKjGPi6ygiu1X6TXkcu3xbyg

Title: Re: Shame on Sydney Powell!!!
Post by: G M on March 23, 2021, 08:05:29 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 23, 2021, 07:48:26 PM

https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/22/sidney-powell-dominion-voting-systems-voter-fraud-statements-were-not-factual/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2360&pnespid=jLgwsKRSGAiNRne1HKjGPi6ygiu1X6TXkcu3xbyg

If that's her defense, she is utter garbage.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 24, 2021, 04:53:03 AM

Amen!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on March 26, 2021, 03:49:16 AM

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/03/26/biden-unhinged-calls-state-election-integrity-bills-un-american/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 26, 2021, 08:43:04 AM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17192/courts-2020-election

Title: Epoch Times: Montana
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2021, 05:40:39 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-river-of-doubt-runs-through-mail-voting-in-big-sky-country_3747377.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-28

Title: Re: Epoch Times: Montana
Post by: DougMacG on March 28, 2021, 09:23:51 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2021, 05:40:39 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-river-of-doubt-runs-through-mail-voting-in-big-sky-country_3747377.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-28

"Its conclusions were troubling: 4,592 out of the 72,491 mail-in ballots lacked envelopes—6.33% of all votes. Without an officially printed envelope with registration information, a voter’s signature, and a postmark indicating whether it was cast on time, election officials cannot verify that a ballot is legitimate. It is against the law to count such votes."
...
"One auditor asserted that of 28 envelopes reviewed from the same address, a nursing home, all 28 signatures looked “exactly the same” stylistically."

   - I would like to see the story interrupted there with a story about the resulting prosecutions and prison time.  Vote fraud like bank fraud and armed robbery etc. are things that otherwise law abiding citizens shouldn't be dabbling in.

"Extrapolating from the sub-sample, that would make more than 5,000 of Missoula County’s votes—roughly 7%—with unexplained irregularities."

   - To my Dem friends and family, what is the right amount of vote and irregularities?  How much is acceptable?  The right answer is zero, none, nada.

"The county elections office did not provide access to video footage it claimed to have recorded of vote-counting activities."

   - Did these people lose their job and public retirement benefits?  Getting this stopped is not rocket science.  It simply requires the desire to get this stopped.

"This article was written by John R. Lott Jr. for RealClearInvestigations."

   - Thank God someone is looking into this.

Title: Re: Epoch Times: Montana
Post by: G M on March 28, 2021, 12:46:34 PM

Don't hold your breath.

Quote from: DougMacG on March 28, 2021, 09:23:51 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2021, 05:40:39 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-river-of-doubt-runs-through-mail-voting-in-big-sky-country_3747377.html?utm_source=morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-03-28

"Its conclusions were troubling: 4,592 out of the 72,491 mail-in ballots lacked envelopes—6.33% of all votes. Without an officially printed envelope with registration information, a voter’s signature, and a postmark indicating whether it was cast on time, election officials cannot verify that a ballot is legitimate. It is against the law to count such votes."
...
"One auditor asserted that of 28 envelopes reviewed from the same address, a nursing home, all 28 signatures looked “exactly the same” stylistically."

   - I would like to see the story interrupted there with a story about the resulting prosecutions and prison time.  Vote fraud like bank fraud and armed robbery etc. are things that otherwise law abiding citizens shouldn't be dabbling in.

"Extrapolating from the sub-sample, that would make more than 5,000 of Missoula County’s votes—roughly 7%—with unexplained irregularities."

   - To my Dem friends and family, what is the right amount of vote and irregularities?  How much is acceptable?  The right answer is zero, none, nada.

"The county elections office did not provide access to video footage it claimed to have recorded of vote-counting activities."

   - Did these people lose their job and public retirement benefits?  Getting this stopped is not rocket science.  It simply requires the desire to get this stopped.

"This article was written by John R. Lott Jr. for RealClearInvestigations."

   - Thank God someone is looking into this.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2021, 05:26:45 PM

In this moment I think it important that we do not leave the field of the battle of ideas with the giant fart left by the interface of Pravda lies and thought police and Trump's (and Sydney Powell and Rudy G et al) final moves.  If we do not, the conclusion drawn by the general populace will be that it was all bombastic lying puffery by Trump.

To do this I think would be grave error.

An article like this I think has clear value in communicating the legitimacy of our case-- precisely because it has nothing to do with Trump-- and because the mechanics of the fraud are readily understood.

Title: New GA law more fair and transparent
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 29, 2021, 07:50:07 PM

https://rumble.com/vf5p5z-election-expert-new-ga.-law-makes-elections-more-fair-and-transparent.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=2

====================================

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/03/the-voter-suppression-lie/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202021-03-30&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Title: The second ex-Goldman Sachs head honcho who is a NJ gov signs new voting law
Post by: ccp on March 31, 2021, 10:07:01 AM

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/new-jersey-s-democratic-governor-signs-early-voting-expansion-calls-n1262464

Another GS elite
Democrat partisan, of course, signs new policy ("fixing the problem) for perpetual Democrat election victories

*what is not noted in the articles praising bill is that one does not need photo ID when they show up to vote

or even register to vote

https://www.state.nj.us/state/elections/assets/pdf/forms-voter-registration/68-voter-registration-english.pdf

    it appears one does not need SSN
    can use student ID
    store ID card
    and only has to declare they are citizen with no verification

to register to vote
and thus to vote.

of course the rules are geared to allow  cheating , the Democrat Party way,
with no definite means to be able to verify anyone.

This is important to note here:

There are hundreds of thousands of illegals in NJ
~ 475 ,000 according to pew ~5.2 % of the total population of the state
   exceeded  only by Nevada (7.1 % ) Texas (5,7%) and California (5.7%):

https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/interactives/u-s-unauthorized-immigrants-by-state/

Title: GA law improves access
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 01, 2021, 06:20:31 PM

https://www.oann.com/atlanta-based-news-outlet-retracts-false-claims-about-new-ga-elections-law-limiting-times-and-voter-access/

Title: why a disproportionate number of minorities do not have valid state IDs
Post by: ccp on April 03, 2021, 11:03:12 AM

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2012/08/voter-id-laws-why-do-minorities-lack-id-to-show-at-the-polls.html

as far as I can tell

it is one lame excuse after another

they can't take one day off and get an ID?

Like the rest of us?

Time cost and effort are cited as reasons

how much does it cost?

how much time does it take?
effort - > what can I say about that

easier to go to mail box and pick of a taxpayer funded government check I guess

too many kids

single parents hustling to care for kids and jobs?

Why can't I make excuses about taxes?

or all the other multitude of things I would not be able to do without an ID.

I can see a person who has no home , lives on the street , etc but. the rest is just lame excuses

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on April 03, 2021, 01:52:32 PM

Don't you need an ID to buy liquor anywhere now?  And to drive, fly or attend the DNC.  Racist?

A study discovered non-whites go through the exact same process to get an ID as whites do.  Weird.

If you believe non-whites can't do at all what whites do easily and can't even be trained to do it, isn't that the definition of racist?

We need to turn the racism charge right back on them.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2021, 07:25:40 PM

YES.  THIS.

Title: GA No chain of custody for 400,000 votes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 05, 2021, 02:17:15 AM

https://rumble.com/vfcf67-ga.-counties-fail-to-provide-required-chain-of-custody-records-for-400k-mai.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=2

Title: PA finally agrees to remove 20,000+ dead from voter rolls
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2021, 04:54:12 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/apr/7/pennsylvania-agrees-remove-thousands-dead-voters-v/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=cveEUQC%2BSDS2bERQEKeCQhB4tP%2BdyGkfIRi7Po%2FMWhINPrveUCpV6Hn6yc84vfXu&bt_user_id&bt_ts=1617857603065

Title: leftists want to cheat
Post by: ccp on April 10, 2021, 07:26:20 AM

How crazy is this:

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/04/09/levi-strauss-ceo-we-put-our-money-where-our-mouth-is-on-voting-laws-trying-to-thread-the-needle-with-complex-china-situation/

the number of voting days is expanded
getting a picture ID is free

and all they do is yell scream and while stamping their feet :

"voter suppression "

they know what is going

they just want to be able to have the chance to continue stealing elections

Title: WSJ: Strassel: The Democrat against HR 1
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 22, 2021, 08:56:16 PM

Behind the Democrats’ push for their federal takeover of congressional elections is their insistence that it will sweep away “racist” voting laws and increase voter turnout. No wonder they had no interest this week in hearing from a Democratic legend who knows—and can prove—that they are full of it.

That Democrat is Bill Gardner, New Hampshire’s secretary of state. Mr. Gardner has been overseeing Granite State voting since Dec. 2, 1976, a week before Stacey Abrams’s 3rd birthday. In December, a bipartisan vote of the New Hampshire Legislature elected him to a 23rd two-year term. The longest-serving secretary of state in U.S. history, he’s an institution, famous for his apolitical commitment to the state’s constitution and its first-in-the-nation primary.

Mr. Gardner was invited (by Republicans) to testify at Tuesday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, which the Democratic majority titled “Jim Crow 2021: The Latest Assault on the Right to Vote.” Ms. Abrams got most of the headlines; the media and Senate Democrats barely acknowledged Mr. Gardner’s presence. And no wonder. It isn’t only that Mr. Gardner vehemently opposes his party’s H.R.1 bill, which would federally impose procedures such as early and absentee voting on the states. He also has incontrovertible evidence that the narrative behind it is a crock.

“Just because you make voting easier, it does not raise turnout automatically,” Mr. Gardner told the committee. It can have the opposite result by undermining “the trust and confidence voters have in the process.” He called it a “fine balance.” The New Hampshire evidence makes the case.


By Democrats’ definition, New Hampshire has some of the most “suppressive” voter laws anywhere. In the hearing and in a subsequent interview with me, Mr. Gardner explained that some of these rules are part of the state’s constitution. That document requires that residents show up to vote in person unless they are physically disabled or out of town. That means no mail-in voting. The state constitution requires that the final vote tally for each candidate be publicly declared at each polling place the night of the election after the polls close. This is one reason New Hampshire doesn’t allow early voting, which can cause the counting to stretch for days.

New Hampshire is one of four states that don’t allow provisional ballots—again, because it would derail the public reading of tallies. The state requires voter identification. It also requires in-person registration at a town hall or at a polling place on Election Day; it went out of its way to become exempt from the 1993 federal “motor voter” law that allows registration by motor-vehicle offices and other bureaucracies.


Racist? Suppressive? Onerous? Hardly. For the past five presidential elections, New Hampshire has been in the top five states for voter turnout. It’s been third in the past four presidential elections, last year pulling 72.2% of its voting age population to the polls. That exceeded U.S. turnout by nearly 11 points; in 2016 the figure was 14.5 points.


New Hampshire’s experience aside, Mr. Gardner offered the committee a contrasting (and more honest) history of voting in Oregon, the first state to shift to voting by mail. He recalled that in the early 1990s Oregon’s secretary of state pitched him on joining him in that move. Mr. Gardner declined. Before Oregon introduced all-mail voting in 1996, it had routinely been in the top 11 states for voter turnout in presidential elections, and often beat New Hampshire. It has never topped New Hampshire since, and in 2012 fell as low as 17th.

The Granite Stater says he believes deeply in making voting straightforward and accessible, and New Hampshire does that in many ways, including same-day registration. “But I’ve seen what ways to make it easier actually work and what ways don’t work,” he says. They aren’t all equal, and H.R.1’s provisions would likely do the opposite of what Democrats claim.


Mr. Gardner also provided the committee a chart showing U.S. voter turnout in presidential elections since 1952. He tells me he doesn’t think it is an accident that five of the six highest-turnout years were in the 1950s and ’60s, before the beginning of federal efforts to meddle in state elections with laws like the 1971 Federal Election Campaign Act and the 1993 National Voter Registration Act. People lose trust, and even pride in their unique state systems. (Another factor might be the 26th Amendment, ratified in 1971, which lowered the voting age to 18.)

Mr. Gardner has also issued a statement blasting Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats for their “attack” on his state and pointing out that the California system she wants to impose on the country has resulted in her state being ranked 46th, 49th, 49th and 43rd for turnout in the past four presidential elections. “There are 435 members of Congress; New Hampshire has two of them,” he tells me. Just five or six big states “have about half of all the members, and they’ll be writing our voting laws. I’m not telling them how to vote. Why are they telling us in New Hampshire how to vote? Especially given our record.”

And that’s the real question. Democrats’ “Jim Crow” claims are completely at odds with the evidence. If they are going to continue with H.R.1, they should at least be honest that the goal is to rig the system.

Write to kim@wsj.com.

Copyright ©2020 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Appeared in the April 23, 2021, print edition.

Title: AZ recount
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 25, 2021, 04:24:52 PM

A generally friendly source not enthused , , ,

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/apr/25/arizona-republicans-seize-all-ballots-voting-machi/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=xXx8Bafmj47MeA24joSUdUadbaTo4fazHOjUTlEivReBYvK%2B7%2B%2BYjHeeZqxva9Mz&bt_ts=1619389583981

Title: Re: AZ recount
Post by: G M on April 25, 2021, 04:37:25 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 25, 2021, 04:24:52 PM

A generally friendly source not enthused , , ,

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/apr/25/arizona-republicans-seize-all-ballots-voting-machi/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=xXx8Bafmj47MeA24joSUdUadbaTo4fazHOjUTlEivReBYvK%2B7%2B%2BYjHeeZqxva9Mz&bt_ts=1619389583981

By Jonathan J. Cooper and Bob Christie - Associated Press - Sunday, April 25, 2021

AP is friendly?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 25, 2021, 04:56:20 PM

I associated the Washington Times as a friendly source, which is why I was surprised by the thoroughly prog language.  I missed the part about the source being AP.  I will give this another look.

Title: Biden linked firm colluded with Big Tech to censor election posts
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 29, 2021, 05:58:30 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/california-officials-biden-linked-firm-colluded-with-big-tech-to-censor-election-posts-judicial-watch_3793973.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-04-29&mktids=20537d99b23ee9d3227a6d4d16dbdeb7&est=KBF%2B7llYGKrF%2B8BaM4qLvYKu5jmU1lx90QDEIjK6sFu55lh%2BOJhPYywJLEiYvuXGVl2l

Title: Maricopa election investigation
Post by: ccp on May 03, 2021, 09:28:49 AM

Well,
if this fails to find fraud then I will feel better about outright theft
though, nonetheless will still bear witness that the election rules
  were clearly manipulated always in Dems favor
I will still have doubts in PA and GA and Michigan ......

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2021/05/03/maricopa-county-2020-election-audit-expands-could-last-weeks-longer-than-expected-n1444213

OTOH will be surprised if nothing found......

No matter what
this will. not change the fact that Biden is president
    and yes Trump is delusional if he thinks he will be able to turn around the election .

   

Title: JW says Iowa officials coordinated with Big Tech to censor election posts
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 04, 2021, 04:40:16 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/iowa-officials-coordinated-with-big-tech-to-censor-election-posts-judicial-watch_3800787.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-04&mktids=70d7e48ee298ee1a92a11645db08b3f8&est=%2BkwBh11GSHzyui07nqpNKtLk5bBESlYQ2jCuwGs4SYBozIeaAXZwgF8IQXOdp0AzHT0P

Title: Re: Maricopa election investigation
Post by: DougMacG on May 04, 2021, 08:00:22 AM

Quote from: ccp on May 03, 2021, 09:28:49 AM

if this fails to find fraud then I will feel better about outright theft
though, nonetheless will still bear witness that the election rules
  were clearly manipulated always in Dems favor
I will still have doubts in PA and GA and Michigan ......

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2021/05/03/maricopa-county-2020-election-audit-expands-could-last-weeks-longer-than-expected-n1444213
...
this will not change the fact that Biden is president
...

We would be better off to find that no fraud occurred.  Then we could work to overcome losses by conventional methods, like appeal to more voters.  But fraud did occur.  We just don't know yet how much, where, and by whom.

"this will not change the fact that Biden is president"

Right.  That's why Jan 6 and earlier vote certification deadlines were so important.  But if one state result was wrong, at least two other state results are likely wrong too, the electoral college count was wrong and you-know-who is an illegitimate President. 

Every election fraud denier from NPR to Facebook/Twitter to Romney/Cheney who call everyone else a liar will have their Pinocchio narrative turned upside down if just one state result is shown to be wrong.

Title: Another version of election fraud? census manipulations
Post by: ccp on May 04, 2021, 08:55:41 AM

https://www.creators.com/read/stephen-moore/05/21/why-did-biden-census-bureau-add-25-million-more-residents-to-blue-state-population-count

Title: Dems to be sure cover. up continues
Post by: ccp on May 06, 2021, 09:22:54 AM

https://populist.press/breaking-biden-doj-steps-in-to-put-immediate-stop-to-az-audit/

funny
if nothing to hide then why are they hiding everything?

states have the right to run their own elections
I though
so what jurisdiction are the feds claiming ?

Dem lawyers always know how to shyster a way don't they?

Title: A mere five years later, Trump 2016 cleared.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 06, 2021, 07:22:20 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/6/fec-drops-probe-against-donald-trump-stormy-daniel/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=Nu709A%2BYIkiPsJLPjAihG4XGvQFK6OGbOqMtxdWImoVqYFPEItdVCbqRrL8CpVQw&bt_ts=1620351507804

Title: Resistance to vote audit in AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 07, 2021, 02:41:53 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/maricopa-county-refuses-to-provide-routers-to-election-auditors_3805624.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-07&mktids=6a9e235df516cfbc92413d9ea6bb2f08&est=pnpWKkr1pzAbfJ4ZD6DjMz5wGe4EuSgdYxEY7DReX7ofcbpLWO9CkaCcONG4PZ%2BgOpyz

Title: Florida bans private funding of election procedures
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 07, 2021, 09:00:24 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/07/florida-passes-law-banning-private-funding-of-election-procedures/

Title: Just waiting for the DOJ stormtroopers to bust this up
Post by: ccp on May 08, 2021, 08:29:27 AM

inevitable:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/05/three-developments-nullify-maricopa-county-2020-election-put-supervisors-legal-jeopardy-forensic-audit-even-started/

Title: New Census Data raises serious issues about 2020 Vote Fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 08, 2021, 08:53:28 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/05/new_census_data_raises_serious_questions_about_2020_election_fraud.html

Title: Developments in AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 09, 2021, 11:47:16 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/turn-over-routers-or-face-subpoenas-arizona-lawmakers-tell-maricopa-county_3807631.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-09&mktids=f53a36a446593c5eadb49d69306faba3&est=fBIMAOFKpXbJp7wC0g%2B3OhzwEs4%2FKguvrArvJuK96Y0Dydu8A623OgnArGTATOKqC9ot

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/arizona-formally-ban-post-election-signature-fix-for-unsigned-mail-in-ballots_3807930.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-09&mktids=f53a36a446593c5eadb49d69306faba3&est=YjPwfA7qzGedL89bzBayitBOppDOdMAW6Y5ukNftqNylBX9tuVW3U2n3hGqybvXbiLRo

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/arizona-senate-tells-us-officials-election-audit-is-secure_3807577.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-09&mktids=f53a36a446593c5eadb49d69306faba3&est=64A%2FwkPb4YYy5fWbOQjwkbfcmnXX1myWtSjDTOkz%2BFNIY4LHWKjgAOssmndfMAvNZl4e

Verifying addresses is voter intimidation says DOJ?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on May 09, 2021, 05:53:14 PM

The “Big Lie,” of course, isn’t that the 2020 election was stolen—it’s that the election was perfectly fair and lawful.

https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/06/democrats-cant-quash-the-big-lie/

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/449150/

Texas and Arizona have passed several proposals that will tighten election requirements; Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed a massive election reform bill in March that enraged Democrats across the country including Joe Biden.

Which is why Democrats, the media, and NeverTrumpers like Liz Cheney must keep the “Big Lie” taunt alive. The cowardice of congressional Republicans notwithstanding, political leadership at the state level and rank-and-file Republicans are working to ensure a redo of the 2020 election doesn’t happen again—most would rather be considered liars than craven bystanders while the country burns.

Unfortunately, the “Big Lie” faces more headwinds than just a Jake Tapper tantrum or a Liz Cheney op-ed: Joe Biden’s Justice Department is poised to use its power to halt election reform in advance of the 2022 election. During a congressional hearing this week, Attorney General Merrick Garland made clear he would use the agency’s Civil Rights division to fight Republican-backed election laws in court, especially those requiring photo identification.

“The question on voter ID is what kind of disparate impact it has on voters of different races, colors and language groups, and whether it violates the Constitution by having a disparate impact on people’s ability to vote,” Garland told a House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday. “The Supreme Court has held that voter ID as a concept is constitutional. And the issue is what, in any individual cases [sic], the record shows about whether it deprives certain groups protected by the 14th Amendment right to vote.”

Title: More on Maricopa County AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 10, 2021, 04:36:04 PM

https://rumble.com/vgt7bh-maricopa-county-failed-to-control-2020-election.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=2

Title: Re: More on Maricopa County AZ
Post by: DougMacG on May 11, 2021, 09:09:01 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 10, 2021, 04:36:04 PM

https://rumble.com/vgt7bh-maricopa-county-failed-to-control-2020-election.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=2

It would be nice if something definitive comes out of this, either way.  Blocking the investigation at every turn is a bad sign.

Title: Lawsuit ie; phantom ballots?
Post by: ccp on May 11, 2021, 02:05:54 PM

https://populist.press/votes-were-intentionally-switched-the-number-is-massive/

Caution this is on the Steve Bannon broadcast.
I don't trust him though he is on mostly on my side, but the lawsuit sounds like the real deal.

****Waiting for the libs to send in the National Guard to break this up and start making arrests
 in order to "save Democracy" from the "Big Lie".****

That is why we need cisgender commanders who have to point out they are  Latinas and suffer from GAD (generalized anxiety disorder).    :wink:
(PS. what is cis gender again ?). Communists always gain control of the military as soon as they can.

Title: A different take on Maricopa AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 11, 2021, 08:37:33 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/may/11/election-audit-arizona-becomes-black-swan-event/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=KQr3SsqZ93BoT%2Fkx2UT2K2QTOHJps83E67B0oSyh7jcL9s6%2BxaDAZC6mgGGlUCI9&bt_ts=1620776362935

Title: More Maricopa AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 14, 2021, 05:58:39 AM

Hat tip to Epoch Times for the way it continues to follow this story:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/arizona-senators-back-off-subpoena-threat-over-audit-ask-maricopa-officials-to-attend-meeting-on-serious-issues_3814145.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-14&mktids=bf964c01f1f4b0d0ef68ca0052815b47&est=yCVRb14ErhmuDqIV4aZK4g4EhKfAsbnBsdh42Mpn4NL0KPcYyWERQFFPp%2BnSDhZVCEpB

Title: More Maricopa AZ 2.0
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2021, 02:16:36 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/dominion-maricopa-county-rebuff-arizona-senates-attempt-to-get-election-machine-passwords_3815423.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-15&mktids=13d7e446fd722c726e49668d60dfd066&est=qRgFQXixFPGWFj48iJACFYGuqvdxCvz3ab%2BCfTlTUzo8h6qCSHJntX8wTQnJCw576uRz

Title: Compare Liz Cheney to her replacement Elise Stefanik
Post by: ccp on May 17, 2021, 05:53:02 AM

https://web.archive.org/web/20210516211245/https://www.theepochtimes.com/gop-chair-elise-stefanik-justice-department-is-trying-to-block-maricopa-county-audit_3817473.html

Title: Re: Compare Liz Cheney to her replacement Elise Stefanik
Post by: DougMacG on May 17, 2021, 07:12:40 AM

Quote from: ccp on May 17, 2021, 05:53:02 AM

https://web.archive.org/web/20210516211245/https://www.theepochtimes.com/gop-chair-elise-stefanik-justice-department-is-trying-to-block-maricopa-county-audit_3817473.html

Wow, good start!

Title: not all ballots just the R ones
Post by: ccp on May 18, 2021, 05:05:05 PM

not clear when this was discovered
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/pa-county-unable-to-scan-republican-ballots/

don't believe we heard this till now

DOJ will get right on it I am sure

Title: Re: not all ballots just the R ones
Post by: DougMacG on May 18, 2021, 06:14:54 PM

Quote from: ccp on May 18, 2021, 05:05:05 PM

not clear when this was discovered
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/pa-county-unable-to-scan-republican-ballots/

don't believe we heard this till now

DOJ will get right on it I am sure

31 dimensions of cheating in 6 states.  If just one issue proves true  that would have changed the result in just one state, it changes everything. The Big Lie would becomes just a small lie.

Title: Maricopa AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2021, 03:19:58 AM

https://www.oann.com/maricopa-county-admits-elections-bad-since-2016/

https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/19/audit-fight-in-maricopa-county-threatens-our-constitutional-order/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on May 20, 2021, 07:53:36 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/s-1-voting-rights-elections-sen-tim-scott

Title: New Hampshire
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2021, 12:14:38 PM

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/05/an_election_audit_in_new_hampshire_may_be_the_pebble_that_diverts_the_stream.html

Title: Maricopa AZ-- deleted files recovered?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2021, 12:39:27 PM

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/arizona-audit-allegedly-deleted-files-maricopa-county-recovered?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=newsletter-FP&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=2021-05-19&ats_es=639c4dfcf4902e5be56a6038ef508105

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, vote integrity, ID for everything but voting?
Post by: DougMacG on May 21, 2021, 07:59:40 AM

I located a Pfizer vaccine location yesterday and drove to a suburban Walmart.  I got the vaccine free with almost no waiting.  All I had to do was answer some easy yes/no health questions and give them two forms of identification, drivers license and health insurance card - to make "writing the information down easier".

Strange that I post this in the vote fraud thread?  Wouldn't showing two forms of ID (one form?) also help poll workers verify your name, address, etc. as well?

She did not say we "require" two forms of ID and I thought of not doing that, but when you walk into a health clinic, an airport, a liquor store, rent a car, renew your vehicle license tabs, get pulled over by a police officer, and on and on and on, you expect to be asked for identification.  But not to vote??  And it is "The Big Lie" to think there may be fraud in a heated contest conducted on the honor system?  Good grief.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 21, 2021, 08:24:50 AM

I got at hospital

finally found where being given for the sec shot

had to show ID with security guard looking over my shoulder
went to the second  desk
had to show ID again where I checked in

and then went to get the shot from the nurse who checked my ID a third time

Doug,

my thought at the time was *exactly* the same as yours
it belongs in this thread

Title: Georgia mail in ballot audit approved
Post by: ccp on May 22, 2021, 05:27:09 AM

not holding my breath but overall this is good:

https://populist.press/breaking-georgia-judge-calls-for-forensic-audit/

Title: Re: Electoral process, vote fraud, vote integrity, ID for everything but voting?
Post by: G M on May 23, 2021, 12:32:38 PM

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/074/837/101/original/deacb9e2396890b1.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/074/837/101/original/deacb9e2396890b1.jpg)

Quote from: DougMacG on May 21, 2021, 07:59:40 AM

I located a Pfizer vaccine location yesterday and drove to a suburban Walmart.  I got the vaccine free with almost no waiting.  All I had to do was answer some easy yes/no health questions and give them two forms of identification, drivers license and health insurance card - to make "writing the information down easier".

Strange that I post this in the vote fraud thread?  Wouldn't showing two forms of ID (one form?) also help poll workers verify your name, address, etc. as well?

She did not say we "require" two forms of ID and I thought of not doing that, but when you walk into a health clinic, an airport, a liquor store, rent a car, renew your vehicle license tabs, get pulled over by a police officer, and on and on and on, you expect to be asked for identification.  But not to vote??  And it is "The Big Lie" to think there may be fraud in a heated contest conducted on the honor system?  Good grief.

Title: Fake ballots in GA?
Post by: DougMacG on May 26, 2021, 12:40:22 PM

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/30000-fake-ballots-found-in-georgia-audit-theyre-not-real/

"The Big Lie"

Title: Electoral process 2020 in Packerland
Post by: DougMacG on May 27, 2021, 06:50:48 AM

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/05/27/how_the_democrats_stacked_the_deck_in_the_green_bay_november_election_145825.html

Title: AZ bans mass mail ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 28, 2021, 02:05:40 AM

https://rumble.com/vhoylh-ariz.-bans-mass-mailing-of-ballots.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=2

Title: Re: AZ bans mass mail ballots
Post by: DougMacG on May 28, 2021, 07:53:06 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 28, 2021, 02:05:40 AM

https://rumble.com/vhoylh-ariz.-bans-mass-mailing-of-ballots.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=2

Republican legislatures are looking at limiting ballots to one per voter?  CANCEL THEM!  Wipe them off social media!  Move the All Star game! 

In the Dem states, it would be nice if they would add the note with their mass mailings of ballots, please disregard if you have already voted or are, for some reason, ineligible to vote.

Title: PA and Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 29, 2021, 11:47:49 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/pennsylvania-county-appoints-prosecutor-to-investigate-voting-machine-errors_3834770.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-05-29&mktids=19c757721e51ee40c9362757d3b5ae89&est=F0k9SW%2FwmX5r8nFDOqSJdvW8Az6bcu%2BVpobB9Evw6bbsGJl7XWuTF84ukhvfiEXEpsZH

Title: Shocking to read this...
Post by: G M on May 30, 2021, 04:27:11 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/05/breaking-alarm-went-off-secure-building-fulton-county-georgia-ballots-kept-building-found-wide-open/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 01, 2021, 07:38:15 AM

". “Two Fulton County deputies who were assigned to watch the secure building where the ballots were being kept appear to have left the building 20 minutes before the alarm went off,” Robinson said on Twitter."


https://populist.press/trump-responds-after-fulton-county-ballot-facility-found-wide-open/

of course

they should be fired and have all their accounts reviewed as well as family
    watched for 10 yrs looking for the payoff

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 01, 2021, 08:20:14 AM

Quote from: ccp on June 01, 2021, 07:38:15 AM

". “Two Fulton County deputies who were assigned to watch the secure building where the ballots were being kept appear to have left the building 20 minutes before the alarm went off,” Robinson said on Twitter."

https://populist.press/trump-responds-after-fulton-county-ballot-facility-found-wide-open/
of course
they should be fired and have all their accounts reviewed as well as family
    watched for 10 yrs looking for the payoff

We have all these uninvestigated micro-conspiracy allegations without full evidence of the big Kracken.  We needed, for one thing, a James O'Keefe embedded in the middle of it.  Absent that, we need legal grounds to do as suggested, conduct a Mueller report level inquiry into the communications of every shady character in the chain.

There isn't going to be one smoking gun or an inauguration reversed, but there needs to be enough hard evidence to otherwise overturn the outcome in at least one of the states to make history mark the final electoral count with an asterisk.  Otherwise, "The Big Lie" narrative stands forever and future fraud will be that much harder to stop.

Title: Election integrity and voter ID around the world, John Lott
Post by: DougMacG on June 01, 2021, 08:27:26 AM

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2021/06/01/the_us_is_a_voter_photo_id_outlier_theyre_the_rule_in_europe_and_elsewhere_778714.html

Title: voter id required round the world good post Doug
Post by: ccp on June 01, 2021, 08:41:03 AM

except the dumb ass libs in UK
and
of course here where they insist on ability to go out and ballot harvest etc
to pull out elections for the Democrats

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2021/06/01/did-former-trump-advisor-michael-flynn-really-call-for-a-myanmar-like-coup-in-america-n1451161

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 01, 2021, 08:46:06 AM

Is that the URL you had in mind?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 01, 2021, 05:54:21 PM

Total fantasy.

You aren't voting or investigating your way out of this.

Quote from: DougMacG on June 01, 2021, 08:20:14 AM

Quote from: ccp on June 01, 2021, 07:38:15 AM

". “Two Fulton County deputies who were assigned to watch the secure building where the ballots were being kept appear to have left the building 20 minutes before the alarm went off,” Robinson said on Twitter."

https://populist.press/trump-responds-after-fulton-county-ballot-facility-found-wide-open/
of course
they should be fired and have all their accounts reviewed as well as family
    watched for 10 yrs looking for the payoff

We have all these uninvestigated micro-conspiracy allegations without full evidence of the big Kracken.  We needed, for one thing, a James O'Keefe embedded in the middle of it.  Absent that, we need legal grounds to do as suggested, conduct a Mueller report level inquiry into the communications of every shady character in the chain.

There isn't going to be one smoking gun or an inauguration reversed, but there needs to be enough hard evidence to otherwise overturn the outcome in at least one of the states to make history mark the final electoral count with an asterisk.  Otherwise, "The Big Lie" narrative stands forever and future fraud will be that much harder to stop.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 01, 2021, 06:06:46 PM

Quote from: G M on June 01, 2021, 05:54:21 PM

Total fantasy.

You aren't voting or investigating your way out of this.

I think of G M as a lot like Churchill, but on this question of giving up and giving in, I'll take Churchill:

We shall go on to the end, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and
growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the
beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight
in the hills; we shall never surrender.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_LncVnecLA

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 01, 2021, 06:32:56 PM

The last box is the only box that matters now.

Plan accordingly.

Quote from: DougMacG on June 01, 2021, 06:06:46 PM

Quote from: G M on June 01, 2021, 05:54:21 PM

Total fantasy.

You aren't voting or investigating your way out of this.

I think of G M as a lot like Churchill, but on this question of giving up and giving in, I'll take Churchill:

We shall go on to the end, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and
growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the
beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight
in the hills; we shall never surrender.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_LncVnecLA

Title: You aren't investigating your way out of this
Post by: G M on June 01, 2021, 07:36:57 PM

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/stunning-admission-on-bill-barr/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 02, 2021, 06:13:43 AM

Whoa , , ,

Title: Re: You aren't investigating your way out of this
Post by: DougMacG on June 02, 2021, 06:19:39 PM

Quote from: G M on June 01, 2021, 07:36:57 PM

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/stunning-admission-on-bill-barr/

   - So end the investigations? 

"The last box is the only box that matters now."

    - Please explain.

"You aren't voting or investigating your way out of this."

   - Voting (and investigations) got us into this mess.

I don't buy the idea that Republican run states can't slow mass fraud down enough to conduct a fair election in their state.  Republicans control 31 state legislatures https://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/partisan-composition.aspx including Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina.  Democrats control 19, mostly not swing states.  Most of this could be cleaned up without help from a single Democrat.  Can't clean it up without knowing what happened.  Must investigate.  For the honest citizenry, we must push them to investigate and to tighten election security, and never stop pushing until they do it.

What is the other plan?  Concede the federal government to the Left, cf. Chavez, Maduro.  Retreat to red areas and try to hold off the federal powers they gain full control over, IRS, FBI, ATF, NSA, US Military, from there?

How does that work?

Title: Re: You aren't investigating your way out of this
Post by: G M on June 02, 2021, 07:20:36 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on June 02, 2021, 06:19:39 PM

Quote from: G M on June 01, 2021, 07:36:57 PM

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/stunning-admission-on-bill-barr/

   - So end the investigations? 

"The last box is the only box that matters now."

    - Please explain.

"We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box".

"You aren't voting or investigating your way out of this."

   - Voting (and investigations) got us into this mess.

I don't buy the idea that Republican run states can't slow mass fraud down enough to conduct a fair election in their state.  Republicans control 31 state legislatures https://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/partisan-composition.aspx including Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina.  Democrats control 19, mostly not swing states.  Most of this could be cleaned up without help from a single Democrat.  Can't clean it up without knowing what happened.  Must investigate.  For the honest citizenry, we must push them to investigate and to tighten election security, and never stop pushing until they do it.

What is the other plan?  Concede the federal government to the Left, cf. Chavez, Maduro.  Retreat to red areas and try to hold off the federal powers they gain full control over, IRS, FBI, ATF, NSA, US Military, from there?

How does that work?

The left has total operational control of the feral government. They did, even when Trump was the duly elected president.

Title: "irregularities" "many Republicans oppose" "highly suspect audit"
Post by: ccp on June 03, 2021, 05:05:40 AM

black pens were "observed"
non residents
sending to Montana

https://www.yahoo.com/news/arizona-2020-vote-partisan-audit-allegations-katie-hobbs-governor-191115899.html

and not mentioned but the usual statement

this is threat to our Democracy!

Title: RINO vt governor wants non citizens to vote
Post by: ccp on June 04, 2021, 08:26:41 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/06/03/vermont-republican-governor-seeks-to-give-non-citizens-voting-rights-in-local-elections/

what is it about the concept of citizens versus NON citizens
people refuse to accept

with Republicans like this we have no hope

Title: DEm governor of Nevada
Post by: ccp on June 04, 2021, 01:03:38 PM

mail ballots to be sent to every "voter"


https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/nevada-gov-sisolak-signs-law-allowing-permanent-mail-in-voting_3842494.html?utm_source=News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-06-04-1&mktids=f2ef7d957fd584f0c50dac86e64d5424&est=X4lNiU0wT3lwqAd6D51QQRe%2B%2FJPZvsZL4%2FIgpVqdE0H8PbrfSJDM2E9M3oY%3D

Harry Reid presumable can get the votes they always need at the 11th hour.

Title: Prof John Lott: Euro vote integrity laws work
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 06, 2021, 07:05:34 AM

https://rumble.com/vi1py5-john-lott-research-shows-tight-voting-laws-prevent-fraud-in-eu-countries.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=1

Title: Re: Prof John Lott: Euro vote integrity laws work
Post by: G M on June 06, 2021, 09:01:45 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 06, 2021, 07:05:34 AM

https://rumble.com/vi1py5-john-lott-research-shows-tight-voting-laws-prevent-fraud-in-eu-countries.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One+America+News+Network&ep=1

That's why dems hate them.

Title: Xeroxed ballots in GA?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 09, 2021, 12:43:34 PM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/why-judge-has-georgia-vote-fraud-his-mind-pristine-biden-ballots-looked-xeroxd?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 09, 2021, 03:49:01 PM

"Why A Judge Has Georgia Vote Fraud On His Mind: "Pristine" Biden Ballots That Looked Xerox'd"

It is amazing how long it is taking to get evidence that is more than just a few ballots here a few ballots there,
and tired of reading "bombshell" and Audit 'devastating news" headline
etc on  'Populist Press'

it is like chicken little every time I see this stuff

Title: AZ audit to finish soon
Post by: ccp on June 10, 2021, 07:33:08 AM

reportedly this week  :roll:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/arizona-audit-hand-recount-expected-to-end-this-week_3850893.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-06-10&mktids=0f7d0b0d3eb3582bfd17786c7405f739&est=xdXhZ8tZDdBeyoNfmJq85u0uZB0BeuQ%2BKqEM0COLpvKFnpuHiaBRcY7VERM%3D

Title: What happens if the election audits go Trump's way?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 15, 2021, 10:52:46 AM

This question needs to be asked now of all concerned and force them to answer.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/06/what_happens_if_the_election_audits_go_trumps_way.html?fbclid=IwAR14VTUhQ4Ecdhj2UE0zCGIhQwJ2ZP-XfPuCRQkDlVKqmOiDNt0p9pTpCxQ

Title: 2016: Obama against federalizing elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 16, 2021, 06:17:05 AM

Pasting this post here as well:

President Barack Obama speaks out forcefully against HR-1, in 2016
« Reply #433 on: May 11, 2021, 11:46:23 AM »
QuoteModifyRemoveSplit Topic
White House Press Conference August 4, 2016  28:20 on this video:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/national/watch-president-obamas-full-news-conference-at-the-pentagon/2016/08/04/b728125e-5a95-11e6-8b48-0cb344221131_video.html

Question, Josh Lederman: Thank you, Mr. President. Repeatedly now, Donald Trump has said that this
election will be rigged against him, challenging really the core foundation of our democratic
system. Can you promise the American people that this election will be conducted in a fair
way? And are you worried that comments like his could erode the public's faith in the
outcome of the election?

"It is -- I don't even really know where to start on answering this question. Of course the
elections will not be rigged. What does that mean? The federal government doesn't run the
election process. States and cities and communities all across the country, they are the ones
who set up the voting systems and the voting booths. And if Mr. Trump is suggesting that
there is a conspiracy theory that is being propagated across the country, including in places
like Texas, where typically it's not Democrats who are in charge of voting booths, that's
ridiculous. That doesn't make any sense. And I don't think anybody would take that seriously."

https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/PDFFiles/Barack%20Obama%20-%20ISIL%20Presser%20Post%20Security%20Council%20Meeting.pdf


That is exactly what HR-1 seeks to reverse, state and local control of elections.  Instead it nationalizes control of the standards and processes, making this stated reason that rigging is not possible, possible.

Thank you Barack Obama, the gift that keeps giving.

Title: GA: Ballot transfer forms missing
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 16, 2021, 06:54:26 AM

second post

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/06/15/georgia-secretary-of-state-raffensperger-announces-investigation-of-fulton-county-over-missing-absentee-ballot-transfer-forms/

Title: MI bill
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 17, 2021, 05:36:55 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/michigan-senate-passes-legislation-to-add-voter-id-requirements-overwhelmingly-popular_3861610.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-06-16&mktids=9c40eec5ae565e091e76fb95ae00c2dd&est=RJq2p78WKhhUQKSAYVxC4lGwNqQf4g7w95zGX%2F4z1QnGNEB%2FrWAa8qVjyPyuyFOxbFDp

Title: Electoral process: Easy to Vote, Hard to Cheat, Glenn Reynolds
Post by: DougMacG on June 17, 2021, 07:28:07 AM

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/06/17/easy_to_vote_hard_to_cheat_145941.html

"we need paper ballots, voter ID, and open counting"

[Why is this so hard?]

Title: Abrams for Manchin's voting "compromise "
Post by: ccp on June 18, 2021, 05:39:43 AM

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/stacey-abrams-backs-manchin-s-compromise-voting-legislation-n1271134

So we know it cannot be good (for us)

If this gets passed, Abrams knows she will still be able to cheat

So 50 Dems
  (and likely murkowski and romney )  will be for it, and with Harris -
 we lose

Title: Sidney Powell in trouble?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 19, 2021, 02:47:51 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/sidney-powell-summoned-to-michigan-court-for-sanctions-hearing-judge_3864570.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-06-19&mktids=039af16e1b036edcdfda3bac9f3b78d2&est=My4ARKzTTRKmSBnPZFR9on6iYQadrzEAumkjiLKbkeLVwqhSBWkCUcaRCzEpqeHYFkJz

Title: GA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2021, 05:11:53 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/georgia-investigators-notes-detail-massive-issues-during-2020-election_3864679.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-06-20&mktids=7adb64c5d7af24399288aea3c1c02ffe&est=O97ixRLyh1OT5jCSXf%2FqErrKfzjj%2FJVaS24yfceklZdcdLZEt8S%2FoYjXcTAVxr1EqoVZ

Title: kerik over 1 million votes
Post by: ccp on June 22, 2021, 09:27:50 AM

that Trump won in Pa
that were squashed:

https://rumble.com/viuhbl-kerik-trump-won-by-over-1-million-votes-in-key-state.html

I wonder if I can come up with "2 " million can I be interviewed ?

At this point :

 :roll: :roll: :roll:

Title: Trump of course goes after Barr now
Post by: ccp on June 28, 2021, 06:54:10 AM

https://populist.press/trump-blasts-barr/

still waiting for audit results............. :roll:............ :roll:........... :roll:

which might help substantiate my suspicions but will have no overall effect otherwise
 of course.

Title: AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2021, 06:33:07 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/arizona-republican-lawmakers-vote-to-strip-power-from-secretary-of-state-katie-hobbs_3877910.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-06-29&mktids=925d161073736aba122448b27d0822e2&est=ySo9GuOOFWYCRSB3%2BSQMtdnJ3NRenZCnsdY9o8oMbBrlAmFc6orVs8iYKDCiiaS%2BTq2E

Title: Eric Adams gets suspicious in NYC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2021, 07:51:02 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/eric-adams-says-vote-counting-raises-serious-questions-after-losing-ground-in-nyc-mayors-race/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=24309053

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 30, 2021, 05:36:58 AM

Besides vote cheating, ranked choice voting is a strange idea.

Title: Re: Eric Adams gets suspicious in NYC
Post by: G M on June 30, 2021, 11:31:14 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2021, 07:51:02 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/eric-adams-says-vote-counting-raises-serious-questions-after-losing-ground-in-nyc-mayors-race/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=24309053

https://redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2021/06/30/nyc-finds-a-135000-vote-error-in-election-count-42518-votes-decided-georgia-arizona-and-wisconsin-in-2020-n404736

Whoops!

Title: RCV is BS, Ranked Choice Voting, NYC
Post by: DougMacG on June 30, 2021, 03:09:50 PM

Ranked Choice Voting is the design of the Liberal Left who don't want to risk losing to a Republican when their side is divided between the pure Left and a more electable Liberal choice.

I don't know how it works, and they don't know how it works, but the idea is that if a majority vote for Liberal Choice 1 with Liberal Choice 2 as their second choice, or vice versa, they cannot lose to conservative choice 1 getting less than 50% of the vote who is no one's second choice.

In other words, Bill Clinton who never got 50% of the vote would never have been President.

NYC in chaos, this link or see previous post:
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/politics/nyc-board-of-elections-to-release-new-unofficial-primary-results-after-ranked-choice-fail/3131856/

Nothing says how screwed up it is more than watching it play out:

"135,000 ballot images that were in its computer system for testing purposes had never been cleared, proved that the board was not equipped to handle the new ranked choice system.

The BOE uses memory sticks to transfer voting data from scanner machines to their computer system. Those memory sticks, which were used on primary night, only collect data on first-choice votes, with a second set of memory sticks used to transfer the ranked choice data. Four of the five boroughs had the second set of memory sticks scrubbed of the test ballot info, but the Queens test data had not been cleared."

We don't pick our leaders with second and third choice votes; this is bullshit.

Ray of hope from the article:

"City Council’s Black, Latino and Asian Caucus...favor putting a repeal of ranked choice voting on the November ballot."

Do it!

Title: Epoch Times: NYC 135,000 vote error
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 01, 2021, 05:51:35 AM

New York’s Mayoral Primary Vote Count Voided After 135,000 Ballot Discrepancy
BY TOM OZIMEK June 30, 2021 Updated: June 30, 2021 biggersmaller Print
The New York City Board of Elections said on June 29 that 135,000 test ballots were accidentally included in a preliminary tally of votes cast in the city’s mayoral primary election, leading to the count being voided and drawing the ire of candidates.

New York’s first attempt at ranked-choice voting (RCV) descended into confusion after the elections board abruptly removed updated vote totals from its website hours after posting them, citing a “discrepancy” in the numbers.

“We are aware there is a discrepancy in the unofficial RCV round by round elimination report,” the board said in a statement, noting that it was working with technical staff to identify the discrepancy and asking “candidates to have patience.”

Later, the board posted another statement noting that it had inadvertently failed to remove sample ballots it had used to test its software.

“When the cast vote records were extracted for the first pull of RCV results, it included both test and election night results, producing approximately 135,000 additional records,” the board stated, apologizing for the error and vowing “to ensure the most accurate up to date results are reported.”


“The cast vote record will be re-generated and the RCV rounds will be re-tabulated,” the board stated.

New York’s primary election was held a week ago, when preliminary results showed Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, with a 10-point lead. That preliminary advantage appeared to shrink to 2 points on June 29, when voters’ second, third, fourth, and fifth choices were factored in under the ranked-choice voting system being used for the first time in a mayoral contest.

But after the votes were released, reporters and campaign staffers noticed that there were around 135,000 more votes counted than had been reported on election night, with Adams releasing a statement calling on the Board of Elections “to explain such a massive increase,” which he said raised “serious questions.”

After the board acknowledged the mistake, Adams issued another statement calling the error “unfortunate” and saying that “it is critical that New Yorkers are confident in their electoral system.”

By the evening of June 29, the Board of Elections had taken down the vote totals and replaced them with a note stating that the results would be available on June 30.

The since-voided results appeared to show the race narrowing, with Kathryn Garcia, the city’s former sanitation chief who ran as a technocrat, moving up to a close second and Maya Wiley, a former MSNBC analyst and civil rights lawyer, falling from second to third.

Wiley, who finished second to Adams on election night in first-rank votes, bemoaned the board’s mistake.

“This error by the Board of Elections is not just failure to count votes properly today, it is the result of generations of failures that have gone unaddressed,” she said in a statement. “Sadly, it is impossible to be surprised.”

Garcia, too, expressed criticism in a statement, stating that the board’s release of incorrect ranked-choice vote tallies “is deeply troubling and requires a much more transparent and complete explanation.” She also said that all absentee and ranked-choice votes “must be counted accurately, so that all New Yorkers have faith in our democracy and our government.”

The discrepancy also drew a critical comment from former President Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., who has suggested that New York’s vote discrepancy illustrates the need to ask hard questions about election integrity.

“Let me get this straight? You can be off by 135,000 votes in a New York City mayoral primary alone but if someone loses the White House by less than 45,000 across multiple states in a presidential election, you can’t have any questions,” Trump Jr. wrote in a Twitter post. “Seems legit … if you live in China.”

The final results of the mayoral primary are expected to be announced sometime in July.

Title: PA Gov vetoes vote integrity bill
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 01, 2021, 05:53:29 AM

second post

Pennsylvania Gov. Vetoes GOP-Backed Election Integrity Bill
BY JACK PHILLIPS June 30, 2021 Updated: June 30, 2021 biggersmaller Print
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf vetoed a Republican-backed election overhaul bill that would expand voter identification requirements, move up the voter registration deadline, limit the use of drop-boxes, and allow county officials to conduct early pre-canvassing for mail-in ballots, among other measures.

In explaining why he vetoed the bill, the Democrat governor wrote that he “made it clear I wouldn’t sign a bill that creates barriers to voting,” adding “that’s exactly what this bill does by: Limiting mail ballots, Capping early voting, Cutting voter registration time.”

On Wednesday, Wolf also used his line-item veto authority to remove a budget legislation proposal that would earmark millions of dollars to create an election-auditing agency.

Wolf separately wrote in his veto letter that he wants to work on legislation that can be passed on a bipartisan basis later this year.

The election measure, known as the Voting Rights Protection Act, passed in the GOP-held state Senate by a vote of 29 to 21, falling short of the two-thirds majority to override Wolf’s veto.


Pennsylvania state Rep. Seth Grove, a Republican who chairs the House State Government Committee, on Wednesday accused Wolf of failing voters and asserted that provisions within the bill are supported by most Pennsylvanians.

“To say I am disappointed in Wolf’s lack of action is an understatement,” Grove said in a statement to media outlets. “Though Wolf has put on blinders to problems within our election process, it doesn’t mean the problems do not exist.”

Conservative policy group Heritage Action sharply criticized the governor’s veto.

“Voter ID requirements are a common-sense first step to protecting our elections. They are supported by 74 percent of Pennsylvania voters,” the group’s director, Jessica Anderson, said Wednesday.

The bill is also one of several efforts by Republican-controlled legislatures to shore up what they say are lax laws and enforcement around elections. They’ve also argued that such bills are needed to restore public trust in elections.

Meanwhile, Democrats have near-universally panned such measures at the state and federal level, accusing Republicans of trying to suppress voter turnout rates. In other states, Democrats have accused Republicans of passing such measures in a bid to suppress minority groups’ voting rights.

Recent polls, however, have suggested that a majority of Americans support requiring voters to present photo identification before casting their ballots. A survey from Monmouth suggested that 62 percent of Democrats, 87 percent of independents, and 91 percent of Republicans support some form of voter identification requirement.

Title: GA Sec State seeking takeover of Fulton County
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 03, 2021, 04:03:30 PM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/georgia-secretary-state-seeking-election-takeover-fulton-county-enough-enough?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Title: More BS
Post by: ccp on July 05, 2021, 08:19:29 AM

https://populist.press/arizona-senators-drop-bomb-on-audit-outcome/

if audit does not show enough fraud to be significant
so be it but I am tired of the hot air at this point

populist press = bulls..t press

Title: AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2021, 01:39:52 PM

a) It appears a goodly amount of grifting is going on , , ,

b) Not inferring that this is that, just posting it on its own merits vel non:

https://amgreatness.com/2021/07/05/attorney-az-sec-of-state-katie-hobbs-and-maricopa-county-election-officials-have-known-since-nov-3-that-election-servers-were-breached/

Title: WSJ: AG Garland should drop the GA lawsuit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2021, 02:45:54 PM

Attorney General Merrick Garland is the front-runner so far for 2021’s bad timing prize. The Justice Department last month rushed out a lawsuit claiming that Georgia’s new election law violates Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act only days before the Supreme Court laid down standards that make the lawsuit a nearly certain loser.


Justice knew the likely timing of the Court’s ruling in Brnovich v. DNC, so a fair guess is that Mr. Garland succumbed to White House and progressive pressure to make a political statement to support Democratic efforts in Congress to federalize state election laws in H.R.1.

Bad call. Now federal judges hearing the case will have to contend with Justice Samuel Alito’s five principles in Brnovich as they assess the Georgia statute.


It won’t be easy to find legal fault under those principles. Mere voting inconvenience can’t be considered disqualifying, since all voting imposes some inconvenience. Any specific voting provision, such as the number of drop boxes, must also be considered in the overall context of a state’s voting rules. Georgia’s rules are generally lenient and don’t especially burden the ability of minorities to vote.


Perhaps Justice can find a federal judge somewhere to rule against Georgia, but such a ruling is unlikely to survive on appeal to higher courts. The legal and political result of the lawsuit is therefore likely to vindicate Georgia Republicans during the 2022 election season or leading up to 2024, depending on how the lawsuits proceed. Mr. Garland would be wise to drop the suit in light of Brnovich, lest his term at Justice be marred by the continuation of this patently political lawsuit.

Title: are we sure
Post by: ccp on July 05, 2021, 02:55:44 PM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/could-a-voter-id-compromise-be-a-win-for-voting-rights-162258909.html

"Conservatives have continued to argue that it’s entirely reasonable to ask people to prove their identity with a government-issued ID in order to prevent fraud — though cases of in-person voter impersonation are exceedingly rare"

well I won't buy it unless the audit if it ever gets finished comes to this conclusion
voter fraud is not rare
though in person  may not be common
I am not sure how it is being done but it ain't rare

Guliani was quipping on his radio show he was trying to figure how to win the dead vote from the Democrats when he ran for mayor.

Title: what if audit comes up with conclusion opposite the media driven results?
Post by: ccp on July 07, 2021, 03:15:54 PM

as CD asked in previous post

here is some pondering about the possibility of audit findings

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/07/how_barack_obama_begot_gwen_berry.html

I think we know what will happen - nothing

and the results themselves will of course be questioned
attacked
and lawyers charging up the hour calculators jumping into the fray
 and the media bashing anyone who supports the big lie
and Trump going beyond nuts ranting and raving
how the SCOTUS should take this up
we need to protest
etc etc

Title: audit in PA
Post by: ccp on July 08, 2021, 06:32:29 AM

https://populist.press/breaking-another-full-forensic-audit-announced/

concentrate in Phila Pittsburgh
on what the PA AG was in on
since he "knew" Trump would lose

in the end though
it will be us vs the Democrat machine
so nothing will come of it but talking points
and confirmation of what we already know

we will be able to scream *the big lie* is actually the Dem machine coverup of election fraud

Title: Re: You aren't investigating your way out of this
Post by: G M on July 09, 2021, 12:43:30 PM

Quote from: G M on June 02, 2021, 07:20:36 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on June 02, 2021, 06:19:39 PM

Quote from: G M on June 01, 2021, 07:36:57 PM

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/stunning-admission-on-bill-barr/

   - So end the investigations? 

"The last box is the only box that matters now."

    - Please explain.

"We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box".

"You aren't voting or investigating your way out of this."

   - Voting (and investigations) got us into this mess.

I don't buy the idea that Republican run states can't slow mass fraud down enough to conduct a fair election in their state.  Republicans control 31 state legislatures https://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/partisan-composition.aspx including Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina.  Democrats control 19, mostly not swing states.  Most of this could be cleaned up without help from a single Democrat.  Can't clean it up without knowing what happened.  Must investigate.  For the honest citizenry, we must push them to investigate and to tighten election security, and never stop pushing until they do it.

What is the other plan?  Concede the federal government to the Left, cf. Chavez, Maduro.  Retreat to red areas and try to hold off the federal powers they gain full control over, IRS, FBI, ATF, NSA, US Military, from there?

How does that work?

The left has total operational control of the feral government. They did, even when Trump was the duly elected president.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/394653.php

VOAT HARDER!!!!   :roll:

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 09, 2021, 04:08:31 PM

well
I would think Mike Savage is right

we aren't about to get into the cartridge box strategy
 until people start starving in the streets

till then it won't happen in 2021 in my opinion

but just in case the Left is taking over the military leadership for this reason
 which is obvious

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 10, 2021, 06:02:05 AM

Tucker read most of
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/394653.php on the air last night.  Extremely eloquent!!!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 10, 2021, 06:25:25 AM

I am about to head out for several hours.  Is there someone who could collect that series of incredibly eloquent tweets into one whole and post it here?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Illegal votes Georgia
Post by: DougMacG on July 10, 2021, 06:39:21 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/09/new-evidence-indicates-enough-illegal-votes-in-georgia-to-tip-2020-results/#.YOhA9lAqtRg.twitter

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 10, 2021, 07:17:31 AM

better read Doug's post above before it gets wiped clean by FBI or big tech.

Assume we are all now on some surveillance list

I am old enough to remember I trusted our government..........

 :-(

Title: voter Id preventing Dem party illegal voting fraud
Post by: ccp on July 10, 2021, 07:58:02 AM

and this my friends , as we all know , is why Abrams and crew are fighting voting integrity  so hard:

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/09/new-evidence-indicates-enough-illegal-votes-in-georgia-to-tip-2020-results/

Title: Re: voter Id preventing Dem party illegal voting fraud
Post by: G M on July 10, 2021, 12:35:16 PM

Quote from: ccp on July 10, 2021, 07:58:02 AM

and this my friends , as we all know , is why Abrams and crew are fighting voting integrity  so hard:

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/09/new-evidence-indicates-enough-illegal-votes-in-georgia-to-tip-2020-results/

If it was a clean election, the left would be happy to see audits done.

"Read them and weep, Trumptards!"

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on July 10, 2021, 04:49:01 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 10, 2021, 06:02:05 AM

Tucker read most of
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/394653.php on the air last night.  Extremely eloquent!!!

https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1413675917923262464%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.revolver.news%2F

Title: PA DO[in]J tries to block audit
Post by: ccp on July 12, 2021, 07:41:28 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/pennsylvania-department-of-state-tells-counties-not-to-allow-outside-access-to-voting-systems_3896243.html?utm_source=News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-07-11-2&mktids=34c99269cebcbaa2b9c234b3ca7887f0&est=iXBkeOUxzKmw%2FpJd7H1Mo85VxO%2FPZSUxT%2BY6vOBGHo4WC8UwHfXxmBctjzM%3D

(me: fearing the truth may come out of course not their phony excuses)

Title: Georgia
Post by: DougMacG on July 13, 2021, 06:25:16 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/12/ignoring-georgia-illegal-voting-proves-democrats-dont-care-about-election-integrity-at-all/

Title: GA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 13, 2021, 07:06:41 PM

https://amgreatness.com/2021/07/13/voter-integrity-group-in-georgia-says-2020-election-in-fulton-county-riddled-with-massive-errors-and-provable-fraud/

Title: US attorney in PA writes letter to Trump
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 14, 2021, 02:25:33 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/trump-releases-letter-from-ex-us-attorney-alleging-barr-pressured-him-not-to-probe-voter-fraud-claims_3898922.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-07-14&mktids=cc79aec2861489433eb494358963bf99&est=Jp7Cq8shgOirhMDVbtXP6V4injCFHuaziQKYSgrzNp9I5namcIkzmryTGvS4%2FLU1mVSy

Title: Electoral process, Vote Fraud, Stalin: Those who count votes decide everything
Post by: DougMacG on July 14, 2021, 09:04:11 AM

“Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.”

― Joseph Stalin

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/2140-those-who-vote-decide-nothing-those-who-count-the-vote

Title: Inconsistent counts in AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 14, 2021, 12:07:32 PM

https://amgreatness.com/2021/07/14/arizona-senate-prez-says-audit-teams-2020-election-ballot-count-differs-from-maricopa-countys-tally/

Title: 74,000 ballots in AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2021, 07:18:44 AM

https://www.westernjournal.com/74000-ballots-returned-no-record-ever-sent-shocking-az-audit-update/?fbclid=IwAR0ZA6U71kwOh-5jC9AA3aBtRNo2ln7psopmplXZtUDM2BoSCI_m-JBc0CI

Title: Re: 74,000 ballots in AZ
Post by: DougMacG on July 16, 2021, 08:00:33 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2021, 07:18:44 AM

https://www.westernjournal.com/74000-ballots-returned-no-record-ever-sent-shocking-az-audit-update/?fbclid=IwAR0ZA6U71kwOh-5jC9AA3aBtRNo2ln7psopmplXZtUDM2BoSCI_m-JBc0CI

"74,000 Ballots Returned with No Record of Ever Being Sent: Shocking AZ Audit Update"

Biden win margin = 11,779

Big story, when you get a chance, could you post the NYT, NPR, WashPost or WSJ link to it.     :wink:

I can't find it. 
https://www.nytimes.com/
https://www.npr.org/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/
https://www.wsj.com/
Not a word.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2021, 10:18:30 AM

All I have is the Western Journal citation.

No surprise that the Pravdas are not covering this.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on July 16, 2021, 10:22:27 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2021, 10:18:30 AM

All I have is the Western Journal citation.

No surprise that the Pravdas are not covering this.

But they are Professional Journalists!!!!

Title: More AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2021, 11:20:07 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-live-arizona-senate-briefing-election-audit?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Title: 60% error rate in the hand audit?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2021, 03:39:31 PM

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/election-integrity-group-says-ballot-image-analysis-fulton-county-shows-provable-fraud-audit?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=newsletter-FP&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=2021-07-16&ats_es=639c4dfcf4902e5be56a6038ef508105

Title: FB fact checkers counter 74,000 claim with this:
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 16, 2021, 04:29:48 PM

https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2021/07/fact-check-there-were-not-over-74000-more-mail-in-ballots.html?fbclid=IwAR2w6ns7Zu4hv5cKCGdMOu_5NWBiSgSexeOy3M_CsIycx7_WK-1EEo3ewOg

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 17, 2021, 07:53:11 AM

The Dem lawyers and operatives

Are already picking the audit apart,
 and the MSmedia of course will only tell "their" side of the story

Very depressing how the *truth* is not being made available.

One way or the other -  what did happen?

Title: AZ: Check out Item C in particular
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 17, 2021, 02:45:54 PM

https://twitter.com/threeguysyesh/status/1415841053278679041/photo/1

Title: Rudy
Post by: ccp on July 19, 2021, 03:57:07 PM

caution populist press

Rudy explains one way how the Dems did it (cheated):

https://populist.press/sufficient-numbers-to-change-the-election/

laughing at thinking how the libs will tear into this.

larry lib will need to show his partisan face to assure
us nothing will change about who is is the WH

Title: North Carolina BOE denies audit request
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2021, 05:07:11 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/north-carolina-state-board-of-election-denies-audit-request_3910748.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-07-22&mktids=ef5239d8acdfaf3ea5125b5119073175&est=[EMAIL_SECURE_LINK]

Title: PA de-certifies a county's machines
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2021, 12:46:07 PM

Seems like we have seen this dance before. , ,

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/pennsylvania-decertifies-countys-voting-system-cites-violation-election-code?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 22, 2021, 05:07:56 PM

".
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/pennsylvania-decertifies-countys-voting-system-cites-violation-election-code?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter"

can someone help me out
I am not clear what this is exactly saying

the machines cannot be used in future elections because they are "tampered" with

?????

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2021, 05:49:31 PM

The notion is that a third party getting into the machine to audit it can also mess with it and therefore once it is audited the BOE can no longer verify that it has not been fuct with.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on July 22, 2021, 06:06:08 PM

Huh. I as told they can't be tampered with!

 :roll:

Quote from: ccp on July 22, 2021, 05:07:56 PM

".
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/pennsylvania-decertifies-countys-voting-system-cites-violation-election-code?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter"

can someone help me out
I am not clear what this is exactly saying

the machines cannot be used in future elections because they are "tampered" with

?????

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on July 23, 2021, 09:21:58 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2021, 05:49:31 PM

The notion is that a third party getting into the machine to audit it can also mess with it and therefore once it is audited the BOE can no longer verify that it has not been fuct with.

Reminds me of the VW diesel scandal.  They had one setting for the fuel economy test and a different setting for actual customer driving.  These machines may have separate settings for audit situations and for actual election cheating.  Once audited, maybe they have to go back to the manufacturer to get the cheat mode re-installed.

Title: unbelievable
Post by: ccp on July 24, 2021, 06:04:46 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2021/07/23/hank-johnson-folks-are-trying-to-kill-us-on-voting-must-confront-evil-that-is-ready-to-choke-us-unless-we-show-well-seize-control/

blacks are being killed , used as tools (they fail to mention it is by the DNC)
  choked , white people can vote but blacks cannot, threat to our democracy that black people built and on and on and on

this is supposed to be a serious discussion

"black votes matter "

Title: Increasing doubts
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 27, 2021, 07:59:54 AM

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/amid-troubling-audits-poll-reveals-10-democrats-now-doubt-biden-won-election-fairly?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=brief-FP&utm_campaign=dailyam&utm_content=2021-07-27&ats_es=639c4dfcf4902e5be56a6038ef508105

Title: Well, it worked last time , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2021, 10:32:12 AM

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/bidens-doj-sets-stage-permanently-destroy-election-integrity-ensure-gop-never-wins?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=brief-FP&utm_campaign=dailyam&utm_content=2021-07-31&ats_es=639c4dfcf4902e5be56a6038ef508105

Title: Milwaukee : "every vote counts"
Post by: ccp on August 01, 2021, 08:39:50 AM

NOT if the votes are collected by partisans scouring the urban communities with $5 bills and their other cons to get names of people to put on ballots who would otherwise not have willfully voted

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/07/breaking-exclusive-uncovered-email-shows-milwaukee-elections-executive-woodall-vogg-laughing-election-steal-election-night/

executive director of Milwaukee election committee in on the 'urban' vote cheat:

https://www.google.com/search?source=univ&tbm=isch&q=claire+woods+milwaukee&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj4rNStk5DyAhWPm-AKHbd_CV0QjJkEegQIDxAC&biw=1440&bih=789#imgrc=tnsfAdG6KZ5QXM&imgdii=5MI-qK8v5MmQjM

Title: Colorado County's voting system passwords posted online
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 10, 2021, 04:33:43 PM

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/colorado-countys-voting-system-passwords-posted-online-lead-decertification-machines?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=newsletter-FP&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=2021-08-10&ats_es=639c4dfcf4902e5be56a6038ef508105

Title: Mike Lundell crashes and burns
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 12, 2021, 01:37:44 AM

https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=1c3caf824377bb41110a68320d3181d6_61152115_6d25b5f&selDate=20210812

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 12, 2021, 06:28:13 AM

I don't see any Lundell article
on the post above?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on August 12, 2021, 08:50:32 AM

Quote from: ccp on August 12, 2021, 06:28:13 AM

I don't see any Lundell article
on the post above?

I don't know that link but it seems Mike Lindell is not coming through with bombshell data he promised.

Whether false of just unverified, the over-hyping hurt our side.  Why is Sydney Powell using the - you shouldn't have relied on e - defense?  There were real problems in this election and we shouldn't be handing the other side things that fit their 'big lie' narrative.

We needed and still need James O'Keefe types to embed in the electoral process backstage in certain key Democratic cities in swing states.  We've known about the problem in my lifetime since Kennedy-Nixon in Chicago, 1960.  How many jokes did Johnny Carson have about dead people voting in Chicago?  They don't write jokes about things that no one knows.  Everyone knew.  It was a corrupt Democrat machine.  Instead of shutting it down, they took a winning formula and ran with it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 12, 2021, 01:44:20 PM

I just read the article

did not realize it was behind an add

if not Lindell himself at least his tech guy was honest and said he could not "prove" any Chinese hack.  I would rather not make claims that are specious . That is not helpful .

but what about all the rest of the claims so far

still waiting in Jersey  :-o

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 12, 2021, 01:47:06 PM

Expert finds no proof of cyberattack in election

Rebuts Lindell’s China accusation

BY JOSEPH CLARK THE WASHINGTON TIMES SIOUX FALLS, S.D. | The cyber expert on the “red team” hired by MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell now says the key data underpinning the theory that China hacked the 2020 election unveiled at the Cyber Symposium is illegitimate.

Mr. Lindell said he had 37 terabytes of “irrefutable” evidence that hackers, who he said were backed by China, broke into election systems and switched votes in favor of President Biden. The proof, he said, is visible in intercepted network data or “packet captures” that were collected by hackers and could be unencrypted to reveal that a cyberattack occurred and that votes were switched.

But Mr. Lindell’s lead cyber expert, Josh Merritt, told The Washington Times that packet captures are unrecoverable in the data and that the data, as provided, cannot prove a cyberincursion by China.

“So our team said, we’re not going to say that this is legitimate if we don’t have confidence in the information,” Mr. Merritt said on Wednesday, the second day of the symposium.

Mr. Merritt’s break from Mr. Lindell accelerated the unraveling of the My Pillow millionaire’s months of spinning of a conspiracy theory that he said would reverse the outcome of the 2020 election and restore former President Donald Trump to the White House. Mr. Lindell delayed a scheduled unveiling of his evidence on Tuesday at the symposium.

He had offered $5 million to any inperson attendee who can disprove his claims. The offer is no longer on the

table, said Mr. Merritt.

Leading up to the seminar, Mr. Lindell had displayed a video of scrolling, incomprehensible text, which he claimed were the packet captures he had received — proof, he claimed, of his China hacking theory. The video was featured in his documentary “Absolute 9-0” and was played on loop on screens throughout the convention center during the symposium.

Cybersecurity expert J. Kirk Wiebe, a former senior National Security Agency analyst and whistleblower, also said Mr. Lindell did not have the actual data sets.

He said the scrolling text was likely meant to resemble what the packet captures would look like in the data set but were not actual packet captures, which are vital to prove the claims.

Several cyber experts at the symposium became frustrated late into the first day with not being provided with packet captures.

Mr. Merritt and Mr. Wiebe said the missing packet captures could be a result of either the format the data was sent in or they were withheld by the source of the information, Dennis L. Montgomery.

Mr. Montgomery is a former government contractor who developed cyber tools named HAMMER and SCORECARD, which were allegedly used by the U.S. to influence foreign elections. Mr. Montgomery came forward with the data after he said the tools were being used to influence U.S. elections, according to Mr. Wiebe.

Mr. Merritt confirmed that Mr. Montgomery was the source of the data.

But the data Mr. Montgomery sent contains no packet captures and cannot be used to validate Mr. Lindell’s marquee theory, which he planned to unveil at the symposium, said the two experts.

Mr. Montgomery reportedly suffered a stroke on the eve of the symposium and has not been in contact with Mr. Lindell’s team or any cyber experts at the symposium.

He has been behind several other high-profile conspiracy theories, including allegations that U.S. security agencies wiretapped Trump Tower while Mr. Trump was running for president in 2016.

Mr. Montgomery said he presented the wiretap evidence to FBI Director James B. Comey, who dismissed the information. Mr. Montgomery later sued Mr. Comey, alleging a cover-up. The lawsuit was dropped.

Mr. Montgomery has also publicly claimed that the 2020 election was manipulated, which former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Christopher Krebs said was a “hoax.”

Still, Mr. Merritt said, the data did contain important “forensic” evidence of manipulated voters.

“We were handed a turd,” he said. “And I had to take that turd and turn it into a diamond. And that’s what I think we did.”

The symposium organizers unveiled data Wednesday in front of the audience, which they said showed tampering in the 2021 presidential election in Mesa County, Colorado. The presentation was ad hoc and separate from Mr. Lindell’s original claim of a nationwide hack.

Mesa County’s clerk and recorder, Tina Peters, headlined Day One of the symposium. Ms. Peters is under investigation for a potential election security breach from within her office.

Mr. Lindell’s team would not confirm the source of the data used for Wednesday’s presentation.

Phil Waldron, the leader of the Red Team, said only a small slice of the data was provided, just days before the symposium. Mr. Waldron said the remaining data, not interrogated during the symposium, could contain the packet captures and other data needed to prove China hacked the election. He said ample evidence was contained in the data that points to other significant election anomalies that were just as significant and worth unpacking during the symposium.

Kurt Olsen, a lawyer on Mr. Lindell’s team, said there were multiple sources of the data that Mr. Lindell claims to have, and he did not confirm that Mr. Mongtomery was the source of the data. He also clarified that the $5 million challenge has not been canceled and that Mr. Merritt would not be privy to that information.


Lindell


MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell said intercepted data could be unencrypted to reveal that a cyberattack occurred in the November presidential election in favor of Joseph R. Biden, but a cyber expert said “packet captures” are unrecoverable in the data. ASSOCIATED PRESS

Title: Chi Coms and Congresswoman
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 13, 2021, 02:10:20 PM

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/950409/the-ccp-has-long-been-in-the-wire-ed

Title: sidney powell , has smoking gun
Post by: ccp on August 14, 2021, 10:55:00 AM

so reports populist press

https://populist.press/sidney-powell-reveals-smoking-gun-has-to-get-witness-protection/

my response.  :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

her reputation is not quite as bad as avenatti's
but .............

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 14, 2021, 12:01:31 PM

Unleash the Kraken  :roll:

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on August 16, 2021, 04:59:03 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 14, 2021, 12:01:31 PM

Unleash the Kraken  :roll:

The Kraken we needed:

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/zzYs_sM_bpk/maxresdefault.jpg)

The Kraken we got:

(https://img1.etsystatic.com/000/0/6831978/il_fullxfull.339155067.jpg)

Title: Election Fraud discovered in my old district in CA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 22, 2021, 03:50:04 PM

https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/08/more-election-fraud-discovered-in-californias-newsom-recall-election/?fbclid=IwAR0oFMW6YufpkpzXTVKgBWKriRrnP1oVmZYV7l-QyxcmvO4PzmIeBuHKy2I

Title: Must. VOAT. Harder!
Post by: G M on August 22, 2021, 09:19:49 PM

https://thedcpatriot.com/why-did-douglas-county-nevada-just-delete-82-of-2020-voters-off-their-rolls-2/

Title: 15 million mail in ballots unaccounted for in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 23, 2021, 08:09:12 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/nearly-15-million-ballots-unaccounted-for-in-2020-election-report-says_3955184.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-08-23&mktids=7554ea55c4925123346234ab24b157c7&est=Hg99K1Pg1aAjJCkG3DcReN1IcFKuqcH665pCqgeIhV%2Buhx%2FkVcX8uCDYDSog36XkVolh

Title: Re: 15 million mail in ballots unaccounted for in 2020
Post by: G M on August 23, 2021, 08:13:44 AM

We obviously need to VOTE HARDER!

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 23, 2021, 08:09:12 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/nearly-15-million-ballots-unaccounted-for-in-2020-election-report-says_3955184.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-08-23&mktids=7554ea55c4925123346234ab24b157c7&est=Hg99K1Pg1aAjJCkG3DcReN1IcFKuqcH665pCqgeIhV%2Buhx%2FkVcX8uCDYDSog36XkVolh

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 23, 2021, 08:22:52 AM

And/or?

Title: 2020 WI: 20,000 missing ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 28, 2021, 02:51:34 AM

FK!!!

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/08/27/public-interest-legal-foundation-wisconsin-mail-ballots-went-missing-undeliverable/

Title: Re: 2020 WI: 20,000 missing ballots
Post by: G M on September 02, 2021, 07:28:41 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 28, 2021, 02:51:34 AM

FK!!!

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/08/27/public-interest-legal-foundation-wisconsin-mail-ballots-went-missing-undeliverable/

https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2021/09/01/hans-von-spakovsky-missing-ballots-three-states-exceed-joe-bidens-victory-margins/

Title: Trump loyalists getting in the electoral trenches
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 05, 2021, 02:25:05 AM

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/florida-michigan-other-state-elections-are-falling-trump-loyalists-n1278499

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, Dominion Voting Machine regrets its Biden votes
Post by: DougMacG on September 07, 2021, 10:23:03 AM

https://babylonbee.com/news/joe-bidens-approval-numbers-so-low-even-dominion-computers-regret-having-voted-for-him

Dominion Voting Machine Really Starting To Regret Its 50,000 Votes For Biden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
America's newspaper of record

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 07, 2021, 11:18:35 AM

well he will always have over 40 % support as long as he keeps promising more handouts to enough of the free shit crowd

whose ranks relentlessly keep growing...........
 :x

Title: As we knew: AZ stolen
Post by: G M on September 08, 2021, 08:59:48 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/breaking-huge-results-canvassing-arizona-released-election-steal-now-confirmed/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2021, 03:18:37 PM

We badly want this to be true, so let us read with care and look for additional sources.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 08, 2021, 04:00:04 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2021, 03:18:37 PM

We badly want this to be true, so let us read with care and look for additional sources.

It blatantly happened right in front of us. There is zero doubt.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 08, 2021, 04:06:19 PM

Quote from: G M on September 08, 2021, 04:00:04 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2021, 03:18:37 PM

We badly want this to be true, so let us read with care and look for additional sources.

It blatantly happened right in front of us. There is zero doubt.

Remember this?

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/084/361/695/original/79455b8d631e4457.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/084/361/695/original/79455b8d631e4457.jpg)

Title: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: G M on September 10, 2021, 08:19:13 AM

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/09/08/white-house-extends-national-election-emergency-granting-authority-for-federal-intelligence-agencies-to-enter-state-election-databases-for-mid-term-election/

Is it sinking in yet?

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 08:22:48 AM

Quote from: G M on September 10, 2021, 08:19:13 AM

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/09/08/white-house-extends-national-election-emergency-granting-authority-for-federal-intelligence-agencies-to-enter-state-election-databases-for-mid-term-election/

Is it sinking in yet?

My old boss used to say, don't come to me with problems.  Come to me with solutions. 

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: G M on September 10, 2021, 08:33:35 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 08:22:48 AM

Quote from: G M on September 10, 2021, 08:19:13 AM

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/09/08/white-house-extends-national-election-emergency-granting-authority-for-federal-intelligence-agencies-to-enter-state-election-databases-for-mid-term-election/

Is it sinking in yet?

My old boss used to say, don't come to me with problems.  Come to me with solutions.

We all know the solution.

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 10:08:51 AM

Quote from: G M on September 10, 2021, 08:33:35 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 08:22:48 AM

My old boss used to say, don't come to me with problems.  Come to me with solutions.

We all know the solution.

Boycott elections forever because of what happened in 2020, arm and retreat to safe areas?

I think we have more agreement on the problems than we do on the solutions.

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: G M on September 10, 2021, 10:52:01 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 10:08:51 AM

Quote from: G M on September 10, 2021, 08:33:35 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 08:22:48 AM

My old boss used to say, don't come to me with problems.  Come to me with solutions.

We all know the solution.

Boycott elections forever because of what happened in 2020, arm and retreat to safe areas?

I think we have more agreement on the problems than we do on the solutions.

Safety in numbers. Learn from history. We are the Neo-Kulaks. The left has plans for us. Best be ready to avoid those plans.

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: G M on September 10, 2021, 11:07:28 AM

Quote from: G M on September 10, 2021, 10:52:01 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 10:08:51 AM

Quote from: G M on September 10, 2021, 08:33:35 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 08:22:48 AM

My old boss used to say, don't come to me with problems.  Come to me with solutions.

We all know the solution.

Boycott elections forever because of what happened in 2020, arm and retreat to safe areas?

I think we have more agreement on the problems than we do on the solutions.

Safety in numbers. Learn from history. We are the Neo-Kulaks. The left has plans for us. Best be ready to avoid those plans.

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/084/519/766/original/aa18fe3b2131f2e1.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/084/519/766/original/aa18fe3b2131f2e1.jpg)

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 12:24:19 PM

That said, IMHO, the current election and the 2022 and 2024 elections matter.  Also constitutionality matters. 

Biden and Congress don't have jurisdiction over state legislatures in elections, nor do liberal cities.  Democrats control the state legislatures in only 18 out of 50 states including none of the key (alleged) cheating states.  How is election integrity not repairable with enough will, and why don't we ALWAYS have a clear majority in the Senate?  Maybe Hershel Walker and a few others can run with that ball.  (Elections matter.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_state_legislatures

I get it that Supreme Court justices are often constitutionally conservative in name or origin only but we won the right to pick 6 of 9 by winning elections.

If we could win some (more) elections, maybe we could re-draw some lines before the inevitable(?) split up.  Minnesota is a red state outside the Twin Cities.  Illinois is a red state outside the Chicago metro.  California is a red state away from the coast.  Colorado is a red state outside the front range, etc.  Splitting the country by county doesn't fix it either.  I live in a county larger than 8 states in population and economy.  I own a prime piece; why do  I have to retreat and regroup?  What about families divided? 

Our main problem (IMHO) isn't that Leftist extremists are extremely Left.  Our problem is failure to govern when we do win elections, and failure to persuade our own friends, families, neighbors, coworkers, etc. that Leftist extremism is bad.

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: G M on September 10, 2021, 12:31:15 PM

You don't vote your way out of vote fraud. The coup was done with the support of many republicans. The DC Uniparty will stack the deck, always.

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 12:24:19 PM

That said, IMHO, the current election and the 2022 and 2024 elections matter.  Also constitutionality matters. 

Biden and Congress don't have jurisdiction over state legislatures in elections, nor do liberal cities.  Democrats control the state legislatures in only 18 out of 50 states including none of the key (alleged) cheating states.  How is election integrity not repairable with enough will, and why don't we ALWAYS have a clear majority in the Senate?  Maybe Hershel Walker and a few others can run with that ball.  (Elections matter.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_state_legislatures

I get it that Supreme Court justices are often constitutionally conservative in name or origin only but we won the right to pick 6 of 9 by winning elections.

If we could win some (more) elections, maybe we could re-draw some lines before the inevitable(?) split up.  Minnesota is a red state outside the Twin Cities.  Illinois is a red state outside the Chicago metro.  California is a red state away from the coast.  Colorado is a red state outside the front range, etc.  Splitting the country by county doesn't fix it either.  I live in a county larger than 8 states in population and economy.  I own a prime piece; why do  I have to retreat and regroup?  What about families divided? 

Our main problem (IMHO) isn't that Leftist extremists are extremely Left.  Our problem is failure to govern when we do win elections, and failure to persuade our own friends, families, neighbors, coworkers, etc. that Leftist extremism is bad.

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 12:49:48 PM

Right.  Running honest elections requires more than merely showing up to vote, as does holding elected officials accountable.

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: G M on September 10, 2021, 12:58:47 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 12:49:48 PM

Right.  Running honest elections requires more than merely showing up to vote, as does holding elected officials accountable.

How are you going to hold Keith "Jihad" Ellison accountable?

Title: Re: You aren't voting your way out of this
Post by: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 02:47:35 PM

Quote from: G M on September 10, 2021, 12:58:47 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 10, 2021, 12:49:48 PM

Right.  Running honest elections requires more than merely showing up to vote, as does holding elected officials accountable.

How are you going to hold Keith "Jihad" Ellison accountable?

He didn't get in by election fraud.  He got in by voter stupidity.  Same with MN Sec State Steve 'George Soros' Simon.  Anyway, I meant holding Republican elected officials accountable.  I expect the worst from their side.

Al Franken got in by cheating a few hundred votes in the recount, but MN in not one of the 31 states Republicans should be able to control.  No one honest infiltrated the Minneapolis vote count or recall operation.

In their overreach, Democrats lost out-state Minnesota and Republicans took control of the State Senate in the formerly most liberal state in the union, right under their noses.

Part of the solution, I believe, is James O'Keefe style infiltration of the cheating areas - in Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Phoenix. 

Pass the needed laws.  Capture the evidence as it happens, and prosecute.  Statistical anomalies are not evidence.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 10, 2021, 06:21:16 PM

"Pass the needed laws.  Capture the evidence as it happens, and prosecute."


Plenty of laws on the books regarding vote fraud.

Who is investigating and prosecuting them?

Same people that investigated and prosecuted those that burned your city down?

Title: FEC flatulence covers for Twitters censorhip of Hunter story
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 13, 2021, 11:48:55 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/twitter-did-not-violate-election-laws-by-throttling-hunter-biden-article-fec-finds/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=25029849

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, Calif recall
Post by: DougMacG on September 16, 2021, 05:43:15 AM

https://townhall.com/columnists/johnrlottjr/2021/09/14/very-concerning-evidence-of-vote-fraud-in-california-recall-election-n2595826


They have a 30 point advantage.  Why cheat?

Title: Re: Electoral process, vote fraud, Calif recall
Post by: G M on September 16, 2021, 07:47:07 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 16, 2021, 05:43:15 AM

https://townhall.com/columnists/johnrlottjr/2021/09/14/very-concerning-evidence-of-vote-fraud-in-california-recall-election-n2595826


They have a 30 point advantage.  Why cheat?

Because they can. No consequences.

Title: Re: Electoral process, vote fraud, Calif recall
Post by: DougMacG on September 16, 2021, 09:16:40 AM

[They cheat} "Because they can. No consequences."

   - Yes.  On what scale, with what level of organizatin, no one seems to know.
 
"Plenty of laws on the books regarding vote fraud.
Who is investigating and prosecuting them?
Same people that investigated and prosecuted those that burned [Mpls] down."


The recall vote (so far):  5.9 million 'No' to 3.33 million 'yes'.  Pretty dumb of them to not know they already had this.  Biden would not come if he didn't know they had this.  Oddly, the 8 point margin poll was way wrong in the opposite direction from usual.

Dem party-run, deep state law enforcement is never going to investigate Leftist fraud.  I think the only solution to organized vote fraud, besides winning state legislatures, is infiltration.

Nearly all 'constitutional conservative' voters will not get involved beyond voting.  We need people to infiltrate behind enemy lines, find wrongdoing and capture real evidence. 

California has the greatest income inequality, the most homeless, the most in poverty, perhaps the most corruption in government, not because of topography but because of public policies, yet we are losing the battle of ideas there by millions of votes without the cheating.  300 ballots stuffed here or there is not the central problem in this case.  Still there needs to be prosecution for every provable case of election tampering.

To Larry Elder's credit, he is soliciting and accumulating evidence of irregularities.  Other states can use that information to tighten the laws and enforcement, even if California won't.  To knowingly screw up one vote should be a felony and 300 should be 300 counts.  Two people or more involved should warrant an organized crime charge on top of that. 

There should be zero tolerance for election interference.

Every illegal who voted (illegally) should be denied citizenship and all government benefits forever, for one thing.

It doesn't take that many prosecutions to get the bulk of it stopped.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 16, 2021, 12:05:52 PM

"We need people to infiltrate behind enemy lines, find wrongdoing and capture real evidence."

That's been done. And it meant nothing.

Title: Improve Election Integrity, Heritage
Post by: DougMacG on September 16, 2021, 12:51:20 PM

https://www.heritage.org/testimony/how-states-can-improve-the-integrity-elections

Why not fight to improve things everywhere we can.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 16, 2021, 02:41:47 PM

YES.

Title: Re: Improve Election Integrity, Heritage
Post by: G M on September 16, 2021, 05:02:09 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 16, 2021, 12:51:20 PM

https://www.heritage.org/testimony/how-states-can-improve-the-integrity-elections

Why not fight to improve things everywhere we can.

MUST! VOAT! HARDER!

 :roll:

Notice all the remaining red states being flooded with Californians, illegals and Hajis?

Title: As I was saying...
Post by: G M on September 17, 2021, 05:18:58 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/350000-ballots-disappeared-california-recall-election-tuesday-night-ap-blames-incident-staff-error/

Title: Re: As I was saying...
Post by: G M on September 17, 2021, 06:35:03 PM

Quote from: G M on September 17, 2021, 05:18:58 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/350000-ballots-disappeared-california-recall-election-tuesday-night-ap-blames-incident-staff-error/

https://i.imgur.com/mbU9Nfc.png

(https://i.imgur.com/mbU9Nfc.png)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 17, 2021, 06:40:25 PM

Quote from: G M on September 16, 2021, 12:05:52 PM

"We need people to infiltrate behind enemy lines, find wrongdoing and capture real evidence."

That's been done. And it meant nothing.
[/quote

https://nypost.com/2020/09/27/project-veritas-uncovers-ballot-harvesting-fraud-in-minnesota/

Did anyone get arrested for this, Doug? Prosecuted?

Well, at Ilhan Omar lost her citizenship and was removed from office for immigration fraud, right?

Title: two partisan Democrats judges strike down voter ID law inNC
Post by: ccp on September 18, 2021, 12:53:09 PM

". Defendants, including North Carolina House Speaker Timothy Moore, failed to show that racial discrimination was not a substantial or motivating factor behind enactment of the law, Superior Court Judges Michael O’Foghludha and Vince Rozier Jr., both Democrats, wrote in a 102-page ruling permanently blocking the measure."

WAIT A SECOND.  ISN'T THIS DEMOCRAT ASS BACKWARDS?
Why do defendants have to "prove" this was not racially motived?
Can plaintiffs prove it was ?
Again black people are not able to get voter IDs because they cannot get off their asses and get one?  Is that what the theses is here?

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/north-carolina-judges-strike-down-voter-id-law-claiming-its-racist_4003810.html?utm_source=News&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-09-18-1&mktids=3bf6720f9d820bdf89b3e9f7f2ad5864&est=OolTYQQ%2F8%2BO8o7LuiUvCp9Ari%2FbuCCuYPie2IHq9VnDWMWrHcPekZME%2BV88%3D

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 18, 2021, 04:14:29 PM

Fk.

Title: I do not get voter registrations etc
Post by: ccp on September 19, 2021, 11:07:07 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/going-arizona-recently-processed-67300-voter-identities-social-security-administration-58-no-match-found/

Non citizens can get SSN #s:

https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10096.pdf
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/how-united-states-immigration-system-works

Can they also get voter cards?

The law is confusing enough
The end runs around the law appear to make this even more of a quagmire

I wonder how many Haitians are Republican .
I doubt more then a VER/Y few immigrants from the Caribbean are Republicans
except some Miami Cubans.  The NT Cubans are Democrats

Title: Graham and Lee say Trump fraud theories fuct
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 20, 2021, 11:07:31 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/graham-lee-personally-vetted-trumps-election-fraud-evidence-and-were-unconvinced/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=News-Roundup20210920&utm_term=NewsRoundup-Smart

Title: Re: Graham and Lee say Trump fraud theories fuct
Post by: G M on September 20, 2021, 11:13:02 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 20, 2021, 11:07:31 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/graham-lee-personally-vetted-trumps-election-fraud-evidence-and-were-unconvinced/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=News-Roundup20210920&utm_term=NewsRoundup-Smart

Then they should be in favor of audits!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 21, 2021, 01:27:33 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/19/faulty-recall/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 22, 2021, 07:20:46 AM

he Enormity of Manchin’s Skinny H.R.1
If you trim a bad voting bill, you end up with . . . a bad voting bill.
By The Editorial Board
Sept. 21, 2021 6:49 pm ET



Democrats negotiating with Sen. Joe Manchin have drawn up a compromise voting bill. Their initial proposal, H.R.1, aimed to federalize U.S. elections, and parts of it looked unconstitutional. That bill didn’t win Mr. Manchin’s support, so Democrats have written what they call the Freedom to Vote Act, which they’re selling as a petite H.R.1.

Calling this bill slimmed down, though, is like touting your healthy choices after you order a Diet Coke with four Big Macs. The revised text is 592 pages, and it wraps up many of the same ideas that made H.R.1 a nonstarter. The Freedom to Vote Act would create a federal right to a mail ballot, no excuse needed, overruling laws in 16 states. Worse, every state would be required to count late-arriving mail votes. Assuming timely postmarks, ballots would be valid if they showed up a week after Election Day.


For tight races, this likely means no more decisive results on election night, with no victory parties and no concession speeches. As mail votes trickled in, the numbers would move day by day, hour by hour. This is a recipe for mistrust, lawsuits and cries of fraud, however spurious. See also: Trump, Donald.

What about late ballots that lack postmarks? Apologies to the U.S. Postal Service that we keep bringing this up, but Pennsylvania officials received 10,097 late mail ballots last year, and 6.6% lacked legible postmarks. Tardy ballots also would be valid, the bill says, if they were “signed by the voter on or before the date of the election,” as if nobody has ever gotten in trouble for backdating. A state Senate election near Pittsburgh last year turned on some 300 absentee ballots that voters forgot to date.


The constitutional objections to the new bill are the same as for H.R.1. The bill’s mandates ostensibly apply to all federal elections, but federal races only. First problem: The Constitution vests state lawmakers, not Congress, with authority over the “Manner” of choosing presidential electors. Second problem: The voting mandates are so detailed that they would be hard to untangle from state and local races, which are none of Congress’s business.


The Freedom to Vote Act says felons would regain the franchise in federal races automatically upon leaving prison. But 27 states have constitutions or laws that require felons to at least finish parole or probation before voting. The merits of this policy aside, election officials would be caught between two standards.

In theory they could try to respect both: If a mail ballot from a parolee arrived a week after Election Day, maybe the federal votes could be counted while throwing out the local selections. More likely would be a lawsuit over Congress’s encroachment, which could unsettle voting rules in time for the 2022 midterms. That’s the last thing the nation needs after 2020’s plague-year election.

***
What about voter ID? Mr. Manchin’s memo floating a compromise this summer featured this suggestion: “Require voter ID with allowable alternatives (utility bill, etc.).” Surprise, surprise, the Freedom to Vote Act takes only half that proposal. There isn’t a national voter-ID requirement, but the bill would neuter state laws by forcing every jurisdiction to accept “a bank card,” “a utility bill,” and “any other document containing the individual’s name” that is issued by any government body.

The Freedom to Vote Act also still includes the Honest Ads Act, which would require internet platforms to disclose anyone who spent $500 a year on ads “relating to any political matter of national importance.” It includes the Disclose Act as well, with rules for businesses and nonprofits if they “promote” or “attack” candidates. The message to conservatives is to think twice before speaking up about politics.

The new bill doesn’t totally mirror H.R.1. One dropped idea, and good riddance, would have switched the Federal Election Commission to an odd number of seats, guaranteeing an imbalance. Yet the Freedom to Vote Act is better than H.R.1 only in the sense that it’s better to get two anvils dropped on your noggin than four anvils followed by a Steinway piano.

Democrats started with a bad voting bill that was gigantic, and they’ve whittled it into a bad voting bill that’s merely enormous. It still deserves to die.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on September 23, 2021, 06:25:34 AM

From Calif Larry Elder thread, putting this here.

Doug: "I alone cannot [stop vote fraud].  100 million people, if they tried their hardest, could stop vote fraud."

G M: "100 million ARMED people, if they tried their hardest, could stop vote fraud."

Doug:  How?

G M:The left doesn't respect the rule of law. They will learn to respect the rule of .308/556.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will be for a few days.  My question remains, seriously, how?  My state is a shall issue state.  I can carry and know people who do.  But if I pull out my hypothetical weapon while they are lying, cheating and stealing, and/or use it to stop vote fraud we can't even find, I will be arrested and disarmed. If 100 million did that to 'win' the election, we become them and my views wouldn't prevail in the new order anyway. 

All I'm saying is, it's not an either-or.  We have to fight way better in the battle of ideas, compete more effectively in elections and use those victories to work toward real elections, AND we have to prepare for the worst because the downward spiral you describe is happening in front of eyes.

Your right to own and carry, and to seek out a red county in a red state where you might keep that right, comes from a war and a constitution, but also from elections people pulled together and won for us. 

At present, opposition run the country at the Executive and Legislative federal level, all within reach of winning back, and we have been winning state legislatures and have some pretty good Justices on the Supreme Court, which if both performed well I think could bring the election process back much closer to fair and based on rule of law.

Yes we must "voat harder" - AND not tolerate breaks in the rule of law.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 23, 2021, 09:18:15 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 23, 2021, 06:25:34 AM

From Calif Larry Elder thread, putting this here.

Doug: "I alone cannot [stop vote fraud].  100 million people, if they tried their hardest, could stop vote fraud."

G M: "100 million ARMED people, if they tried their hardest, could stop vote fraud."

Doug:  How?

G M:The left doesn't respect the rule of law. They will learn to respect the rule of .308/556.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will be for a few days.  My question remains, seriously, how?  My state is a shall issue state.  I can carry and know people who do.  But if I pull out my hypothetical weapon while they are lying, cheating and stealing, and/or use it to stop vote fraud we can't even find, I will be arrested and disarmed. If 100 million did that to 'win' the election, we become them and my views wouldn't prevail in the new order anyway. 

All I'm saying is, it's not an either-or.  We have to fight way better in the battle of ideas, compete more effectively in elections and use those victories to work toward real elections, AND we have to prepare for the worst because the downward spiral you describe is happening in front of eyes.

Your right to own and carry, and to seek out a red county in a red state where you might keep that right, comes from a war and a constitution, but also from elections people pulled together and won for us. 

At present, opposition run the country at the Executive and Legislative federal level, all within reach of winning back, and we have been winning state legislatures and have some pretty good Justices on the Supreme Court, which if both performed well I think could bring the election process back much closer to fair and based on rule of law.

Yes we must "voat harder" - AND not tolerate breaks in the rule of law.

We are tolerating the breaks of the rule of law daily. At the federal level and the blue zoos, like Minneapolis.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on September 23, 2021, 10:23:31 AM

Yes, letting them win let's them control the process. Stop them everywhere you can.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 23, 2021, 10:49:21 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 23, 2021, 10:23:31 AM

Yes, letting them win let's them control the process. Stop them everywhere you can.

You can stop them at local levels in red states.

Title: Biden won AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 24, 2021, 05:55:17 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/trump-allies-arizona-election-audit-confirms-biden-victory/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=25132985

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 24, 2021, 06:33:50 AM

well as for me

that settles it in Arizona

the DNC just out hustled us
with changes in voting rules and their Lebron Opray George DNC paid army of "volunteers"
who went out and got many thousands of signatures one way or the other
and just as many as they needed.

Kraken cracks up.

Waiting to see about other audits.

How will Orange hair spin this ............. :roll:

The only Kraken now is the LEFT cracking up
Oh will CNN have fun with this.

We are getting wiped out by immigration.  Of course those people will vote for those who pay them off with out tax dollars.

Title: MSM maybe distorted findings
Post by: ccp on September 24, 2021, 10:30:10 AM

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2021/09/24/ignore-the-msm-heres-what-the-2020-maricopa-county-election-audit-actually-says-n1481090

Title: Re: MSM maybe distorted findings
Post by: G M on September 24, 2021, 10:33:40 AM

Quote from: ccp on September 24, 2021, 10:30:10 AM

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2021/09/24/ignore-the-msm-heres-what-the-2020-maricopa-county-election-audit-actually-says-n1481090

Wait? The MSM distorted a story?

Unpossible!

They are professional journalists!

Title: AZ audit finds over 50,000 illegal vote discrepancies
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 24, 2021, 11:38:05 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/24/arizona-audit-finds-over-50000-illegal-votes-discrepancies-due-to-either-malicious-actions-or-severe-incompetence/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, Ten AZ questions
Post by: DougMacG on September 24, 2021, 07:00:58 PM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/ten-questions-arizona-election-audit-could-answer-friday

Title: NYC wants to give vote to legal non-citizens
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 25, 2021, 01:42:31 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/09/23/new-york-city-democrats-seek-voting-rights-nearly-1m-non-citizens/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 25, 2021, 08:58:51 AM

"NYC wants to give vote to legal non-citizens"

The next discriminated group that the Dems will yell and scream about are *non* citizens

they will be fighting for their rights!

at this point may as well get rid of the whole concept of citizenship

I am not sure what benefits citizens have over non citizens anymore

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 25, 2021, 09:05:22 AM

Citizens are treated worse.

Quote from: ccp on September 25, 2021, 08:58:51 AM

"NYC wants to give vote to legal non-citizens"

The next discriminated group that the Dems will yell and scream about are *non* citizens

they will be fighting for their rights!

at this point may as well get rid of the whole concept of citizenship

I am not sure what benefits citizens have over non citizens anymore

Title: You are here
Post by: G M on September 26, 2021, 09:43:55 PM

https://www.dailypundit.com/2021/09/25/they-know-not-what-they-do-but-fuck-around-and-find-out/

Title: Washington Times: AZ and more: Epoch Times
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 27, 2021, 03:41:46 AM

Election audits become Republican rallying cry

After Arizona, candidates champion integrity

BY DAVE BOYER AND MICA SOELLNER THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Republican candidates across the nation are taking up the banner of election audits as a way to connect with primary voters next year in the wake of Arizona’s long-awaited review of the 2020 presidential election.

Candidates are eager to claim the mantle of election integrity and earn the support of former President Donald Trump.

Josh Mandel, a Republican running for a Senate seat in Ohio, is making sure voters know he wants Arizona to “decertify” its 2020 election results, which showed Joseph R. Biden winning the state.

“On Election Day the Arizona officials falsely claimed that Trump lost by 10,457 votes,” Mr. Mandel tweeted. He said the audit of Maricopa County’s results showed “44,000 possibly illegal ballots cast.”

One of Mr. Mandel’s Republican rivals for the Senate seat in Ohio, Jane Timken, also weighed in about the results of the election 10 months ago in Arizona, a state two time zones away. She said Arizona’s “discrepancies are deeply troubling as to

the integrity of our elections and demand action. It is vital that only election results based on legal votes are certified.”

It’s a message that the Republican base is ready to hear. According to a September CNN poll, 78% of Republicans said Mr. Biden did not win and 54% said there is evidence to back up their belief.

A Yahoo News/YouGov poll in early August found that 66% of Republicans believe “the election was rigged and stolen from Trump.” Just 18% said they think “Joe Biden won fair and square.”

The audit of the presidential election results in Maricopa County, Arizona, showed Friday that Mr. Biden defeated Mr. Trump by slightly more votes than were certified in last year’s official count. Republican leaders, however, said the review raises significant concerns about voter fraud and election security.

The audit, conducted by Cyber Ninjas, showed that Mr. BIden won the county by 45,469 votes, 360 more than the 45,109-vote margin initially certified. State Senate President Karen Fann, a Republican, said the review revealed that election laws were broken. She referred the report to state Attorney General Mark Brnovich for possible action.

“We had a number of issues, which is why people question the ballots in the election,” Ms. Fann said. “What this is all about is making sure your vote counts.”

Mr. Brnovich said he will “take all necessary actions that are supported by the evidence and where I have legal authority.”

Mr. Trump told enthusiastic supporters at a rally in Perry, Georgia, on Saturday night that the audit verified his claims that he won in Arizona. He pointed to findings of more than 20,000 ballots that appeared to be cast by people no longer living in the state.

“You have more than 10,000 votes that I ‘lost’ by,” Mr. Trump said. He also cited the audit’s findings of inconsistencies related to mail-in balloting and potential duplicate ballots.

The former president made clear that he and his supporters will keep pressing for audits of the 2020 election results in other states as part of the Republican campaign for 2022.

“I bring voter fraud to the forefront to save our nation from corrupt elections and to make sure this never, ever happens again,” Mr. Trump said.

One of the states he is targeting is Georgia, which Mr. Biden also won narrowly.

Mr. Trump attacked Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan and Gov. Brian Kemp, all Republicans who dismissed Mr. Trump’s unproven claims.

“They ignored monumental evidence of rampant fraud,” Mr. Trump said, claiming scores of duplicate and missing ballots in Georgia. He was the first Republican presidential candidate to lose the state in three decades.

The candidates Mr. Trump promoted included U.S. Rep. Jody Hice, who is running for secretary of state in Georgia, and state Sen. Burt Jones, who is vying for lieutenant governor. Republican U.S. Senate candidate Herschel Walker, Mr. Hice and Mr. Jones have echoed Mr. Trump’s claims of voter fraud.

Mr. Hice, a four-term House Republican, accused Mr. Raffensperger of diminishing confidence in the state’s elections.

“It is my deep conviction that Brad Raffensperger has massively compromised the right of the people at the ballot box,” Mr. Hice said. “He has opened wide the door for all sorts of irregularities and fraud to march into our election system, and it is time that we take charge of this.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who also appeared at the rally, called for her state to conduct its own audit of the 2020 election.

“Trump won Georgia, and that’s why I’m calling for an audit in Georgia. It’s time to do it. No more excuses,” Mrs. Greene said.

Republican Vernon Jones, who is running for governor in Georgia, said the state should follow Arizona’s lead.

“After reviewing the newly released Maricopa County audit, there is no reason why the same audit should not happen in Georgia,” Mr. Jones said. “Gov. Kemp, no more stonewalling. Do the right thing and call for a 159-county independent forensic audit. The voters of Georgia deserve a free, fair and transparent election. Let’s get on with the audit so the truth can prevail.”

Other swing states that Mr. Trump lost are conducting election reviews.

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, sued last week to block a subpoena to state election officials in what Republicans called a “forensic investigation” of the presidential election. Mr. Shapiro called the Republican-backed audit “a sham” and said he will do “everything within our power to protect Pennsylvanians’ personal [voter] data.”

State Sen. Cris Dush, a Republican, said the information is necessary to investigate claims that voters were registered as living in a condemned building. Senate President Pro Tempore Jake Corman, a Republican, said the attorney general “wants to stop us from performing our constitutional duty of providing oversight of the executive branch.”

Mr. Biden defeated Mr. Trump in Pennsylvania by more than 80,000 votes.

In Wisconsin, where Mr. Biden won by more than 20,000 votes, Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, a Republican, has authorized lawyer Michael Gableman to review the election results. He wants Mr. Gableman to conclude his work by the end of October so lawmakers can consider any legislation this year.

Rohn Bishop, the chairman of the Republican Party in Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin, said he hopes the results from the Arizona audit will persuade the state Republican Party to stop focusing on the “nonsense” of the 2020 election and instead work on 2022.

“Right now GOP effort is hacking off Republican Clerks, and alienating soft GOP voters who think we’re nuts and wasting their tax dollars,” Mr. Bishop tweeted.

Perhaps the most surprising election audit to spring up was in Texas, where Mr. Trump won comfortably. Texas offi cials announced an audit last week of four counties after Mr. Trump pressed Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, for the action.

Mr. Abbott is facing a primary challenge next year from Don Huffines, who has the endorsement of Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Calling on Mr. Abbott last week to conduct an audit of the Texas election, Mr. Trump said, “Your citizens don’t trust the election system.”

The audited counties will include Democratic strongholds around Houston and Dallas, as well as Tarrant County, a traditionally Republican-led county that went for Mr. Biden.

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo, the county’s top elected Democratic official, criticized the move.

“Donald Trump ordered Gov. Abbott to audit the 2020 Texas election and, like clockwork, TX just initiated an audit of Harris County voters. Democracy isn’t a game,” Judge Hidalgo tweeted. “These fake audits are an affront to all voters, & pure pandering to the kinds of extremists that stormed our Capitol.”

Former San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, a Democrat who served as secretary of housing and urban development in the Obama administration, called the Texas audit “a gross abuse of power.”

“Trump demands an audit and Abbott’s appointee immediately announces a bogus one — with no evidence of fraud,” Mr. Castro tweeted. “Abbott is so afraid of losing his primary that he’s governing our state based on the whims and lies of Donald Trump.”

The Arizona audit also has exposed rifts in the state Republican Party. Maricopa County Republicans are calling on Arizona Republican Party Chairwoman Kelli Ward to resign after the results of the election audit were released.

County Supervisor Clint Hickman urged Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican, and other top state officials to call on Mrs. Ward to leave her position.

“She has caused a fracture in our party. She has operated outside of it for the purpose of helping herself,” Mr. Hickman said Friday in an interview with KTAR News.


A NEW DIRECTION: The audit of presidential election results in Maricopa County, Arizona, showed a defeat for Donald Trump, but Republicans found significant concerns about voter fraud

========================================


https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/arizona-senate-president-releases-audit-results_4015286.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-09-27&mktids=fd937ee26c0641abb9cc037a04216a37&est=gOMfrf%2BpdRzegaprbxxlH8LaCOXyuTjZl%2BfKsmFLRC9G5VmCl1Tlv6b9AyXJBrAUWmgA

Title: People who don't exist have the right to VOAT too!!!
Post by: G M on September 27, 2021, 08:09:11 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/09/not-making-headlines-az-audit-not-find-identity-86391-voters-dont-appear-exist-73-8-democrat-no-party-affiliation/

Interesting!

Title: 8 down, 42 to go:
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 28, 2021, 12:56:39 PM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10035521/California-8th-U-S-state-make-universal-mail-ballots-permanent.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 30, 2021, 07:28:24 AM

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-949359499502?fbclid=IwAR1Ue69x_U5gyyrlISkDWOEoFgR4hj02BxHSGXE27d8vMgWCA6APPNJiDBc

Title: WSJ: Scorched Earth Judging in North Carolina
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 04, 2021, 05:16:00 AM

OPINION  REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Scorched-Earth Judging in North Carolina
A liberal state Supreme Court gambit threatens political legitimacy.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 3, 2021 5:11 pm ET


Donald Trump tried to overturn at least three state elections in 2020. But liberal groups in North Carolina are trying to overturn or sidestep four separate elections in that state from 2018 and 2020. Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court in 2020, a filing last week suggests North Carolina’s Supreme Court is willing to entertain the political revanchists’ claims.


The scorched-earth politics at work are elaborate, so bear with us. The two elections immediately under fire are a 2018 state referendum capping North Carolina’s income tax at 7% and another referendum requiring photo identification for in-person voting in the state.

North Carolina’s constitutional amendment process requires a three-fifths majority of the Legislature to put a measure on the ballot, and then for the public to ratify it in a referendum. The Republican Legislature placed the tax and voting amendments on the ballot in 2018, and voters approved them by about 15 and 11 percentage points, respectively.

Liberal groups want to throw out those decisive outcomes, and their sweeping claim extends beyond the 2018 election. It’s that the entire Legislature of America’s ninth largest state was essentially illegitimate for the better part of a decade due to gerrymandering. Federal litigation forced North Carolina to redraw its 2011 legislative maps in 2017.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Opinion: Morning Editorial Report
All the day's Opinion headlines.

PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBED
Therefore, the plaintiffs argue in NC NAACP v. Moore, the Republican Legislature should not have been able to put the measures on the ballot, rendering both of the voters’ verdicts void. A North Carolina lower-court judge agreed. But he was reversed by a state appellate court, which balked at the notion of retroactively stripping an elected Legislature of its powers and nullifying referenda, no matter the outcome of litigation over district boundaries.

The shenanigans don’t end there. The case is now before the seven-member North Carolina Supreme Court, which is closely divided along partisan lines. The three Republicans include Tamara Barringer and Phil Berger, who were elected in 2020. That’s where the next layer of electoral subversion comes in.


The plaintiffs this July filed a motion for the two justices elected in 2020 to be removed from the case. The pretext is that Justice Barringer served in the North Carolina state Legislature when the constitutional amendments were passed, and Justice Berger’s father is a GOP legislative leader and therefore named as a defendant as a stand-in for the state.

Yet the public and the press were well aware of this high-profile case and the justices’ backgrounds when they were elected in 2020. Past service as a legislator is not normally disqualifying from hearing cases related to legislation passed during that service, and removing a judge at a “court of last resort” requires a higher burden since that judge can’t be replaced.

One of the liberal justices, Anita Earls, litigated extensively against North Carolina’s 2011 maps before she was elected to the Supreme Court in 2018. Yet Justice Earls’ removal is not sought because a liberal majority to overturn the two constitutional amendments would depend on her vote.

Recusals at the U.S. Supreme Court are at the discretion of the Justice alone, and it might be expected that Justices Barringer and Berger would see through this political gambit. But last week the court’s liberal justices suggested that they might be considering an unprecedented effort to evict their conservative colleagues involuntarily—a stunning and destabilizing prospect.

The court delayed argument in the case and last Tuesday sent out an unusual order asking the parties a number of questions, including, “Does this Court have the authority to require the involuntary recusal of a justice who does not believe that self-recusal is appropriate?”

That suggests that Justices Barringer and Berger believe, rightly, that they do not need to recuse from the case, but at least some (perhaps a majority) of the other justices have been moved by the liberal pressure campaign to consider a vote to oust them.

***
It’s worth reviewing the radicalism of what may be transpiring. Democrats in North Carolina lost policy votes in 2018 around taxation and voting, and elections for the state’s highest court in 2020.


Now liberal interests are seeking to reverse their 2018 election defeats using the courts. It would be one thing to challenge policy through the normal judicial process. But because Democrats lost seats on the state Supreme Court in the 2020 elections, they want to effectively undo the impact of those elections on this case with a selective removal of justices.

What’s remarkable is that the advocates claim that their tactics in serially subverting the judgments of voters are somehow a defense of democracy. If successful, this institutional mischief will reverberate far beyond North Carolina.

Title: They are going to blatantly steal this one, just like they did in California
Post by: G M on October 07, 2021, 12:34:37 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/go-va-dems-ask-northam-waive-absentee-ballot-witness-signature-requirements-governors-race-tightens-citing-covid-dangers/

Title: Sure.
Post by: G M on October 08, 2021, 05:17:26 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/shady-maricopa-county-official-claims-secretly-delete-information-servers-subpoena-make-room-next-election-video/

Title: District of Columbia is well represented in government
Post by: ccp on October 09, 2021, 09:28:59 AM

Most Fed employees live in Maryland and Virginia which have 10 and 13 electoral votes respectively

and the majority of Senators and Congressman are crats just like Fed employees

https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Virginia
https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_congressional_delegations_from_Maryland

So basically the DC area with its Federal largess already controls a huge chunk of Federal power

no need to make DC a state - these people control two surrounding states
and with at least Virginia turn the state blue.

Title: Re: District of Columbia is well represented in government
Post by: DougMacG on October 09, 2021, 11:50:09 AM

Readers' Digest:

"in short, statehood for D.C. would directly contradict the Constitution."

Article 1, Section 8 in particular:

“[The Congress shall have Power] To exercise exclusive Legislation…over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may…become the Seat of the Government of the United States.” The article also stated that this 100-mile district would come from land ceded by the states so that the new seat of government would be independent of any state.

https://www.rd.com/article/washington-dc-not-state/
------------------------------------------------------------

This means change only by amendment, not by unconstitutional legislation like "HR-51. 

[Doug] The District of Columbia could be redefined to include only government properties and not residential. The residential areas effected could make agreement with an adjacent state if they want 'statehood' and Senate representation.  Even someone from Rhode Island would not think statehood for an area so small.  What are their industries, government and what else?  The only people thinking statehood are the same traitors who leave our border open, let anyone vote and game the system every other way they can think of.  That won't win the 38 states they need to amend the constitution.

Title: Re: District of Columbia is well represented in government
Post by: G M on October 09, 2021, 12:02:06 PM

The constitution means anything the left wants it to mean.

Quote from: DougMacG on October 09, 2021, 11:50:09 AM

Readers' Digest:

"in short, statehood for D.C. would directly contradict the Constitution."

Article 1, Section 8 in particular:

“[The Congress shall have Power] To exercise exclusive Legislation…over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may…become the Seat of the Government of the United States.” The article also stated that this 100-mile district would come from land ceded by the states so that the new seat of government would be independent of any state.

https://www.rd.com/article/washington-dc-not-state/
------------------------------------------------------------

This means change only by amendment, not by unconstitutional legislation like "HR-51. 

[Doug] The District of Columbia could be redefined to include only government properties and not residential. The residential areas effected could make agreement with an adjacent state if they want 'statehood' and Senate representation.  Even someone from Rhode Island would not think statehood for an area so small.  What are their industries, government and what else?  The only people thinking statehood are the same traitors who leave our border open, let anyone vote and game the system every other way they can think of.  That won't win the 38 states they need to amend the constitution.

Title: 65% think more mail in voting leads to more cheating
Post by: DougMacG on October 12, 2021, 09:48:14 AM

65% think more mail in voting leads to more cheating.  28% say it will not.

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/october_2021/vote_by_mail_most_voters_think_it_will_cause_more_cheating

Title: Imagine how many cases like this are never investigated or prosecuted
Post by: G M on October 14, 2021, 08:32:50 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/breaking-mi-nursing-home-employee-caregiver-legally-incapacitated-persons-charged-submitting-26-absentee-ballot-applications-forging-residents-signatures-2020-election/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 14, 2021, 10:29:00 AM

26 demented or otherwise incapacitated voters decided to vote

absentee

anyone care to guess who the votes were for

(not mentioned, of course ).

"“Our election system is secure, and today’s charges demonstrate that in the rare circumstances when fraud occurs we catch it and hold the perpetrators accountable.” Benson added, “These charges also send a clear message to those who promote deceitful claims about widespread fraud: the current protocols we have in place work to protect and ensure the integrity of our elections. It’s time to share that truth and stop spreading lies to the contrary.”

oh really .  probably the only reason it came to fore
would be a relative found out a vote was cast for the Nursing Home pt.

how else would anyone know?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on October 14, 2021, 10:33:23 AM

Admittedly, Dementia patients voting for Biden does seem to make sense.

Quote from: ccp on October 14, 2021, 10:29:00 AM

26 demented or otherwise incapacitated voters decided to vote

absentee

anyone care to guess who the votes were for

(not mentioned, of course ).

"“Our election system is secure, and today’s charges demonstrate that in the rare circumstances when fraud occurs we catch it and hold the perpetrators accountable.” Benson added, “These charges also send a clear message to those who promote deceitful claims about widespread fraud: the current protocols we have in place work to protect and ensure the integrity of our elections. It’s time to share that truth and stop spreading lies to the contrary.”

oh really .  probably the only reason it came to fore
would be a relative found out a vote was cast for the Nursing Home pt.

how else would anyone know?

Title: zuckerberg
Post by: ccp on October 16, 2021, 05:34:01 PM

funding of the Dem operative army

I am sure soros james winfrey contributed too:

https://www.dickmorris.com/the-impact-of-zuckerbergs-bucks/

Title: Even the Brits are saying 2020 was rigged
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2021, 11:25:38 AM

https://stream.org/rigged-even-the-brits-are-saying-so/?fbclid=IwAR1PCmgfnjJEpIalF4KBVdhqoa7O6qRNhb-H-L3WSG11Y5x2zMhpzEVpDTo

Title: Dems propose electoral free speech czar
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2021, 04:41:59 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/10/democrats-propose-a-federal-speech-czar/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202021-10-20&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Title: Gatestone: What happened in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2021, 04:35:36 AM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17833/what-happened-2020-election

Title: WT: VA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 27, 2021, 04:03:54 AM

GOP guarding unattended ballot drop boxes in Virginia

BY KERRY PICKET THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Republican Party of Virginia, unnerved by the high number of drop boxes around the commonwealth that are not monitored by public officials, has deployed volunteers to keep an eye on the ballot receptacles.

Drop-box voting, launched by the state’s Democratic-run government in 2020 as part of COVID-19 measures, is a ballot security issue for the state GOP as Virginians decide the close governor’s race between Republican Glenn Youngkin and Democrat Terry McAuliffe.

“You have them in secure locations, namely in the registrar’s office, and they’re only accessible to the public, obviously, during business hours of the registrar’s office,” Virginia Republican Party Chairman Rich Anderson told The Washington Times. “But once they’re outside, those are the ones we’re concerned about — that somebody could go drive up to one under current law and dump a bushel basket of ballots in there.”

He added, “I kid you not. It’s hard to believe, but it is legal under Virginia law because it just simply doesn’t address [security] one way or the other.”

The Virginia Democratic Party and the Virginia Department of Elections did not respond to requests for comment.

Expanded early voting in the state this year is expected to add to the volume of ballots deposited at drop boxes.

For the most part, voters in Virginia are only allowed to deposit their own ballot at the drop boxes.

Virginia law presently allows a designated representative to cast an emergency ballot for an incapacitated or hospitalized voter. It is required for the representative to complete a statement, and a false statement is a felony violation.

“They can go into nursing homes and assist individuals who are registered to vote to fill out a ballot and, without regard to their capacity to mentally process the information, and make an independent decision and render an uninfluenced vote,” Mr. Anderson said. “That is very vulnerable to manipulation, but it’s hard to say to what extent that happens.”

He concedes that it would be difficult to tell if an individual is engaged in illegal activity just by dropping loads of ballots at a drop box.

However, having volunteers and paid staffers and video cameras monitoring drop boxes located at unattended sites is a precaution that Mr. Anderson says is necessary.

“The feeling is that by being present, several things happen. First of all, it may deter the large-scale dropping off of ballots, which, to me, is an indication that something nefarious is taking place. And, [secondly,] to ensure that the boxes themselves are not tampered with.”

Since the 2020 election, Virginia voters can cast their ballots inside designated drop boxes set up in their districts around the commonwealth.

Lawmakers in Richmond last year, through the Democratic majority, voted for the change to receive and collect ballots from voters who may be concerned about exposure to the coronavirus. Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam signed legislation in September 2020, allowing municipalities to set up drop boxes inside and outside their registrar’s offi ces, at satellite voting sites and on Election Day at polling locations.

Title: Re: WT: VA
Post by: G M on October 27, 2021, 06:52:41 AM

Votes will magically appear inside the counting rooms.

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 27, 2021, 04:03:54 AM

GOP guarding unattended ballot drop boxes in Virginia

BY KERRY PICKET THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Republican Party of Virginia, unnerved by the high number of drop boxes around the commonwealth that are not monitored by public officials, has deployed volunteers to keep an eye on the ballot receptacles.

Drop-box voting, launched by the state’s Democratic-run government in 2020 as part of COVID-19 measures, is a ballot security issue for the state GOP as Virginians decide the close governor’s race between Republican Glenn Youngkin and Democrat Terry McAuliffe.

“You have them in secure locations, namely in the registrar’s office, and they’re only accessible to the public, obviously, during business hours of the registrar’s office,” Virginia Republican Party Chairman Rich Anderson told The Washington Times. “But once they’re outside, those are the ones we’re concerned about — that somebody could go drive up to one under current law and dump a bushel basket of ballots in there.”

He added, “I kid you not. It’s hard to believe, but it is legal under Virginia law because it just simply doesn’t address [security] one way or the other.”

The Virginia Democratic Party and the Virginia Department of Elections did not respond to requests for comment.

Expanded early voting in the state this year is expected to add to the volume of ballots deposited at drop boxes.

For the most part, voters in Virginia are only allowed to deposit their own ballot at the drop boxes.

Virginia law presently allows a designated representative to cast an emergency ballot for an incapacitated or hospitalized voter. It is required for the representative to complete a statement, and a false statement is a felony violation.

“They can go into nursing homes and assist individuals who are registered to vote to fill out a ballot and, without regard to their capacity to mentally process the information, and make an independent decision and render an uninfluenced vote,” Mr. Anderson said. “That is very vulnerable to manipulation, but it’s hard to say to what extent that happens.”

He concedes that it would be difficult to tell if an individual is engaged in illegal activity just by dropping loads of ballots at a drop box.

However, having volunteers and paid staffers and video cameras monitoring drop boxes located at unattended sites is a precaution that Mr. Anderson says is necessary.

“The feeling is that by being present, several things happen. First of all, it may deter the large-scale dropping off of ballots, which, to me, is an indication that something nefarious is taking place. And, [secondly,] to ensure that the boxes themselves are not tampered with.”

Since the 2020 election, Virginia voters can cast their ballots inside designated drop boxes set up in their districts around the commonwealth.

Lawmakers in Richmond last year, through the Democratic majority, voted for the change to receive and collect ballots from voters who may be concerned about exposure to the coronavirus. Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam signed legislation in September 2020, allowing municipalities to set up drop boxes inside and outside their registrar’s offi ces, at satellite voting sites and on Election Day at polling locations.

Title: Poll: majority of Americans say Big Tech censorship of Hunter lap top story
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2021, 03:36:40 AM

https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/poll-majority-of-americans-say-big-tech-censorship-of-hunter-laptop-story-interfered-with-election/

Title: WSJ anally rapes Trump
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2021, 04:39:19 PM

The progressive parsons of the press are aflutter that we published a letter to the editor Thursday from former President Trump, objecting to our editorial pointing out that he lost Pennsylvania last year by 80,555 votes. We trust our readers to make up their own minds about his statement. And we think it’s news when an ex-President who may run in 2024 wrote what he did, even if (or perhaps especially if) his claims are bananas.



Mr. Trump’s letter is his familiar barrage, with 20 bullet points about alleged irregularities that he says prove “the election was rigged.” It’s difficult to respond to everything, and the asymmetry is part of the former President’s strategy. He tosses off enough unsourced numbers in 30 seconds to keep a fact-checker busy for 30 days. When one claim is refuted, Mr. Trump is back with two more.

To highlight a few, he objects to the way the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rewrote the deadline for mail ballots. We do too. But he insinuates that the presidential results include thousands of tardy votes, and “none of these should have been counted.” They weren’t, per a directive by Justice Samuel Alito. “Those ballots were segregated as the court ordered,” says a spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania Department of State. “They are not included in the vote totals.”

Mr. Trump says that “25,000 ballots were requested from nursing homes at the exact same time.” His citation for this—no kidding—is a Nov. 9 cable-TV hit by Sen. Lindsey Graham. Mr. Trump is alleging 25,000 fake votes in Pennsylvania, based on a stray remark by someone from South Carolina. Breaking news: A politician on TV repeated a rumor. We emailed to follow up, and Mr. Graham’s office tells us this was “an allegation, one of many others,” but it now “can be laid to rest.”


Some of Mr. Trump’s figures appear to come from amateur spelunking into voter data. Caveat emptor when this is done by motivated partisans unfamiliar with election systems. The “audit” team in Arizona asserted that Maricopa County received 74,000 more mail votes than were sent out. This was debunked as a misunderstanding of the files.


Mr. Trump says Attorney General Bill Barr “ordered U.S. Attorney Bill McSwain to stand down and not investigate” the election. Mr. McSwain claims as much. Yet Mr. Barr, who’s no liberal patsy, has said it’s “false,” and Mr. McSwain is running for Governor. Mr. Barr said Mr. McSwain “told me that he had to do this because he was under pressure from Trump.” We believe Mr. Barr.

This is how it goes for election truthers. First the allegation was ballots marked with Sharpies, then voting machines tied to Venezuela, then more votes than voters. Now Mr. Trump apparently thinks his own Attorney General did an inside job. Electoral fraud does happen: A Pennsylvania man received five years of probation this spring after voting for Mr. Trump on behalf of his dead mother. The price of liberty, as they say, is vigilance. But the evidence doesn’t show anything real that could dent Pennsylvania’s 80,555-vote margin.

Even if it did, Mr. Trump would be two states short of victory. Georgia’s ballots were counted three times and a signature check done. The Arizona audit was a dud. A Michigan inquiry led by a GOP lawmaker ended up keelhauling “willful ignorance” and grifters who use misinformation “to raise money or publicity.” Mr. Trump’s lawyers who made baseless claims have been sued for defamation—twice. They’ve been sanctioned by a federal judge. Does Mr. Trump imagine a conspiracy so deep that practically everybody is in on it?

Mr. Trump is making these claims elsewhere, so we hardly did him a special favor by letting him respond to our editorial. We offer the same courtesy to others we criticize, even when they make allegations we think are false.

As for the media clerics, their attempts to censor Mr. Trump have done nothing to diminish his popularity. Our advice would be to examine their own standards after they fell so easily for false Russian collusion claims. They’d have more credibility in refuting Mr. Trump’s.

Title: Re: WSJ anally rapes Trump
Post by: G M on October 28, 2021, 04:42:34 PM

Never Trumpers gonna never Trump. Anyone who says 2020 was a legitimate election is lying or a complete moron.

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2021, 04:39:19 PM

The progressive parsons of the press are aflutter that we published a letter to the editor Thursday from former President Trump, objecting to our editorial pointing out that he lost Pennsylvania last year by 80,555 votes. We trust our readers to make up their own minds about his statement. And we think it’s news when an ex-President who may run in 2024 wrote what he did, even if (or perhaps especially if) his claims are bananas.



Mr. Trump’s letter is his familiar barrage, with 20 bullet points about alleged irregularities that he says prove “the election was rigged.” It’s difficult to respond to everything, and the asymmetry is part of the former President’s strategy. He tosses off enough unsourced numbers in 30 seconds to keep a fact-checker busy for 30 days. When one claim is refuted, Mr. Trump is back with two more.

To highlight a few, he objects to the way the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rewrote the deadline for mail ballots. We do too. But he insinuates that the presidential results include thousands of tardy votes, and “none of these should have been counted.” They weren’t, per a directive by Justice Samuel Alito. “Those ballots were segregated as the court ordered,” says a spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania Department of State. “They are not included in the vote totals.”

Mr. Trump says that “25,000 ballots were requested from nursing homes at the exact same time.” His citation for this—no kidding—is a Nov. 9 cable-TV hit by Sen. Lindsey Graham. Mr. Trump is alleging 25,000 fake votes in Pennsylvania, based on a stray remark by someone from South Carolina. Breaking news: A politician on TV repeated a rumor. We emailed to follow up, and Mr. Graham’s office tells us this was “an allegation, one of many others,” but it now “can be laid to rest.”


Some of Mr. Trump’s figures appear to come from amateur spelunking into voter data. Caveat emptor when this is done by motivated partisans unfamiliar with election systems. The “audit” team in Arizona asserted that Maricopa County received 74,000 more mail votes than were sent out. This was debunked as a misunderstanding of the files.


Mr. Trump says Attorney General Bill Barr “ordered U.S. Attorney Bill McSwain to stand down and not investigate” the election. Mr. McSwain claims as much. Yet Mr. Barr, who’s no liberal patsy, has said it’s “false,” and Mr. McSwain is running for Governor. Mr. Barr said Mr. McSwain “told me that he had to do this because he was under pressure from Trump.” We believe Mr. Barr.

This is how it goes for election truthers. First the allegation was ballots marked with Sharpies, then voting machines tied to Venezuela, then more votes than voters. Now Mr. Trump apparently thinks his own Attorney General did an inside job. Electoral fraud does happen: A Pennsylvania man received five years of probation this spring after voting for Mr. Trump on behalf of his dead mother. The price of liberty, as they say, is vigilance. But the evidence doesn’t show anything real that could dent Pennsylvania’s 80,555-vote margin.

Even if it did, Mr. Trump would be two states short of victory. Georgia’s ballots were counted three times and a signature check done. The Arizona audit was a dud. A Michigan inquiry led by a GOP lawmaker ended up keelhauling “willful ignorance” and grifters who use misinformation “to raise money or publicity.” Mr. Trump’s lawyers who made baseless claims have been sued for defamation—twice. They’ve been sanctioned by a federal judge. Does Mr. Trump imagine a conspiracy so deep that practically everybody is in on it?

Mr. Trump is making these claims elsewhere, so we hardly did him a special favor by letting him respond to our editorial. We offer the same courtesy to others we criticize, even when they make allegations we think are false.

As for the media clerics, their attempts to censor Mr. Trump have done nothing to diminish his popularity. Our advice would be to examine their own standards after they fell so easily for false Russian collusion claims. They’d have more credibility in refuting Mr. Trump’s.

Title: Sheriff declares fraud in WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2021, 05:19:03 PM

Which is  why it is so important that Trump make his case with care instead of bombastic bullshit that devastates our credibility on the issue!

Here's this:

https://amgreatness.com/2021/10/28/wisconsin-sheriffs-office-presents-evidence-showing-election-board-committed-felony-election-fraud-in-2020/

Title: Re: Sheriff declares fraud in WI
Post by: G M on October 28, 2021, 06:24:34 PM

Remember when the DOJ had the FBI investigate all the vote fraud allegations so we'd know exactly what did or didn't happen?

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2021, 05:19:03 PM

Which is  why it is so important that Trump make his case with care instead of bombastic bullshit that devastates our credibility on the issue!

Here's this:

https://amgreatness.com/2021/10/28/wisconsin-sheriffs-office-presents-evidence-showing-election-board-committed-felony-election-fraud-in-2020/

Title: Re: WSJ anally rapes Trump
Post by: DougMacG on October 29, 2021, 05:46:13 AM

That is the most impressive refute yet.  If they are wrong, it needs to be answered point by point with specifics, not generalities.
------------
Crafty:  "Which is why it is so important that Trump (anyone) make his case with care instead of bombastic bullshit that devastates our credibility on the issue!"

Right!  Suddenly 'we' are on the logic side of false but true.  You can't be wrong on specifics and expect people to buy the conclusion.

Regarding not investigated, it's been a year.  The case for what should be investigated needs to be made with search warrant application accuracy and specificity.  Every ineligible person who voted needs to be prosecuted and everyone who organized fraud needs to be caught and charged with a higher crime, no matter how many or how few that entails.

States (especially with R legislatures) need to get serious with vote integrity laws going forward, and states that don't need to be called out.

No one is going to reverse the 2020 result, but at this point a year later, no one can point to exactly what happened.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 29, 2021, 06:46:12 AM

 "Which is why it is so important that Trump (anyone) make his case with care instead of bombastic bullshit that devastates our credibility on the issue!"

or pillow makers
who claim they know someone who will prove the case for fraud without real evidence to support the claim

that makes him and by association , us , look like fools.

Title: Re: WSJ anally rapes Trump
Post by: G M on October 29, 2021, 09:18:17 AM

As I type this, I am walking distance from a graveyard that contains at least one voter from 2020. That voter has been in that graveyard for roughly 6 years at this point. Do you think the dem AG for this state has opened a single case on any of these many instances?

Quote from: DougMacG on October 29, 2021, 05:46:13 AM

That is the most impressive refute yet.  If they are wrong, it needs to be answered point by point with specifics, not generalities.
------------
Crafty:  "Which is why it is so important that Trump (anyone) make his case with care instead of bombastic bullshit that devastates our credibility on the issue!"

Right!  Suddenly 'we' are on the logic side of false but true.  You can't be wrong on specifics and expect people to buy the conclusion.

Regarding not investigated, it's been a year.  The case for what should be investigated needs to be made with search warrant application accuracy and specificity.  Every ineligible person who voted needs to be prosecuted and everyone who organized fraud needs to be caught and charged with a higher crime, no matter how many or how few that entails.

States (especially with R legislatures) need to get serious with vote integrity laws going forward, and states that don't need to be called out.

No one is going to reverse the 2020 result, but at this point a year later, no one can point to exactly what happened.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on October 29, 2021, 09:23:11 AM

Yes, we need credibility to make our case to the people that think there are 157 genders and a penis can be a female sex organ!

 :roll:

Quote from: ccp on October 29, 2021, 06:46:12 AM

"Which is why it is so important that Trump (anyone) make his case with care instead of bombastic bullshit that devastates our credibility on the issue!"

or pillow makers
who claim they know someone who will prove the case for fraud without real evidence to support the claim

that makes him and by association , us , look like fools.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 29, 2021, 11:13:50 AM

My old boss used to say,  'Don't come to me with problems.  Come to me with solutions.'


G M: "... graveyard that contains at least one voter from 2020. That voter has been in that graveyard for roughly 6 years at this point. Do you think the dem AG for this state has opened a single case on any of these many instances?"


Which one voted?  When did you notify the Dem AG?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on October 29, 2021, 11:19:33 AM

Other people have, and it's been studiously ignored.

Quote from: DougMacG on October 29, 2021, 11:13:50 AM

My old boss used to say,  'Don't come to me with problems.  Come to me with solutions.'


G M: "... graveyard that contains at least one voter from 2020. That voter has been in that graveyard for roughly 6 years at this point. Do you think the dem AG for this state has opened a single case on any of these many instances?"


Which one voted?  When did you notify the Dem AG?

Title: The Left is gaslighting us again
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 01, 2021, 12:00:40 AM

https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2021/10/31/the-left-is-gaslighting-us-again-n2598321

Title: Dem fraud machine activated for VA election
Post by: G M on November 02, 2021, 07:33:54 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/happening-judge-virginia-dismisses-case-allows-fairfax-county-include-absentee-mail-ballots-governor-election-violate-law/

MUST!VOAT!HARDER!

Title: Biden's Inexplicable Victory, Nine Unexplainable Anomalies
Post by: DougMacG on November 02, 2021, 11:27:36 AM

https://charlemagneinstitute.substack.com/p/bidens-inexplicable-victory

Extreme data anomalies don't prove fraud, but they can point to it where you may find it.

Title: Re: Dem fraud machine activated for VA election
Post by: G M on November 02, 2021, 11:48:01 AM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/396276.php

The more votes they suppress, the less they have to fake.

Quote from: G M on November 02, 2021, 07:33:54 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/happening-judge-virginia-dismisses-case-allows-fairfax-county-include-absentee-mail-ballots-governor-election-violate-law/

MUST!VOAT!HARDER!

Title: Maskless in VA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2021, 03:52:00 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_breakingnews/virginia-gop-claims-some-maskless-voters-turned-away-from-polls_4082486.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-11-02-3&mktids=84b2a563970b6f96d9563ec1695a92ea&est=QwtWF6T7pMk0UHNcnOhw6wBDZcaGom4ONToTzIFSYEvMZTMSSLnvtlbVIArO%2FQPA9zGG

Title: The Sopranos vote in NJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2021, 09:06:36 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/new-jersey-governor-race-called-democrat-murphy-20000-votes-mysteriously-gained-40000-ballots-overnight/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 04, 2021, 06:00:25 AM

"This comes after obvious issues were identified overnight where 40,000 ballots were awarded to Murphy in Bergen County after the county was reported as 100% reported."

Dem typical defense of this :

"every vote counts you racist white supremacist dog whistler!"
 :-(

Title: More from NJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2021, 06:01:12 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/new-jersey-gubernatorial-election-worker-let-non-citizen-non-registered-voter-fill-ballot-right-now-video/?fbclid=IwAR1g0iHwhe-EzT-TpbCnTt1HUPpSZjreE0ykt6ZWYxcZD584ldQnTx9pwXo

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 04, 2021, 07:20:26 AM

".https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/new-jersey-gubernatorial-election-worker-let-non-citizen-non-registered-voter-fill-ballot-right-now-video/?fbclid=IwAR1g0iHwhe-EzT-TpbCnTt1HUPpSZjreE0ykt6ZWYxcZD584ldQnTx9pwXo "

can't get any more blatant then this

when I went to see Frank speak at a local campaign stop near by
one of the first questions asked of him was something like:
"what do we have in place to stop the likely steal and election fraud that will take place"

his response was kind of curious
he basically shrugged it off and said something to the effect not to be concerned
and tried to focus on policies

In Elizabeth nj where I grew up (next to newark). the population was 1/3 black 1/3 white and 1/3 Latin (Cubans and Puerto Ricans)

now it is 2/3 Latin and if you drive around you feel like you are in Guatemala City or maybe San Salvador

Anyone think all these residents have green card or citizenship?

Anyone think locals are not letting them vote ?

Title: DeSantis : election crime unit
Post by: ccp on November 04, 2021, 08:10:34 AM

https://www.westernjournal.com/desantis-reveals-new-police-unit-pursue-election-crime-reveals-waiting-first-person-caught-force/

Title: Was McAwful just off his fraud game?
Post by: G M on November 04, 2021, 10:14:04 AM

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/396315.php

Title: It appears NJ didn't VOAT HARD ENOUGH!
Post by: G M on November 04, 2021, 07:12:28 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/breaking-new-jersey-senate-president-wont-concede-republican-truck-driver-says-12000-ballots-recently-found-one-county/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2021, 08:04:03 PM

Fk fk fk  :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on November 04, 2021, 09:03:16 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2021, 08:04:03 PM

Fk fk fk  :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x

Don't worry, the DOJ is investigating and getting ready to makes arrests, right?

Title: Re: It appears NJ didn't VOAT HARD ENOUGH!
Post by: G M on November 04, 2021, 09:39:03 PM

Quote from: G M on November 04, 2021, 07:12:28 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/breaking-new-jersey-senate-president-wont-concede-republican-truck-driver-says-12000-ballots-recently-found-one-county/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/fraud-new-jerseys-election-uncovered-voting-machines-not-allow-citizens-vote-republican-governor-candidate/

Title: Re: It appears NJ didn't VOAT HARD ENOUGH!
Post by: G M on November 05, 2021, 06:50:09 AM

Quote from: G M on November 04, 2021, 09:39:03 PM

Quote from: G M on November 04, 2021, 07:12:28 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/breaking-new-jersey-senate-president-wont-concede-republican-truck-driver-says-12000-ballots-recently-found-one-county/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/fraud-new-jerseys-election-uncovered-voting-machines-not-allow-citizens-vote-republican-governor-candidate/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/11/nj-election-update-56-voting-machines-shut-shipped-warehouse-election-night-dem-stronghold-county-gov-murphy-got-113k-votes/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 05, 2021, 07:37:33 AM

One more deep thought.  Precincts and counties should report their results - all at the same time.  Basic premise of elections, you don't get to see how the others voted before you vote, this should apply to precincts and counties as well.  If they stay up late, we stay up late, since cheating seems to have become an as-needed thing.

Winning margin 2020 Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, was roughly 0.0% of the vote.  If that was cheating, they seemed to know exactly what they needed to win.  Now NJ?

Title: More NJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 05, 2021, 07:38:50 AM

https://connecticut.news12.com/election-day-2021-56-districts-in-essex-county-did-not-count-votes-last-night-here-s-why

https://newjersey.news12.com/essex-county-election-officials-begin-counting-votes-from-56-districts-after-delays

Title: VOAR harder - yes this is frustrating - clear cut stealing
Post by: ccp on November 05, 2021, 07:46:10 AM

always in Democrat
 districts as far as I know

often in middle of night
shipped to warehouse.  :x

of course with armed guards and cameras provided by Republican security
to ensure no tampering.  :roll:

I don't know why we can never stop this shit
we KNEW it would happen in a tight race
esp. in NJ

(like at Copyright Office when they used to ship CW from the main building to a ware house
and low and behold - the delivery truck broke down and had to go to repair shop - and then CR miraculously disappeared or were switched ).

Title: Dead registered voters in Michigan
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2021, 05:47:10 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/11/05/law-firm-sues-michigan-secretary-of-state-for-leaving-25000-dead-registrants-on-voter-rolls/

Title: Real vote fraud database
Post by: DougMacG on November 09, 2021, 12:57:38 PM

Heritage.  https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud

1,334
Proven instances of voter fraud

1,147
Criminal convictions

Not an exhaustive list.

Title: VA redistricting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 13, 2021, 08:47:17 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/virginia-supreme-court-disqualifies-one-gop-nominee-tapped-to-redistrict-maps/ar-AAQDjmX?cvid=95f1b189ba70436deb322ffa11dcbd85&ocid=winp1taskbar

Title: Raffensperger: The Dems stole America's confidence in Elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 15, 2021, 05:42:02 PM

Who Stole Americans’ Confidence in Elections?
The Clinton campaign and Stacey Abrams spread falsehoods about vote theft years before Trump’s loss.
By Brad Raffensperger
Nov. 15, 2021 6:47 pm ET



I’m mostly known for standing up for the integrity of Georgia’s November 2020 elections. I spent months debunking conspiracy theories, refuting lies about our voting procedures, and enduring threats because I refused to bend on the facts.

Before all that, I was a Trump supporter. In June 2016, I donated to the Trump campaign. Little did I know that at around the same time, one of the most significant election disinformation operations was beginning—one that would create almost constant turmoil for President Trump during his four years in office and convulse the country. Ultimately, the Steele dossier would set the stage for a political environment where Americans have more confidence in stolen election claims than in the elections themselves.

That is what the Steele dossier always was: election disinformation. Several years of investigations into the origins of the salacious lies has resulted in two indictments, one of them handed up Nov. 3, of men connected to the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic Party for lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about those connections. An FBI lawyer also admitted to altering an email that the bureau used to secure the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant connected to the dossier. It turns out that not only did much of the unverified report alleging collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign come from biased political sources, many of the claims were made up or regurgitated from rumors published in various news outlets.

Mainstream media organizations reported breathlessly on the claims in the dossier after it was released by Buzzfeed. Its claims had never been verified. Yet news outlets gave it legitimacy through constant repetition and breaking-news headlines.


Major elected officials and members of the intelligence community raised public alarms about the dossier. But too many treated its unverified and baseless allegation as a smoking gun that proved an imaginary scheme to steal the 2016 presidential election.


Tragically, these unverified claims were also used to turn federal law enforcement into a weapon against the Trump campaign. The FBI used the claims in the dossier to secure a warrant to wiretap a former member of the Trump campaign. The FISA court application contained only one footnote about possible political motivations. The misinformation reached the highest levels of America’s law-enforcement apparatus, given credibility by the media and others trying to undermine the integrity of America’s 2016 election.

The evidence was obviously unreliable. The main source—the defendant in this month’s indictment—had heavy ties to the Clinton campaign and other Democratic Party organizations, not to mention the Russian government.

The damage this dossier did may be irreparable. With the complicity of major media outlets, the country was told to believe a falsehood. The Clinton campaign, Democratic Party affiliates and mainstream media ran a concerted campaign to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election.

All too often, conservatives like me get accused of plotting complicated “House of Cards”-style efforts to steal elections. Stacey Abrams has alleged, without any credible evidence, that Georgia Republicans did such things in 2018, and she still refuses to concede that year’s election for governor. Yet the Steele dossier, and how it was used improperly to turn America’s justice system to political ends, serves as the starkest example in memory.

The atmosphere of distrust fed Ms. Abrams’s claims. After all, it was gospel among liberals that the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election. The media and the public had been primed to believe an election could be stolen.

When Mr. Trump said the 2020 election was stolen, it should have been obvious how easy it would be to convince Americans not to trust the election. They had just watched major political figures, law-enforcement officials and trusted news anchors spend years making similar assertions about Mr. Trump. Many of the same actors unquestioningly endorsed Ms. Abrams’s claims that her election was stolen.


There has been no mea culpa from anyone involved in pushing the 2016 and 2018 stolen-election lies. To this day, Ms. Abrams maintains that her election was stolen and argues her case was “different” from Mr. Trump’s. The same media outlets that reported around the clock that Mr. Trump stole his election have been quiet since the evidence disproved that claim.

I have said many times that stolen-election claims undermine the integrity of America’s elections, regardless of who makes them or why. They are as bad when they come from Republicans as Democrats. American politicians need the moral courage to accept their losses and move on. If American democracy is to survive, political figures of both parties need to abandon stolen-election claims once and for all.

Mr. Raffensperger, a Republican, is Georgia’s secretary of state.

Title: Taking Advantage of Wuhan Virus to Change the Way We Vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 19, 2021, 11:46:49 PM

https://amgreatness.com/2021/11/19/taking-advantage-of-the-covid-pandemic-to-change-the-way-we-vote/

Title: WSJ: Old School is better
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 22, 2021, 01:59:06 PM

Losing by Five, With 1,400 Votes Rejected
In a squeaker House race, bad mail votes are 275 times the margin.
By The Editorial Board
Nov. 21, 2021 4:32 pm ET


The headlines say a House election in Florida has been won by a mere five votes, 11,662 to 11,657, which is a remarkable piece of news. But here’s what those reports are missing: Nearly 1,400 mail ballots were thrown out for one reason or another. If this isn’t a warning about the perils of trusting your vote to the postman, it’s hard to know what would be.

The Nov. 2 election was a primary in the 20th Congressional District, a safe Democratic seat formerly held by Rep. Alcee Hastings, who died in April at age 84. After recounts and the typical arguing over some disputed ballots, Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick was certified last week as the Democratic nominee with a five-vote victory. She will almost certainly prevail in the January special election.

Yet what a mess: 1,253 mail votes were tossed for missing the Election Day deadline, according to staff at Broward and Palm Beach counties. Of those, 294 were postmarked before Election Day, meaning these voters probably assumed they’d done everything right. Another 708 had missing or illegible postmarks, so there’s no way to know when they were mailed. That’s an alarming failure rate for the U.S. Postal Service.

In addition to the tardy ballots, 140 mail votes were rejected for other reasons, county staff say. Forty of them were unsigned. Seventy-eight signatures were mismatched or otherwise faulty. A dozen and a half were ballots for the wrong precinct or wrong party, since Florida has closed primaries for registered partisans only.


The result is an ambiguous hash: In an election decided by five votes, who knows what another 1,400 might have done? The second-place candidate at one point said he was considering his legal options, and he probably regrets not urging his supporters to vote in person.


This is a real problem with widespread mail voting, and it isn’t getting enough attention. One screwy primary in a safe House district isn’t a threat to the republic, but George W. Bush won Florida—and thus the White House in 2000—by 537 votes. The federal Election Assistance Commission reports that, during the voting in November 2020, Florida rejected 13,919 mail ballots. The figure for Michigan is 20,480, and 34,171 for Pennsylvania.

The Democratic answer is for states to change their laws so that mail votes will be valid long after Election Day. Under H.R.1, the bill the House passed in March to take over voting rules, mail ballots would be valid for 10 days after the fact, provided they were either postmarked on time or “signed by the voter on or before the date of the election.”

Letting the counting drag on that long would be corrosive to public trust. Look no further than former President Trump’s wild fraud claims about 2020, which were aided by the muddled information coming out of laggard states like Pennsylvania. Clearly the USPS’s postmarks are not a reliable fail-safe, and unpostmarked ballots are open to charges of backdating. States should stick to clear Election Day deadlines.

A better solution to these problems is simply to get back to pre-Covid normalcy. If you’re sick or out of town during the voting period, by all means get a mail ballot and send it in early, or drop it off yourself. If not, then we should see you at the polling place, where messy handwriting and postal oversights won’t stand in the way of your vote being counted.

Title: NYC trying to have 800,000 non-citizens vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 23, 2021, 11:00:10 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/new-york-city-council-moves-to-allow-800000-non-citizens-to-vote-in-municipal-elections/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=25807049

Title: de Blasio was against it ; but alas, and of course new Democrat is for it
Post by: ccp on November 23, 2021, 03:16:57 PM

Mayor Bill de Blasio indicated he could veto the bill following the September hearing.

“We’ve done everything that we could possibly get our hands on to help immigrant New Yorkers—including undocumented folks—but…I don’t believe it is legal,” de Blasio told WNYC radio at the time.

However, mayor-elect Eric Adams submitted testimony to the September hearing in favor of the bill.

“In a democracy, nothing is more fundamental than the right to vote and to say who represents you and your community in elected office,” Adams said. “Currently, almost one million New Yorkers are denied this foundational right.”

Title: Hogan Gidley: Election Integrity Starts with Voter ID
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 24, 2021, 03:32:41 AM

Election integrity starts with voter ID

It is now more difficult to eat out a restaurant in New York City than it is to vote

By Hogan Gidley

The results of the Virginia gubernatorial election shocked the political world with an unsuspected, unpredicted red takeover of a traditionally blue state. While the Republican candidate prevailed, the Commonwealth’s election process was not without its share of many documented problems.

There were reports of voter intimidation regarding poll workers lying to voters, telling them “wearing a mask was required to vote.” It wasn’t. Tens of thousands of mail-in ballots were found to have addresses that did not match the voter’s address on the voter rolls. Attempts were made to count mail-in ballots without social security numbers – which is illegal.

Whether you like or loathe the Virginia election outcome, these problems are gravely troubling. Similar issues have occurred in many other states proving that much work still needs to be done at the local level if we are going to have faith, trust, and confidence in the results of our elections.

That effort starts with ensuring that a government-issued photo ID is required to vote.

We live in a society where showing a government-issued photo ID to participate in the simplest of things is a constant necessity – making the liberal’s concerns over this common-sense, simple security measure quite confusing. A governmentissued photo ID is needed to buy alcohol, buy cigarettes, open a bank account, get on a plane, buy a house, rent an apartment, pick up tickets for a game at “Will Call,” and collect food stamps.

In fact, while you know liberal offi ceholders enacted a law in New York City requiring a vaccine passport to eat at a restaurant, what you may not know, is that as a required companion piece of documentation – it is mandated you show a photo ID to prove the passport is yours. A liberal New York City council member correctly – but without a single shred of self-awareness regarding his inconsistent position – pointed out a requirement to produce a photo ID is “to help reduce fraud.”

“Reduce fraud?” Yea, you’re telling me. (If you are keeping score at home, it is now more difficult to eat out a restaurant in New York City than it is to vote, but I digress.)

That politicians’ admission of simple truth acknowledges what every study proves – photo ID prevents fraud.

Even Europe knows this. Forty-six out of the forty-seven countries in Europe require a photo ID to vote. In fact, the United Kingdom is the only country that has been holding out, but it is changing course – announcing that a photo ID will be required in future elections. The move comes on the heels of a recent report showing massive voter fraud in European elections, and that voter ID is an integral component to fighting against it.

So, why does the need for photo ID in our everyday life not evoke the same vitriolic venom and outcry from liberals that are requiring a photo ID when voting does? It’s an interesting question when you consider polling data proves photo voter ID is a wildly popular issue.

A recent poll conducted by Scott Rasmussen shows 82% of the American people believe you “should show photo ID in order to vote.” This includes 69% of African American voters, 78% of Hispanic American voters, 60% of Democrats, and 77% of Independents. Another poll shows that nine in ten Americans believe voter ID in elections is “common-sense.” Furthermore, 72% of Americans say photo ID requirements increase their confidence in elections. While detractors use false, divisive language to describe supporters for photo ID, it’s clear by the numbers that the American people aren’t buying it.

Photo voter ID does not suppress voter turnout either, as a recent Harvard Business School study shows: Voter ID laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout overall for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party.

Furthermore, requiring photo voter ID in just about every other aspect of our lives does not spark cries of “racism,” nor should it. So why does requiring a photo voter ID to vote spark such outrage? The bottom line here is voter ID is a crucial component in protecting the sanctity of a citizen’s vote. For that reason, the Center for Election Integrity (CEI) feels it is important for state governments to provide photo identification free of charge if necessary – like in Georgia and eight other states.

CEI has a clear mission: “Easy to Vote, but Hard to Cheat.” We believe requiring government-issued photo ID to vote is a vital measure needed to protect voters and the integrity of the electoral process.

Regardless of whether you like the outcome of Virginia’s elections or any other political contest for that matter, the data proves measures like voter ID are popular, will prevent fraud, and help bring back confidence in the outcome of elections. With all of that in mind, why are so many of the progressive elites and members of mainstream media so vehemently opposed to it?

You decide

Title: 800,000 Non-citizens to vote in NYC?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 26, 2021, 01:10:07 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/11/non-citizens-who-want-to-vote-should-become-citizens-first/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=25839573

Title: Sen. Cruz vs. Woken Dead witnesses
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 28, 2021, 02:02:07 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_OKPfEBJ6U&t=3s

Title: Suing to see DC voter list data
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 09, 2021, 06:11:23 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/d-c-board-of-elections-sued-for-keeping-voter-data-secret_4144019.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-12-09&mktids=1d74b01a65bdf6b768d7855cabbd21fc&est=Tlz4o2rkZjK7yeWaLF4M%2FvPLUnL1hcbtloWDN2E5Of6uURZTHHW6SO1bqwv2%2BB2%2FfVOk

Title: Non-citizen voting in NYC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 11, 2021, 09:47:20 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/11/rubio-bring-bill-barring-federal-funds-cities-allo/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=PMz6a%2BwxbQMOySLrrgcrFHPnDnTRqrunWvjrVG2vMNZ6wKaJYmu7XmqZ4Par6tc2&bt_ts=1639237789727

Title: non citizen vote approved in DeBlasio's NYC
Post by: ccp on December 11, 2021, 10:15:03 AM

 :-(

what a slap in the face to those of us who are citizens!

Title: DOJ cover up in Arizona
Post by: ccp on December 15, 2021, 09:02:23 AM

http://republicbrief.com/az-state-rep-reads-dem-whistleblowers-letter-to-the-doj-about-2020-election-fraud-during-election-integrity-hearing/

not clear WHEN the letter was sent to DOJ

during Barr's "reign"

or the present loser.

Title: Sinema at the bridge!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 16, 2021, 01:47:06 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/12/16/kyrsten-sinema-wrecks-bidens-hopes-destroying-federal-election-integrity-laws-democrats-panic/

Title: Zuck's hundreds of millions to corrupt the election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 18, 2021, 02:54:28 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/.../irs-filing-confirms.../
“The 2020 presidential election witnessed an unprecedented and coordinated public-private partnership to improperly influence the 2020 presidential election on behalf of one particular candidate and party. Funded by hundreds of millions of dollars from Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and other high-tech interests, activist organizations created a two-tiered election system that treated voters differently depending on whether they lived in Democrat or Republican strongholds,” Amistad Project Director Phill Kline wrote in the report’s executive summary.

Title: MI: Court fight over dead people on voter lists
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2021, 02:39:46 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/court-fight-over-dead-people-on-voter-lists-heats-up-in-michigan_4162130.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2021-12-20&mktids=aa38ff747fe6edf95b416cc78465295a&est=mWrtcuaRxrEEGf2HvD8ihOw1HYMlM%2F888ld6XroihP8oO8cNhTWqVoPBbhzv4mXfzwIq

Title: The SEIU appears on our radar screen again
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 22, 2021, 04:11:09 AM

Conservative groups want recusals from NLRB members in SEIU lawsuit

BY DAVE BOYER THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A coalition of nine conservative groups on Tuesday asked two Biden-appointed members of the National Labor Relations Board to recuse themselves from a major case involving their former employer, the powerful Service Employees International Union.

In a letter to the NLRB, the groups said board members David Prouty and Gwynne Wilcox in the pending case brought by the SEIU have “troubling confl icts of interest” that undermine the agency’s “commitment to impartiality.”

“Taxpayers and consumers deserve an NLRB that does not put its thumb on the scale for political purposes,” wrote the groups, which include Heritage Action, the National Taxpayers Union and the FreedomWorks Foundation.

Mr. Prouty served as general counsel for SEIU Local 32BJ from 2017 until last June, when President Biden appointed him to the NLRB.

Ms. Wilcox served as associate general counsel of 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East.

Their Senate confirmations in July gave Democrats control of the five-member board, which is expected to reverse a slew of Trump-era labor rules.

The SEIU is the nation’s second- largest union and, with its PAC, is a major donor to Democratic candidates, including about $8 million for the Biden campaign in 2020.

NLRB Chair Lauren McFerran, responding to criticism from Republican lawmakers about the alleged conflicts, announced last month that the agency’s designated ethics official told Mr. Prouty and Ms. Wilcox that they may participate in the NLRB’s decision involving a lawsuit filed by the SEIU.

Ms. McFerran said they have an obligation “to faithfully fulfi ll our role as board members when, as here, participation in the board’s deliberations is appropriate.”

The SEIU is challenging a Trump-era rule on “joint employment,” which makes it harder for parent companies to be held liable for labor violations committed by franchisees.

The SEIU wants a new ruling by the NLRB that would make it easier for unions to sue large corporations when franchisees violate labor laws.

Mr. Prouty and Ms. Wilcox said last month they would not recuse themselves, and Tuesday’s letter asked them to reconsider.

The NLRB’s decisions on recusals have come under fire previously.

In 2018, a report by NLRB Inspector General David Berry cited “serious and flagrant” problems with the board’s ethics procedures, saying that members can take part in rulings that indirectly help former clients, as long as the client isn’t a party in the case.

The board also vacated a 2017 decision after finding that a Trump appointee, William Emanuel, should not have taken part in a landmark ruling tied to his former law firm.

The conservative groups seeking the recusals in the SEIU case noted that Mr. Prouty signed on to the union’s letter in 2019 in opposition to the Trump joint employer rule that he will now review.

Among Ms. Wilcox’s former clients was an SEIU-affiliated group called “Fight for $15,” which filed lawsuits opposing the Trump-era joint-employer laws.

“It is critical that independent federal agencies, especially those with sweeping power over the U.S. economy like the NLRB, act in a fair manner that upholds the law without preference towards organized labor or employers,” the groups wrote.

“This is especially relevant as organized labor is lobbying for more power through unprecedented increases of civil penalties in the H.R. 5376, the Build Back Better Act and H.R. 842, the devastating Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act,” they wrote.

The NLRB did not respond to a request for comment about the letter from the conservative groups.

In announcing last month that Mr. Prouty and Ms. Wilcox would not recuse themselves, the NLRB said its ethics official “found that no applicable ethics statute, regulation, or other provision required Member Wilcox or Member Prouty to recuse themselves from the board’s consideration of and response to the lawsuit.”

The board said its decision was “based on an assessment of the relevant facts, their participation would not raise appearance concerns about lack of impartiality.”

Title: Zuckerberg money
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 22, 2021, 04:57:42 PM

second

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/bombshell-report-irs-confirms-election-cash-dump-sourced-zuckerberg-grantee?fbclid=IwAR1yU-MUDAknDASNZ1TqFXT7AdTio53Ns-OjyRtt4ZTo5PuL_XiRuw6JAaY

Title: cancel filibuster for voting rights (cheating ) bill
Post by: ccp on December 23, 2021, 08:49:42 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/biden-filibuster-voting-rights-change-rules/2021/12/23/id/1049754/

this is what dems do when they cannot legitimately get their way with power grabs
or convince voters to vote for them

they try to cheat

sick ..... :-(

Title: Redistricting will not harm Dems
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 24, 2021, 02:48:15 AM

Redistricting shows no reason for Democrats’ alarm

Maps give edge to Biden-leaning areas

BY KERRY PICKET THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Redistricting has added to the number of Biden-leaning districts for upcoming elections, according to an analysis that contradicts Democrats’ narrative that Republicans were reaping a significant advantage from partisan gerrymandering.

Cook Political Report Senior Editor David Wasserman said this week that congressional lines across the country have yet to be finalized, but “Bidenwon congressional districts” seem to be outnumbering Trump-won districts.

“National update: on the current trajectory, there will actually be a few *more* Biden-won congressional districts after redistricting than there are now (224/435),” he said in a post on Twitter.

Mr. Wasserman said in a subsequent tweet that “there are going to be dozens of narrowly Biden-won seats that are very tenuous for Dems in a rough cycle (esp. in AZ, OH, MI, VA, NV). The biggest threat to Dems’ House majority isn’t redistricting; it’s Biden’s approval rating.”

Democrats and their activist allies predicted that Republican-led state legislatures would gerrymander congressional districts and “cheat” the party into power.

The Democrats said only the For the People Act could counteract the effects of Republican gerrymandering.

The legislation allows for voting by mail in each state. It also would lower the threshold in certain states so voters who do not meet ID requirements can sign affidavits during federal elections. Voters could register on the same day they cast ballots, whether during the early voting period or on Election Day. “Ballot harvesting” would expand to states where it is currently illegal.

“The stakes could not be higher: This year alone, 19 Republican-controlled state legislatures have enacted 33 laws to disenfranchise voters while

Republican-appointed judges continue to rip away hard-won voter protections in the courts,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said in late October after Senate Republicans blocked the bill.

“This all-out assault on the sanctity of the ballot is silencing the voices of voters — especially voters of color – and diminishing their say in the destiny of our democracy,” Mrs. Pelosi said.

She said, “House Democrats have led the charge to reverse this anti-democratic tide and return power to the American people. Our For the People Act tears down many barriers to the ballot box, prohibits partisan gerrymandering and combats dark, special interest money in politics.”

On Oct. 2, 2019, former Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. tweeted a Slate article about how state lawmakers “get away with gerrymandering.”

Mr. Holder commented, “Important article. Behind closed doors, Republicans are preparing to gerrymander themselves into power again. They will cheat - that’s what it is: cheating - to win elections unless the people stop them. Join the movement for FAIR maps @ allonthline.”

Early this month, former President Barack Obama said during a virtual fundraiser benefiting the National Democratic Redistricting Committee that Republican-majority legislatures were “passing laws designed to prevent American citizens from exercising their right to vote and drawing congressional maps that drown out the voice of ordinary people.

“Rather than argue, based on ideas, they are trying to tilt the playing field. And they aren’t even waiting for Election Day to do it. Their plan is to control state legislatures and congressional delegations before a single vote is cast. That is not how democracy is supposed to work.”

Robert Reich, a secretary of labor in the Clinton administration, tweeted in August, “make no mistake: If Dems don’t pass the For the People Act, the GOP is going to gerrymander their way to a House majority – and they may never give it up.”

The Democrats’ dire predictions about the redistricting process did not pan out.

After considering the final redistricting maps in California, Arizona and New Jersey, Mr. Wasserman concluded that the state-by-state decennial process of changing district lines after the census is “shaping up to be close to a wash” and that the biggest casualties are competitive seats.

In the 27 states that are at least nearly finished with their congressional maps, districts with a Trump Partisan Voting Index (PVI) of +5 or more increased from 106 to 117 seats and districts with a Biden PVI of +5 or more rose from 138 to 144, he said. Highly competitive seats in swing districts dropped 44%, from 34 to 19 seats.

“AZ commission (two Rs, two Ds, one tie-breaker) votes *unanimously* to approve new congressional map that would’ve split 5-4 for Biden in 2020. But #AZ01 (Biden +1.4) and #AZ06 (Biden +0.1) are highly tenuous, so GOP has a great opportunity to go 6R-3D in 2022,” Mr. Wasserman tweeted.

Longtime Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias wrote of the new Arizona map, “It is disappointing that the AZ Commission produced an illegally gerrymandered map. Arizonians deserve better. Arizona will be sued.”

Mr. Wasserman responded to Mr. Elias’ lawsuit threat. “Hearing increasing concerns from Dem members of Congress that the party’s legal apparatus filing a ton of dead-end lawsuits (for example, AZ map passed w/ unanimous bipartisan support) could diminish their side’s credibility in the suits that actually matter,” he said.

In New Jersey, Democratic Reps. Josh Gottheimer, Mikie Sherrill and Andy Kim are no longer in swing districts. The state’s bipartisan commission sliced out their districts’ conservative regions.

Fellow Democratic Rep. Tom Malinowski’s district received more Republican- leaning areas, making him more vulnerable next year. In 2020, he eked out a win against Republican state Sen. Tom Kean Jr., who plans to run again this cycle.

Meanwhile, districts became redder for two New Jersey Republicans: Reps. Jefferson Van Drew, a newcomer to the party, and Chris Smith, the state’s longest-serving member of Congress.

As a result of the redistricting, however, Mr. Smith’s district will no longer have his home county of Hamilton.

Title: ET: Voter rolls
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 27, 2021, 02:32:42 AM

Effort to update voter lists gains ground after 2020 election

Dead people, noncitizens, other impostors still on rolls

BY STEPHEN DINAN THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Public Interest Legal Foundation went to Pennsylvania with a list of tens of thousands of people who were likely dead but still on the state’s voter rolls in the weeks before the 2020 election.

The state was totally uninterested, according to Christian Adams, the organization’s founder. But once the election was over, Mr. Adams says, the state changed its tune.

It went into mediation with PILF, agreed to look into the list and even agreed to a settlement paying some of the group’s lawyers’ fees.

The kicker, though, was that Pennsylvania prosecutors even brought charges against a man who, according to PILF’s data, had registered his dead wife to vote, then requested her ballot in the 2020 election.

“All of the sudden they’re happy to settle, and to clean up their rolls,” Mr. Adams told The Washington Times.

He said it’s not a fluke. The aftermath of the 2020 elections has opened new opportunities for election-integrity advocates, who say they’re seeing signs of better cooperation from at least some jurisdictions.

Last year’s contest exposed what those involved in voter administration have known for years — national elections are not an exact science, but rather an approximation of the will of voters in the weeks surrounding early November.

How close an approximation is still heatedly debated. But it’s become clear to many that dirty voter rolls, lost or miscounted votes and mishandled ballots are more common than one might have imagined.

The difference in 2020 is that one of the candidates, then-President Trump, argued those usual flaws, combined with

more preposterous speculation about machines switching votes and dumping ballots, “stole” the White House.

While his claims still have traction among some Trump supporters, the more complicated work of cleaning up the very real problems with dead people, noncitizens and other bogus voters remains.

Mr. Adams said his experience with Pennsylvania shows that in some states, the new attention from 2020 has helped.

“A virtual army has arisen of the grass roots, who are not worried about magic voting machines, and recognize the real work of election administration. These people are pressuring states to follow the law and remove dead voters,” Mr. Adams said.

But not every state is more receptive in the wake of 2020.

PILF last month sued Michigan over nearly 26,000 dead voters whom the group says Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson won’t remove. And this month PILF sued Colorado just to get a look at the state’s records on removing ineligible voters.

Those on the other side of the voter wars also are fighting back.

The League of Women Voters sued Wisconsin last week to try to force the state to “reactivate” nearly 32,000 voters who were purged from the rolls “without warning.”

The pool of registered voters has become a battleground as states move to make it easier to vote by mail.

Voting-rights activists say striking names means legitimate but infrequent voters will have a tougher time casting ballots.

Election integrity experts say the more bad names on a list, the more chances there are for fraud.

A ballot mailed out to a deceased voter is one that can be filled out and mailed back by someone else. It’s illegal, but unless someone is out there actively looking for it, it’s tough to spot.

Mr. Adams said he’s noticed an even more worrying trend — dead voters actually registering, then voting.

That was the case for Judy C. Presto, who died in 2013. Mr. Adams has a photo of her grave.

Yet she still managed to file a registration request in August 2020, and cast a ballot in October. Prosecutors say her husband voted in her name by mail.

PILF says it found 114 people in Pennsylvania who appear to have registered to vote after their deaths were recorded.

Tom Fitton, president of the conservative Judicial Watch watchdog group, another group that polices voter rolls, said the key moment for election integrity came a few years back, when the Supreme Court reaffirmed the requirement in federal law that states have to take steps to clean up their lists.

That gives activists a hefty stick, but plenty of states are still resistant.

“Our perception is that states that are not cleaning up the rolls won’t clean up the rolls until they’re called on it,” he said.

There are some dangers to conservatives in the new focus on election integrity.

Analysts argue that Mr. Trump’s questioning of Georgia’s handling of elections helped convince thousands of GOP voters to stay home in that state’s Senate runoff elections this year, costing Republicans two seats — and control of the Senate.

Still to be seen is whether Mr. Trump’s relitigation of the 2020 election will keep GOP voters at home for the 2022 midterms.

But the former president also has helped a broader set of conservatives realize what’s at stake in the administration of elections.

“Conservative activists have realized they have to have a seat at the table,” Mr. Fitton said. “Typically the administration of elections has been ceded to the left, and partisans. And so conservatives are trying to get involved.”


Voter rolls are becoming a bigger battleground in elections. Voting-rights activists say striking names means legitimate but infrequent voters will have a tougher time casting their ballots. Opponents fear fraud. ASSOCIATED PRESS

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, The Wisconsin Purchase, Zuckerberg
Post by: DougMacG on December 27, 2021, 06:36:28 AM

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-wisconsin-purchase/

There is something strange about big money from far away trying to buy influence in other states.  While I sent 100 to Larry Elder to help get his campaign started, Zuckerberg sent a half billion to the swing states to buy this far Left outcome.

Title: Big left-wing dark money
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 05, 2022, 02:20:20 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/big-left-wing-dark-money-groups-fund-schumers-secretive-anti-filibuster-ally_4192441.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=mb-2022-01-05&mktids=5d404b681323fd86de8b6863b8c21aca&est=DNhGosGfloeqXpIi6PefLYVmMqNjKqbrti3AERRouMQtc%2FF72cSR%2F6OfMEPh1G1sQ08B

Title: James Earl
Post by: ccp on January 06, 2022, 12:39:28 PM

speaks of "free and fair" elections:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-democracy-is-at-a-greater-risk-today-181810269.html

Title: PP: The Real Solution to J6
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 07, 2022, 09:34:10 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/85361-a-real-solution-to-prevent-a-j6-repeat-2022-01-07?mailing_id=6405&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.6405&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

 I will be giving this a careful read.

Title: 18 States with Mail Order Voting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 09, 2022, 08:41:20 AM

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vopp-table-18-states-with-all-mail-elections.aspx

Title: non citizens now can vote in NYC.
Post by: ccp on January 09, 2022, 08:48:12 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/01/09/nyc-democrats-grant-voting-rights-to-nearly-1-million-noncitizens/

but Republicans are "THE EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO DEMOCRACY"

etc.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 09, 2022, 09:00:50 AM

as for states the have *all mail in*

The only one I could see makes sense is Alaska

Nevada - from the way it sounded this is so Harry Reid
could cheat

get his soldiers out to get all the union people to cheat........with ballet harvesting

to be able to get the numbers he needs to always miraculously pull out the election at the end.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 09, 2022, 09:17:46 AM

Quote from: ccp on January 09, 2022, 09:00:50 AM

as for states the have *all mail in*

The only one I could see makes sense is Alaska

Nevada - from the way it sounded this is so Harry Reid
could cheat

get his soldiers out to get all the union people to cheat........with ballet harvesting

to be able to get the numbers he needs to always miraculously pull out the election at the end.

Exactly correct.

Title: ex president still working full time to continue to divide
Post by: ccp on January 09, 2022, 10:30:01 AM

all the while using rich donors to build a billion $ shrine to himself of course - the greatest human to have lived - perhaps he would make an exception for Mohammad :

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/09/politics/michelle-obama-2022-elections-fight-for-vote/index.html

playing up the race card as he has always done with his racist wife

"The former first lady laid out a plan of action and said within the next year, When We All Vote and the coalition of other organizations will work to "recruit and train at least 100,000 volunteers" and "register more than a million new voters."
Obama said the coalition will also enlist thousands of lawyers to protect American voters, work to educate Americans on how to ensure their vote is safe and encourage at least 100,000 Americans to call on their Senators in support of the Freedom to Vote Act"

Again republicans are the threat to democracy.....

Title: ProPublica: Bannon's call to seize control of the GOP
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 10, 2022, 01:25:04 AM

Definitely a left of center source, but the piece has much info of interest:

https://www.propublica.org/article/heeding-steve-bannons-call-election-deniers-organize-to-seize-control-of-the-gop-and-reshape-americas-elections

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 10, 2022, 07:46:51 AM

***Definitely a left of center source, but the piece has much info of interest:

https://www.propublica.org/article/heeding-steve-bannons-call-election-deniers-organize-to-seize-control-of-the-gop-and-reshape-americas-elections***

get OUR armies out to get ballots in

(not really legal but should we offer then 5$ more then they pay per vote?)

were does anyone think that Lebron Opray and Zuck money actually goes for;
it ain't for drop boxes I would think.........

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 10, 2022, 08:49:47 AM

If the stop the steal movement was wrong about what happened in 2020, and we don't know that, wouldn't we still want to stop the steal going forward?

Title: Marc Elias one of the designers of 2020 mostly illegal ballot harvesting
Post by: ccp on January 11, 2022, 08:10:45 AM

https://conservativebrief.com/top-dem-3-57772/?utm_source=CB&utm_medium=PP


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Elias

of course has to be a Jewish Democrat  lawyer.

The democrat lawyers are behind most of these things and many a am sad to say are jews

it is not bigoted to point out the truth

we do have a few on our side (Marc Levin, Dan Horowitz ). who are fighting off the Jewish power hungry commies .....

As  a jew  look to them with pride
and to the others with shame and disgust

to say we do not have unusual influence is just wrong

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2022, 10:50:10 AM

Exactly so.

Title: Electoral security, The Big Lie
Post by: DougMacG on January 11, 2022, 12:08:39 PM

Slow Joe and Chuck U Schumer are running around pretending this is 1860 and that blacks can't get ID or something.  What a bunch of BS.  When do blacks and minorities get tired of being spoken aloud of as inept and stupid?

Meanwhile I had to provide two forms of ID at Walmart to get vaccinated.  I've seen blacks fly same as whites providing ID to do so, and they had minorities at the Democratic National Conventions over the years, ID required.

Each voter and each vote checked and tracked all the way through with no room for error, that's all we ask.

The GOP needs to win the election security issue - RIGHT NOW. 
-----------------------------------
Update, add these:
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/01/voting-rights-lies-and-videotape.php
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/byron-yorks-daily-memo-gop-pushes-back-on-democratic-big-lie
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/10/democrats-propose-a-federal-speech-czar/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 11, 2022, 02:05:45 PM

"Slow Joe and Chuck U Schumer are running around pretending this is 1860 and that blacks can't get ID or something.  What a bunch of BS."

they say they are fighting for the right to vote

we say they are fighting for the (legalization) of the right to cheat 

Title: Witty, but as a matter of logic not sure this works
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2022, 02:43:03 PM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/senate-bill-would-force-states-pair-voter-id-vaccine-passports

Title: Strange how’s this is never mentioned…
Post by: G M on January 11, 2022, 02:55:04 PM

https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/26/if-voter-id-laws-are-undemocratic-then-so-is-europe/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2022, 02:58:50 PM

Mexico too, and India as well if I am not mistaken.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 11, 2022, 03:05:43 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2022, 02:58:50 PM

Mexico too, and India as well if I am not mistaken.

Usually the left fcuking LOVES anything Europe does. Funny how they don’t seem to care for this much.

Title: Kurt on how Dems out gerrymander us
Post by: ccp on January 13, 2022, 12:51:51 PM

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2022/01/13/republicans-are-not-gerrymandering-anywhere-near-enough-n2601710

yet the way the MSM has it , it is Republicans who threaten Democracy

Title: May lies lay ahead
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 17, 2022, 01:57:15 PM

https://www.axios.com/electoral-reform-bipartisan-support-0b1ffd06-2c17-4460-b96e-f69f43a9786f.html?fbclid=IwAR0t7Cf1fgH2V5FQ3G1isajxgrUh4m2i0h0vmIeXFxeT1cR6kyb11QhXgZg

Title: WI: Judge rules ballot drop boxes unlawful in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 17, 2022, 03:32:45 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/01/15/judge-rules-absentee-ballot-drop-boxes-unlawful-in-wisconsin/

Title: Vote fraud: The Other Biden Inflation
Post by: DougMacG on January 17, 2022, 09:44:18 PM

Let's say your vote was worth $1 before they diluted it - enough for them to win every election
  What is it worth now?

I think we should go on a search for the 81 million. 

Right after we hold a microsecond of silence for the zero people killed by armed Trump supporters during the "insurrection".
-----------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/01/17/cheapening_the_vote_the_other_inflation__147034.html

Title: Re: Vote fraud: The Other Biden Inflation
Post by: G M on January 17, 2022, 09:56:51 PM

You'll need a Ouija Board to contact more than a few of them.

Quote from: DougMacG on January 17, 2022, 09:44:18 PM

Let's say your vote was worth $1 before they diluted it - enough for them to win every election
  What is it worth now?

I think we should go on a search for the 81 million. 

Right after we hold a microsecond of silence for the zero people killed by armed Trump supporters during the "insurrection".
-----------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/01/17/cheapening_the_vote_the_other_inflation__147034.html

Title: Re: Vote fraud: The Other Biden Inflation
Post by: G M on January 18, 2022, 10:15:16 AM

https://off-the-reservation.com/2021/12/24/coincidence/

Quote from: G M on January 17, 2022, 09:56:51 PM

You'll need a Ouija Board to contact more than a few of them.

Quote from: DougMacG on January 17, 2022, 09:44:18 PM

Let's say your vote was worth $1 before they diluted it - enough for them to win every election
  What is it worth now?

I think we should go on a search for the 81 million. 

Right after we hold a microsecond of silence for the zero people killed by armed Trump supporters during the "insurrection".
-----------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/01/17/cheapening_the_vote_the_other_inflation__147034.html

Title: 4/29/21 FL law curbs mail voting and drop boxes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 18, 2022, 10:20:12 AM

Florida legislature approves measure that curbs mail voting and use of drop boxes
A worker at the Miami-Dade County Elections Department brings an official ballot drop box into the building after polls closed in the August 2020 primary election in Doral, Fla.
A worker at the Miami-Dade County Elections Department brings an official ballot drop box into the building after polls closed in the August 2020 primary election in Doral, Fla. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
By Amy Gardner
April 29, 2021 at 10:58 p.m. EDT



Florida’s legislature on Thursday night became the latest to approve far-reaching legislation imposing new rules on voting and new penalties for those who do not follow them, passing a measure critics said would make it harder for millions of voters to cast ballots in the Sunshine State.

Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who named voting security one of his top legislative priorities this year, said late Thursday night on Fox News that he “of course” would sign the bill.

Like similar bills Republicans are pushing in dozens of state legislatures across the country, the Florida measure adds hurdles to voting by mail, restricts the use of drop boxes and prohibits any actions that could influence those standing in line to vote, which voting rights advocates said is likely to discourage nonpartisan groups from offering food or water to voters as they wait in the hot Florida sun.


One week after it was signed into law, Georgia's Republican-led voting overhaul is facing backlash from a growing number of voting rights advocates. (Mahlia Posey/The Washington Post)
The passage of the bill was preceded by an hour of emotional debate, as Black lawmakers stood up to decry a measure they said was aimed squarely at curbing the clout of voters of color.

“You are making policies that are detrimental to our communities,” said an emotional state Rep. Angela Nixon (D), describing herself as “distraught and disheartened.”

Both Democrats and Republicans, including DeSantis, hailed Florida’s administration of the November 2020 election as a model for the nation. Former president Donald Trump won the state by more than three points.

Nevertheless, DeSantis has said new restrictions are needed to shore up election security. “So we think we led the nation, but we're trying to stay ahead of the curve to make sure that these elections are run well,” DeSantis said in a Fox News segment with other GOP governors Thursday hosted by Laura Ingraham.


Democrats and voting rights advocates counter that the new measure is instead aimed at making it harder for some Floridians to cast ballots — and to appease constituents who believe Trump’s false claims that the election was stolen.

“The governor praised Florida’s election performance as the gold standard, then he quickly pivoted to the national narrative, claiming without evidence that there was fraud and voting irregularities that would plague the state without these changes,” state Sen. Janet Cruz, a Democrat from Tampa, said in an interview this week. “If you can’t win by promoting the best candidate, you win by making it harder for the other side to vote.”

Cruz and other critics said the bill curtails poll access in a variety of ways that will intimidate, confuse and otherwise make it harder for people to vote by mail, which is popular in Florida. In November, more than 4.8 million Floridians — more than 40 percent of the fall electorate — cast mail ballots.


The new hurdles will probably produce longer lines during both early in-person and Election Day voting, she and others said.

As the voting rights fight moves to Texas, defiant Republicans test the resolve of corporations that oppose restrictions

The law’s top two GOP proponents, Rep. Blaise Ingoglia and Sen. Joe Gruters, did not respond to requests for interviews. But in committee hearings and floor debate, numerous Republicans defended the measure as necessary to ensure the integrity of elections.

“Why wouldn’t you want to do that?” Rep. Thomas J. Leek said during House debate Wednesday. “I’ve heard repeatedly that we’re trying to fix something that is not broken. But I guarantee you those same people who are making that argument today would come back in 2022 when the system breaks and complain that we didn’t anticipate things that we should have anticipated. This bill fixes those things.”

In February, DeSantis hailed “the most transparent and efficient election anywhere in the country” — but in the same speech, he said more restrictions on mail voting were needed to “stay ahead of the curve.” DeSantis is a close ally of Trump, who spent much of 2020 deriding mail voting as rife with fraud.


The Florida bill makes it harder to use drop boxes to deposit mail ballots, a voting method that was widely embraced last year because of the coronavirus pandemic.

The legislation prohibits mobile drop boxes, and it requires local election supervisors to staff all drop boxes and to allow ballots to be dropped in them only during early-voting hours. Supervisors who leave a drop box accessible outside those hours are subject to a civil penalty of $25,000. The state’s association of county election supervisors opposes the law.

The bill also limits who may turn in a voter’s ballot, allowing only certain family members to do so or limiting individuals to turning in the ballots of just two nonfamily members.

Voting rights groups said the provisions are unnecessary and could suppress turnout.

“You could go down the street to a mailbox and put that ballot with a stamp in the mail, and there’s no one standing there asking you for identification,” said Patti Brigham, president of the Florida League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan voting rights group, who added that officials have uncovered no evidence of the kind of ballot collection, or “harvesting,” that Republicans say they are trying to prevent. “That’s ridiculous. And it’s voter intimidation.”


Florida’s legislation comes after Georgia Republicans passed an extensive overhaul of that state’s voting rules, a measure that quickly emerged as a flash point in a state with a long history of disenfranchising voters of color. In Texas, GOP lawmakers have proposed bills that take aim at new means of voting embraced in cities such as Houston last year.

The restrictions proposed by Florida Republicans drew sharp criticism from Black lawmakers there, who rose one after another during a House debate Wednesday to condemn the legislation.

They said the bill would make voting particularly difficult for minorities, who more often struggle with transportation and work nonstandard hours in the service sector in Florida’s tourism-dependent economy, relying more heavily on after-hours drop boxes.

The additional barriers made it hard not to conclude that the law is intended to suppress the vote, they said — an ugly reminder of Florida’s embrace of Jim Crow laws in the 20th century.


“It’s a sad day for me personally because people like me, not too long ago, in recent history, were not able to vote,” said Rep. Geraldine Thompson (D).

“I grew up in the South,” said Thompson, who is 72. “When I look at my birth certificate, under race, I’m listed as Colored. And when I went to school, all of my school records showed that I was Negro.”

Thompson told a rapt House chamber of a lynching in Orange County, her current home, in 1920. The victim, a prominent Black businessman named Julius “July” Perry, tried to vote in the local election and was told he had not paid his poll taxes. A mob abducted him from his home in front of his wife and children, hanged him and used his body for target practice.

Thompson also invoked the memory of civil rights leaders Harry T. Moore and his wife, Harriette, who founded a branch of the NAACP in Brevard County. The two died after a bomb was planted under their home on Dec. 25, 1951, and after both were driven to a hospital 30 miles away because one closer refused to treat them.


“On behalf of July Perry, who wanted to vote in 1920, on behalf of Harry T. Moore, who was killed on Christmas night in 1951, on behalf of his wife, Harriette, who died nine days later — vote this bill down,” Thompson said, eliciting thunderous applause from her Democratic colleagues.

How GOP-backed voting measures could create hurdles for tens of millions of voters

While much of the criticism of Senate Bill 90 comes from voting rights advocates who believe it will disproportionately affect communities of color, some Republicans are worried that it will make it harder for their voters to cast ballots, too — particularly the millions of Floridians who have voted by mail for many years.

One provision in particular has Republicans and Democrats alike confounded. It requires voters to reapply for mail ballots every two-year election cycle, rather than every two cycles, or four years, as current law allows.


Members of both parties said the provision will confuse voters who think they’re due to receive an absentee ballot automatically — and is likely to suppress turnout in off-year municipal elections, when voters on the request list automatically receive ballots. In federal elections, it could also put added pressure on in-person voting, resulting in long lines.

“Quite honestly, it’s one of the safest and most effective ways to vote,” said one frustrated former state GOP operative, who believes restrictions on mail voting are not good for either party and who spoke on the condition of anonymity to criticize the strategy. “This is really going to hurt Republicans, especially with seniors and the military.”

One constituency absent from the debate in Tallahassee is the business sector, which in both Georgia and Texas weighed in to oppose voter restrictions. There has been less of that in Florida, both Republicans and Democrats said, because the business groups are largely aligned with the GOP on regulatory and tax issues, and many of the leading businesses rely on tourist-heavy customer bases who aren’t exerting any pressure.

“You would have to believe that people would stop coming to Florida because Republicans are suppressing the vote,” said state Rep. Omari Hardy, a Democrat from Lake Worth. “I don’t think the business community has made that calculation.”

Amy B Wang contributed to this report

Title: Re: 4/29/21 FL law curbs mail voting and drop boxes
Post by: G M on January 18, 2022, 10:29:55 AM

No fair investigating vote fraud! How will dems win now?

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 18, 2022, 10:20:12 AM

Florida legislature approves measure that curbs mail voting and use of drop boxes
A worker at the Miami-Dade County Elections Department brings an official ballot drop box into the building after polls closed in the August 2020 primary election in Doral, Fla.
A worker at the Miami-Dade County Elections Department brings an official ballot drop box into the building after polls closed in the August 2020 primary election in Doral, Fla. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
By Amy Gardner
April 29, 2021 at 10:58 p.m. EDT



Florida’s legislature on Thursday night became the latest to approve far-reaching legislation imposing new rules on voting and new penalties for those who do not follow them, passing a measure critics said would make it harder for millions of voters to cast ballots in the Sunshine State.

Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who named voting security one of his top legislative priorities this year, said late Thursday night on Fox News that he “of course” would sign the bill.

Like similar bills Republicans are pushing in dozens of state legislatures across the country, the Florida measure adds hurdles to voting by mail, restricts the use of drop boxes and prohibits any actions that could influence those standing in line to vote, which voting rights advocates said is likely to discourage nonpartisan groups from offering food or water to voters as they wait in the hot Florida sun.


One week after it was signed into law, Georgia's Republican-led voting overhaul is facing backlash from a growing number of voting rights advocates. (Mahlia Posey/The Washington Post)
The passage of the bill was preceded by an hour of emotional debate, as Black lawmakers stood up to decry a measure they said was aimed squarely at curbing the clout of voters of color.

“You are making policies that are detrimental to our communities,” said an emotional state Rep. Angela Nixon (D), describing herself as “distraught and disheartened.”

Both Democrats and Republicans, including DeSantis, hailed Florida’s administration of the November 2020 election as a model for the nation. Former president Donald Trump won the state by more than three points.

Nevertheless, DeSantis has said new restrictions are needed to shore up election security. “So we think we led the nation, but we're trying to stay ahead of the curve to make sure that these elections are run well,” DeSantis said in a Fox News segment with other GOP governors Thursday hosted by Laura Ingraham.


Democrats and voting rights advocates counter that the new measure is instead aimed at making it harder for some Floridians to cast ballots — and to appease constituents who believe Trump’s false claims that the election was stolen.

“The governor praised Florida’s election performance as the gold standard, then he quickly pivoted to the national narrative, claiming without evidence that there was fraud and voting irregularities that would plague the state without these changes,” state Sen. Janet Cruz, a Democrat from Tampa, said in an interview this week. “If you can’t win by promoting the best candidate, you win by making it harder for the other side to vote.”

Cruz and other critics said the bill curtails poll access in a variety of ways that will intimidate, confuse and otherwise make it harder for people to vote by mail, which is popular in Florida. In November, more than 4.8 million Floridians — more than 40 percent of the fall electorate — cast mail ballots.


The new hurdles will probably produce longer lines during both early in-person and Election Day voting, she and others said.

As the voting rights fight moves to Texas, defiant Republicans test the resolve of corporations that oppose restrictions

The law’s top two GOP proponents, Rep. Blaise Ingoglia and Sen. Joe Gruters, did not respond to requests for interviews. But in committee hearings and floor debate, numerous Republicans defended the measure as necessary to ensure the integrity of elections.

“Why wouldn’t you want to do that?” Rep. Thomas J. Leek said during House debate Wednesday. “I’ve heard repeatedly that we’re trying to fix something that is not broken. But I guarantee you those same people who are making that argument today would come back in 2022 when the system breaks and complain that we didn’t anticipate things that we should have anticipated. This bill fixes those things.”

In February, DeSantis hailed “the most transparent and efficient election anywhere in the country” — but in the same speech, he said more restrictions on mail voting were needed to “stay ahead of the curve.” DeSantis is a close ally of Trump, who spent much of 2020 deriding mail voting as rife with fraud.


The Florida bill makes it harder to use drop boxes to deposit mail ballots, a voting method that was widely embraced last year because of the coronavirus pandemic.

The legislation prohibits mobile drop boxes, and it requires local election supervisors to staff all drop boxes and to allow ballots to be dropped in them only during early-voting hours. Supervisors who leave a drop box accessible outside those hours are subject to a civil penalty of $25,000. The state’s association of county election supervisors opposes the law.

The bill also limits who may turn in a voter’s ballot, allowing only certain family members to do so or limiting individuals to turning in the ballots of just two nonfamily members.

Voting rights groups said the provisions are unnecessary and could suppress turnout.

“You could go down the street to a mailbox and put that ballot with a stamp in the mail, and there’s no one standing there asking you for identification,” said Patti Brigham, president of the Florida League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan voting rights group, who added that officials have uncovered no evidence of the kind of ballot collection, or “harvesting,” that Republicans say they are trying to prevent. “That’s ridiculous. And it’s voter intimidation.”


Florida’s legislation comes after Georgia Republicans passed an extensive overhaul of that state’s voting rules, a measure that quickly emerged as a flash point in a state with a long history of disenfranchising voters of color. In Texas, GOP lawmakers have proposed bills that take aim at new means of voting embraced in cities such as Houston last year.

The restrictions proposed by Florida Republicans drew sharp criticism from Black lawmakers there, who rose one after another during a House debate Wednesday to condemn the legislation.

They said the bill would make voting particularly difficult for minorities, who more often struggle with transportation and work nonstandard hours in the service sector in Florida’s tourism-dependent economy, relying more heavily on after-hours drop boxes.

The additional barriers made it hard not to conclude that the law is intended to suppress the vote, they said — an ugly reminder of Florida’s embrace of Jim Crow laws in the 20th century.


“It’s a sad day for me personally because people like me, not too long ago, in recent history, were not able to vote,” said Rep. Geraldine Thompson (D).

“I grew up in the South,” said Thompson, who is 72. “When I look at my birth certificate, under race, I’m listed as Colored. And when I went to school, all of my school records showed that I was Negro.”

Thompson told a rapt House chamber of a lynching in Orange County, her current home, in 1920. The victim, a prominent Black businessman named Julius “July” Perry, tried to vote in the local election and was told he had not paid his poll taxes. A mob abducted him from his home in front of his wife and children, hanged him and used his body for target practice.

Thompson also invoked the memory of civil rights leaders Harry T. Moore and his wife, Harriette, who founded a branch of the NAACP in Brevard County. The two died after a bomb was planted under their home on Dec. 25, 1951, and after both were driven to a hospital 30 miles away because one closer refused to treat them.


“On behalf of July Perry, who wanted to vote in 1920, on behalf of Harry T. Moore, who was killed on Christmas night in 1951, on behalf of his wife, Harriette, who died nine days later — vote this bill down,” Thompson said, eliciting thunderous applause from her Democratic colleagues.

How GOP-backed voting measures could create hurdles for tens of millions of voters

While much of the criticism of Senate Bill 90 comes from voting rights advocates who believe it will disproportionately affect communities of color, some Republicans are worried that it will make it harder for their voters to cast ballots, too — particularly the millions of Floridians who have voted by mail for many years.

One provision in particular has Republicans and Democrats alike confounded. It requires voters to reapply for mail ballots every two-year election cycle, rather than every two cycles, or four years, as current law allows.


Members of both parties said the provision will confuse voters who think they’re due to receive an absentee ballot automatically — and is likely to suppress turnout in off-year municipal elections, when voters on the request list automatically receive ballots. In federal elections, it could also put added pressure on in-person voting, resulting in long lines.

“Quite honestly, it’s one of the safest and most effective ways to vote,” said one frustrated former state GOP operative, who believes restrictions on mail voting are not good for either party and who spoke on the condition of anonymity to criticize the strategy. “This is really going to hurt Republicans, especially with seniors and the military.”

One constituency absent from the debate in Tallahassee is the business sector, which in both Georgia and Texas weighed in to oppose voter restrictions. There has been less of that in Florida, both Republicans and Democrats said, because the business groups are largely aligned with the GOP on regulatory and tax issues, and many of the leading businesses rely on tourist-heavy customer bases who aren’t exerting any pressure.

“You would have to believe that people would stop coming to Florida because Republicans are suppressing the vote,” said state Rep. Omari Hardy, a Democrat from Lake Worth. “I don’t think the business community has made that calculation.”

Amy B Wang contributed to this report

Title: same old
Post by: ccp on January 18, 2022, 02:24:14 PM

"Democrats and voting rights advocates counter that the new measure is instead aimed at making it harder for some Floridians to cast ballots — and to appease constituents who believe Trump’s false claims that the election was stolen."

same old shit

*false claims *. ALWAYS GETS INSERTED
*Trump's false claims*. AS THOUGH THE REST OF US DID NOT SEE THE OBVIOUS ELECTION CORRUPTION that took place

Amy Gardner - another WP Dem operative:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/amy-gardner/

"  state Sen. Janet Cruz, a Democrat from Tampa, said in an interview this week. “If you can’t win by promoting the best candidate, you win by making it harder for the other side to vote.”

Democrats are too stupid to vote like they have for decades
Is that what they are saying ?

Title: Re: same old
Post by: G M on January 18, 2022, 02:28:53 PM

How are all the illegal aliens and dead people going to vote if you demand IDs?

Quote from: ccp on January 18, 2022, 02:24:14 PM

"Democrats and voting rights advocates counter that the new measure is instead aimed at making it harder for some Floridians to cast ballots — and to appease constituents who believe Trump’s false claims that the election was stolen."

same old shit

*false claims *. ALWAYS GETS INSERTED
*Trump's false claims*. AS THOUGH THE REST OF US DID NOT SEE THE OBVIOUS ELECTION CORRUPTION that took place

Amy Gardner - another WP Dem operative:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/amy-gardner/

"  state Sen. Janet Cruz, a Democrat from Tampa, said in an interview this week. “If you can’t win by promoting the best candidate, you win by making it harder for the other side to vote.”

Democrats are too stupid to vote like they have for decades
Is that what they are saying ?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 18, 2022, 03:10:13 PM

They can use the vaxx cards they use to get in restaurants.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on January 18, 2022, 03:29:07 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 18, 2022, 03:10:13 PM

They can use the vaxx cards they use to get in restaurants.

Exactly.

Title: Clyburn
Post by: ccp on January 20, 2022, 01:30:24 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2022/01/20/clyburn-echoes-biden-absolutely-concerned-about-legitimacy-of-elections-in-gop-led-states/

psssssst.  hey Clyburn - it ain't 1965
blacks can vote
just like anyone else
we just want your side to cheat

Title: NRO: Dems election law circus
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2022, 03:47:58 PM

The Democrats’ Election-Law Circus
By THE EDITORS
January 21, 2022 11:48 AM
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Flipboard
Email this article
Print this article

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) speaks during a news conference at the Capitol in Washington, D.C., January 11, 2022. (Sarah Silbiger/Reuters)

The Democrats spent the past two weeks holding a circus. The theme of that circus was that American elections would be illegitimate and reimpose “Jim Crow 2.0” unless Congress passed a radical overhaul changing how elections have been held in this country since the Founding. People who ought to know better, including President Joe Biden and Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer, argued that American elections are a “rigged game” (Schumer’s term) or “easily could . . . be illegitimate” (Biden’s words) if their proposals did not pass Congress. The next day, after having had time to consider the uproar caused by the president’s remarks, House majority whip Jim Clyburn said he was “absolutely concerned” that without the passage of the proposals, the 2022 elections would not be legitimate. In other words, this was not a one-off statement by Biden during an extended press conference. Rather, there is a deliberate effort under way by Democrats to preemptively sow doubts about the legitimacy of midterm elections they are widely expected to lose.



These rhetorical assaults on the legitimacy of American democracy are playing with fire. They are only words, but then, Donald Trump’s ongoing attacks on the 2020 election are now only words, too. Given the long history of street mobs and riots on the left, it is dangerous to encourage the belief that the 2022 midterm elections and the 2024 presidential elections, if conducted under state laws and in line with pre-pandemic American election procedures, represent an oppressive theft of democracy justifying radical action in response.

Perhaps as alarming as the rhetoric is the procedural radicalism of the Democrats. Biden and nearly the entire Senate Democratic caucus signed on to a kamikaze attack on the filibuster, a tool nearly all of them have used, and praised, for decades. Eloquent defenses of the filibuster were an essential element of Biden’s onetime reputation as a Senate institutionalist.


Democrats deployed the filibuster hundreds of times during the Trump presidency and used it, most recently, last week to block a bill with 55 votes in support of sanctions on Russia for its Nord Stream 2 pipeline with Germany. In 2017, 30 Democratic senators signed a bipartisan letter to Mitch McConnell asking for him to stand strong against Donald Trump’s pressure to end the filibuster. McConnell, consistent with his principles and against the short-term interests of his party, did just that.

JOIN THE TUESDAY
Get Kevin D. Williamson’s newsletter delivered to your inbox each Tuesday.


Email Address
MORE IN DEMOCRATS
U-Haul Literally Ran Out of Trucks Leaving California
Joe Biden Needs Help Knowing What He Thinks
Two Senate Seats Shy of Radicalism
Now, Democrats have made the abolition of the filibuster a litmus test for their party. That will likely harm their electoral prospects for a time, but they will eventually regain a Senate majority. Destroying the filibuster would be a bad thing. Precisely because federal legislation tends to take power from state governments and be nearly impossible in practice to repeal, the filibuster’s requirement of broad, national consensus before passing federal laws is a protection of democratic self-government in the states, the “laboratories of democracy” as progressives such as Louis Brandeis once called them.

Politically, the circus was inexplicable. Biden intemperately compared Democratic senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema to Jefferson Davis, Bull Connor, and George Wallace, a tactic that did nothing to make them more interested in voting for his agenda. Schumer used a procedural loophole to force a vote on the filibuster, putting vulnerable Democratic senators such as Mark Kelly and Maggie Hassan on the record ahead of tough reelection bids. All of this for a foreordained failure that will further demoralize and alienate the Democratic voting base and convince independent voters of the Democrats’ radicalism.

And for what? The two bills the Democrats are promoting were originally designed as partisan “messaging” bills, not governing agendas. They would bulldoze popular state voter-ID laws; attack the secret ballot by eliminating state laws against “ballot harvesting”; eliminate deadlines for the counting of votes on Election Day; outlaw commonsense methods of removing dead or relocated voters from state voter rolls; greatly expand federal power over redistricting; suppress political speech critical of the government; and subsidize political campaigns and Democratic activist groups that conduct partisan voter-registration drives.

The Senate was right to reject these bills. It was right to adhere to its traditional rules for deliberation and debate of changes to our national laws. Democrats burned precious political capital simply to poison the well for acceptance of the upcoming midterm elections and lay the foundation for a perilous assault on core traditions of American governance. None of that reflects well on them. Voters should take notice, and act accordingly.

Title: Illegitimate elections, clean up in aisle Biden
Post by: DougMacG on January 23, 2022, 06:14:16 AM

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/01/21/bidens_election_integrity_reply_puts_wh_in_cleanup_mode_147078.html

Title: WT: Non-Citizen voter registration
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 24, 2022, 03:54:17 AM

Noncitizens granted right to vote show little interest

No registrations after Vermont cities’ ordeals

BY STEPHEN DINAN THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Montpelier City Clerk John Odum chuckled when he was asked how many noncitizens had registered to vote ahead of the Vermont city’s municipal elections in March — the first time they will have the chance to cast ballots.

Not a single person has asked to be signed up, he told The Washington Times this month.

City residents went through a significant ordeal to grant legally present noncitizens the right to vote. They won an amendment to the city charter, got approval from the state legislature and then surmounted a governor’s veto.

Yet with just a few weeks to go, noncitizens don’t seem to have much interest in flexing their new power.

“Right now, we have zero,” Mr. Odum said. As New York City moves to expand voting rights in local elections to noncitizens, including illegal immigrants, cities that have experimented with the policy have found people don’t rush to sign up.

In Winooski, another Vermont city that begins noncitizen voting this year, Jenny Willingham said no one there has signed up either. She said the city is about to do some outreach.

“We’re really trying to promote it,” she said. In San Francisco, which has allowed noncitizen voting in board of education elections for several years, the highest turnout was in 2018, when 59 people on the noncitizen voting list cast ballots. That was a tiny fraction of the nearly 373,000 voters who turned out.

A year later, just two people on the noncitizen roll cast ballots. In 2020, 31 did so.

Federal law is supposed to prohibit noncitizens from registering and casting ballots in federal elections, but state and local governments have no national restrictions within the confines of their

own contests.

Some states have proactively barred noncitizen voting, but others have taken permissive approaches.

The policies vary. In San Francisco, noncitizen voters can cast ballots only in board of education elections, and only if they are parents or caregivers of a juvenile who lives in the city. Illegal immigrants qualify.

In Montpelier, noncitizen voters must have legal status in the U.S., so illegal immigrants are not allowed to cast ballots. Noncitizens can vote on every local issue except for schools. In Winooski, school elections are included.

New York City’s policy, which was allowed to become law early this year and takes effect in 2023, applies to legal permanent residents — green card holders — and to illegal immigrants who have been granted work permits by the Homeland Security Department. That category could include DACA recipients, those in the Temporary Protected Status program and illegal immigrants who have applied for victim visas or asylum.

It is by far the biggest experiment in noncitizen voting that the U.S. has ever seen.

Election officials who spoke with The Times didn’t hazard guesses as to why participation rates have been so low in places where noncitizen voting is allowed.

Some analysts said it could be fear of entanglement with a government agency.

Indeed, San Francisco’s webpage for noncitizen voters contains a stark warning to anyone thinking of signing up: “Any information you provide to the Department of Elections, including your name and address, may be obtained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other agencies, organizations, and individuals. In addition, if you apply for naturalization, you will be asked whether you have ever registered or voted in a federal, state, or local election in the United States. You may wish to consult with an immigration attorney, an organization that protects immigrant rights, or other knowledgeable source before providing any personal information to the Department of Elections and before registering to vote in San Francisco Board of Education Elections.”

The warning is repeated in 50 languages.

J. Christian Adams, who runs the Public Interest Legal Foundation, dedicated to voter integrity measures, said noncitizens may have inertia when it comes to voting, but experiments such as New York’s are intended to break down those barriers and normalize rights for noncitizens.

“The more they desensitize and legitimize illegal aliens voting, eventually the fear goes away,” he said. “The long play here is to alter the cultural inhibitions on registration.”

With the federal prohibition in place, jurisdictions that allow noncitizen voting must keep second voter rolls with the noncitizens’ names to ensure they don’t get mixed in with the rolls for elections for national office.

New York City has tested those waters.

The city allowed any parent who had children in public schools to vote in community school board elections from 1969 to 2002, said Ron Hayduk, a political scientist at San Francisco State University who tracks noncitizen voting.

The professor even found some elections in which noncitizen voters turned out en masse and likely swayed outcomes.

One was the school board contest in the predominantly Dominican neighborhood of Washington Heights in 1986. Mr. Hayduk said turnout hit 10,000 parents, most of them immigrants, and they installed a pro-immigrant majority on the board, including the first Dominican to win election in the U.S.

Mr. Hayduk’s research found that when people focus on mobilizing noncitizen voters, they turn out.

In Hyattsville, Maryland, just over the boundary from the District of Columbia, election officials paid for locally targeted ads in Spanish on Facebook and adopted an all-mail election system, the professor said.

The city-only list of voters — which is where noncitizens would show up, as well as voters ages 16 and 17 — went from 31 names in 2017 to 216 in the 2021 election, and turnout climbed from 12 in 2017 to 144 last year.

That works out to a 67% turnout rate in 2021, far outstripping the 28% rate overall.

Still, those 144 voters accounted for less than 5% of the total votes cast in the city’s election, even though noncitizens make up about 20% of the city’s population, according to data at TownCharts. com.

Takoma Park, another Maryland city on the D.C. line where about 1 in 6 residents are noncitizens, has allowed them to vote in local elections for decades.

Participation is sparse there too, according to city statistics.

The city has about 13,000 registered voters but only several hundred on the city-only list for noncitizens. Takoma Park has never had more than 100 voters in an election in recent years, City Clerk Jessie Carpenter said.

“The numbers are low,” she said. Mr. Hayduk said Takoma Park’s turnout was higher in the 1990s but dropped after the 2001 terrorist attacks, “when anti-immigrant sentiment and surveillance grew.”

New York, of course, dwarfs the other jurisdictions, and the chance for an immigrant voting bloc to emerge has elevated the issue.

The Republican National Committee has filed a lawsuit arguing that the city ordinance runs afoul of the New York Constitution, which the RNC said treats the right to vote as a privilege of citizenship.

The RNC last year sued the two Vermont cities. Those lawsuits are pending.

If noncitizens suddenly start to register and vote in significant numbers, it could create other legal problems, Mr. Adams said, such as diluting the strength of current minority voting blocs.

If, for example, Black voters suddenly see hindrances to selecting their preferred candidates in a Democratic primary, that could be a problem under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Mr. Adams said.

“If New York does this and African Americans are harmed by this, the Public Interest Legal Foundation vows to file a lawsuit under the Voting Rights Act,” he told The Times

Title: Judicial skullduggery in Texas
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 24, 2022, 06:15:45 AM

second

https://www.theepochtimes.com/texas-republicans-urge-court-to-reconsider-decision-that-stripped-ag-of-power-to-prosecute-election-fraud_4229194.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-01-23-4&utm_medium=email&est=hHBWpg4XW%2FfCvoTUFJjX0j0Bz70nIylAytTjOTPo3jY6tNhAizgeaIK1F03Ooh6uygqv

Title: shysters out maneuvar flat footed Republicans again with redistricting
Post by: ccp on January 24, 2022, 11:09:08 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/01/24/2022-midterms-republicans-losing-redistricting-battle-aggressive-democrats/

yet we will hear on MSM how Repub redistricting is a

THREAT TO DEMOCRACY

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 24, 2022, 11:20:34 AM

and of course I should
add

"RACISM"
"DEPRIVING BLACKS THE RIGHT TO VOTE"

Title: WT: Redistricting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 25, 2022, 03:37:32 AM

CONGRESS

House Democrats make surprising inroads in the redistricting process

GOP advantage not likely to be as dominant as feared

BY NICHOLAS R ICCARDI AND BOBY CAINA CALVAN ASSOCIATED PRESS NEW YORK | Democrats braced for disaster when state legislatures began redrawing congressional maps, fearing that Republican dominance of statehouses would tilt power away from them for the next decade.

But as the redistricting process reaches its final stages, that anxiety is beginning to ease.

For Democrats, the worstcase scenario of losing well over a dozen seats in the U.S. House appears unlikely to happen. After some aggressive map drawing of their own in states with Democratic legislatures, some in the party predict the typical congressional district will shift from leaning to the right of the national vote to matching it, ending a distortion that gave the GOP a built-in advantage over the past five House elections.

“We have stymied their intent to gerrymander their way to a House majority,” Kelly Ward Burton, head of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, said of the GOP.

The nation’s congressional maps won’t be settled for several more months. Republicans in some large states such as Florida have yet to finalize proposed changes, giving the GOP a lastminute opportunity to seek an advantage.

But the picture could come into greater clarity this week as the Democratic-controlled New York state legislature gets a chance to seize map-drawing power from the state’s bipartisan commission. That would almost certainly blunt the GOP advantage that has been in place since the last redistricting process in 2010.

The jockeying in state capitals has implications not just for Democrats’ uphill effort to maintain a majority in the U.S. House in this year’s midterm elections. It will affect the broader balance of power in Washington and state legislatures for the remainder of the decade.

While Republicans say they have achieved their goals so far, they’re surprised at how much Democrats have tried to expand the number of seats their party can win. The GOP has taken a markedly different approach by aiming to shore up its vulnerable members’ districts, transforming competitive seats into safe ones.

That’s partly because Republicans already expanded the map with aggressive redistricting after the 2010 census, when they controlled more states. Now, as the lines are adjusted to meet 2020 census figures released last year, they are locking in their gains while Democrats are taking risks to fight back.

In a wave election, Democrats could lose even more seats in the maps they have drawn because they spread their voters so thin, analysts say. And, if political coalitions shift in upcoming years, seats Democrats thought were within reach could suddenly disappear.

“Republicans have given themselves pretty good tsunami protection,” said Michael Li of the Brennan Center for Justice, which tracks redistricting. “But for Democrats, if it rains a little, their house is flooded.”

The Democratic push comes as the party has unsuccessfully fought to ban partisan gerrymandering nationwide — their elections bill barring the practice died in the Senate last week during a Republican filibuster, joined by Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona. Mr. Li said Democrats, however, are still gerrymandering in states they control, sometimes aggressively as in Illinois, other times relatively lightly, as in New Mexico and Oregon.

In contrast, experts say Republicans, who control more states, have gerrymandered heavily in places such as Texas, North Carolina and Ohio. But the GOP’s Ohio maps were tossed out by the state Supreme Court this month, and Democrats are hopeful North Carolina’s high court follows suit with the districts there, part of the reason for the party’s increased optimism.

The next and biggest opportunity for Democrats is in New York, which will test how much power Democrats are willing to give up to fight gerrymandering. Saying they wanted to take partisanship out of redistricting, Democrats there in 2014 backed a ballot measure to put the process in the hands of a bipartisan commission. But the state legislature can overrule the commission. In 2014, the legislature was divided between Democratic and Republican control. Now Democrats have a supermajority in both houses.

The New York Legislature already rejected the commission’s first attempt at maps, and Democrats on the commission declared a deadlock on Monday, giving the Legislature the opportunity to draw its own maps.

“The Democratic leadership and those on the far left that run the show in Albany, they’re hellbent to take this process over to derail the commission, and to have the party bosses in Albany draw the maps,” said Nick Langworthy, chairman of the New York GOP. “I think that they looked at a handful of states to give them a shot to hold on to the majority.”

Republicans need only to net five seats in November’s election to gain control of the House. They started the redistricting cycle controlling line-drawing in states representing 187 House seats while Democrats controlled 75

Title: WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 26, 2022, 04:10:16 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/huge-breaking-news-wisconsin-assembly-votes-withdraw-10-electors-joe-biden-2020-election-video/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 26, 2022, 06:17:14 AM

https://will-law.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/2021ElectionReviewStudy.pdf


Insertion by Marc:

"Our bottom line is that, while we found little evidence of “fraud,” we did find that a substantial number of
votes were not cast in accordance with legal requirements. While we could not find evidence that these
votes were “fraudulent” in the sense of being cast by ineligible voters or nonexistent voters—particularly in
numbers large enough to change the winner—the total number of votes cast unlawfully could have affected
the outcome.

It is possible, for example, that the use of drop boxes made the difference. It is also possible that the injection
of private funding for election administration—funding what was disproportionately directed to Democratic
areas—contributed substantially to the Biden margin. The widespread, and potentially improper, use of
“indefinitely confined” status, and the failure to follow up with voters who fail DMV checks, or the failure
to keep voter rolls up to date also could have had significant impacts. Other failures, such as the conduct of
absentee voting at nursing homes in a way that was not authorized by law, may have had a more limited
impact but undercut confidence in the fairness of the election.

We were able to disprove certain suspicions regarding the election—such as a ballot dump in Milwaukee,
manipulation of voting machines, votes exceeding the number of voters, etc. We do not believe the election
was “stolen.” But it was not adequately secure. Reform is required. We can do better.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, or not
Post by: DougMacG on January 26, 2022, 06:39:05 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/its-just-plain-unconstitutional-wisconsin-gop-leaders-again-reject-resolution-to-pull-back-2020-electoral-votes/ar-AATa27G?ocid=BingNewsSearch

Title: Senators vexed by Biden's unwillingness to rework VP's role in electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 27, 2022, 06:27:25 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jan/26/senators-vexed-bidens-unwillingness-rework-vice-pr/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=a0Y47z9%2BoacYOC2r8AYXbQV7Prjb3SC7x1h8zaJF3pxRHayYELDfy3KULfDlbNAs&bt_ts=1643281671957

Title: WT: NY Dem gerrymander
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 28, 2022, 02:38:20 AM

NEW YORK

DCCC chair submits redistricted map of New York heavily favoring Democrats

BY KERRY PICKET THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The chairman of the House Democratic campaign arm has proposed an aggressive gerrymander of the New York State congressional map, not long after he and his party accused Republican state legislatures of partisan redistricting practices.

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Sean Patrick Maloney released an “Interested Parties” memo Wednesday night suggesting to New York Democrats who are redrawing the state’s congressional lines to support a remapping that would eliminate five of the eight Republican seats, resulting in a 23-Democrats-to-3-Republicans gerrymander. The redistricting would amend the “imbalances” in the current map, he said.

“In New York City and the surrounding areas, the current map does a serviceable job ensuring that communities are linked together and that minority representation is strong - as the New York State constitution requires,” Mr. Maloney writes in his memo. “Of course, communities have changed over the past decade and the new map should reflect that.”

He said, “Ultimately, although lines may shift or expand, the districts must preserve the ability of minority communities to elect their chosen representatives to Congress. Groups like the Unity Coalition have suggested maps that adhere to the state constitutional requirement that maps shall not abridge the voting rights of racial or language minorities.”

Cook Political Report’s election analyst Dave Wasserman described Mr. Maloney’s proposal to Albany map drawers as an “aggressive … gerrymander” and that only three New York Republicans — Reps. Elise Stefanik, Chris Jacobs and Andrew Garbarino — could possibly survive such a redistricting.

Mr. Maloney, whose memo goes through each region of the state and how the districts should be remapped, previously criticized Senate Republicans for blocking Senate Democrats voting legislation that purportedly prevents partisan gerrymandering.

“While Republicans clearly think their best way back to power is suppressing and gerrymandering their way to a majority, Democrats are committed to the fight of protecting and expanding voting rights for all Americans,” Mr. Maloney said last June.

In a statement to The Washington Times, DCCC Communications Director Chris Hayden defended Mr. Maloney.

“The Chairman’s priority is to ensure that the state of New York has a map that represents communities of interest so that every voter’s voice is heard in Washington,” Mr. Hayden said. “The state’s public comment process is critical to a healthy democracy and the only venue for public comment, so as a citizen of the state Congressman Maloney chose to participate in that process.”

Former New York Rep. John Faso, a Republican who serves as a board member of Fair Lines New York, a GOP-affiliated group concerned with fair redistricting, described Mr. Maloney’s memo as an “illegal” proposal to New York’s Constitution.

“The New York State Constitution, which was adopted by the voters in 2014, includes anti-partisan gerrymandering provisions, and the memo is filled with inaccuracies as to the State of New York and its communities,” Mr. Faso told The Washington Times.

“It also had some laughable places where they refer to the Town of Hempstead on Long Island as the City of Hempstead. It obviously was written by someone who has no clue about the true communities of interest in the state, but it would just haphazardly break county lines, municipal boundaries to achieve a political result,” he explained, calling the proposal a suppression of New York GOP voters.

Mr. Faso, a former member of the state assembly, suggested Mr. Maloney’s memo was written because it reflects what the state legislative Democrats intend to do. New York Republicans expect Democrats in Albany “to act probably as soon as tomorrow in terms of introducing a bill and trying to pass it on Monday … in the dark of night,” he said.

He added, “It would be rammed through on minimum notice and, literally, no one in the state will know what they planned and how they plan to rig congressional and legislative districts for the next 10 years … so I think the only recourse is likely to be the courts.

Title: WSJ: GA unmoved by Biden
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 28, 2022, 03:03:06 AM

Biden’s Voting Panic Didn’t Move Georgia
Look at the chart. Can you spot his claimed voter suppression?
By The Editorial Board
Follow
Jan. 27, 2022 6:40 pm ET


Joe Biden’s overheated speech in Atlanta on voting rights didn’t persuade the Senate, and apparently it didn’t move Georgians either. A new survey taken in the wake of his visit by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution says that Georgia voters give Mr. Biden a 34% approval rating, down from 51% in May last year.

It’s possible Mr. Biden elevated the debate over elections and voting, which the poll rated as the No. 1 issue facing the state. But since both sides are animated, how do they net out?

Well, 53% of Georgia voters think ballot dropboxes should be either eliminated entirely, or else they agree with keeping such boxes “inside early voting locations” and “available during voting hours.” Only 44% want dropboxes “widely available.”

If Mr. Biden’s demagoguery about “Jim Crow 2.0” didn’t take hold, that’s probably because it flies in the face of what Georgians have experienced. The chart nearby shows the state’s voter turnout by race/ethnicity since 2006, according to Census Bureau data. Can you spot the voter suppression? We see something else.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP
Opinion: Morning Editorial Report
All the day's Opinion headlines.

PREVIEW
SUBSCRIBED
Some analysts point to the gap between black and white voters, which has reversed since 2012. But who was at the top of the ballot that year? Barack Obama. It would hardly be surprising if black voters were enthusiastic to support the first black President, as the chart suggests.

White Non-Hispanic
Black
Asian
Hispanic (any race)
2006
'08
'10
'12
'14
'16
'18
'20
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
%
All the turnout lines have been rising, generally, since 2014. This date is important because Georgia previously had to get “preclearance” from Washington before changing its voting laws. The Supreme Court nixed that requirement in 2013, and a year later Vice President Joe Biden sounded alarms about a “new assault on the most basic of civil rights, the right to vote.”

Then what happened? In 2018, when Stacey Abrams was running for Governor and narrowly lost, black turnout handily beat white turnout, 59.6% to 56.1%. That bucked the typical trend of much lower voting in midterm years. In 2020, a year with huge overall voting, black turnout rose again to 64%, one point shy of Mr. Obama’s re-election year.

These are survey data, and they aren’t perfect. The voting law that Georgia passed last year is too new to be reflected. But Democrats have warned for years about alleged assaults on the franchise. Here’s a 2012 headline: “Despite voter ID law, minority turnout up in Georgia.” The story explains that opponents of the law “labeled it a Jim Crow-era tactic that would suppress the minority vote.”

If people in Georgia don’t believe Mr. Biden’s same song and dance a decade later, maybe it’s because they remember.

Title: POTH: PA law overturned
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 28, 2022, 07:27:21 PM

Pennsylvania Court Says State’s Mail Voting Law Is Unconstitutional
The decision, which could deal a blow to voting access in a critical battleground state, was immediately appealed.




The law permitted no-excuse absentee voting, created a permanent mail-in voter list and reduced the voter registration deadline from 30 days to 15.
The law permitted no-excuse absentee voting, created a permanent mail-in voter list and reduced the voter registration deadline from 30 days to 15.Credit...Robert Nickelsberg for The New York Times
Nick Corasaniti
By Nick Corasaniti
Jan. 28, 2022
Updated 5:18 p.m. ET
A state court in Pennsylvania on Friday struck down the state’s landmark election law as unconstitutional, dealing a temporary blow to voting access in one of the nation’s most critical battleground states.

In a 3-to-2 decision, the state court sided with 14 Republican lawmakers who sued last year, arguing that the law was unconstitutional. Pennsylvania filed an appeal to its Supreme Court on Friday afternoon, triggering an automatic stay that keeps the law in place during the appeal process.

The law, known as Act 77, was passed by the Republican-controlled legislature and signed by Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat, in 2019. It permitted no-excuse absentee voting, created a permanent mail-in voter list, reduced the voter registration deadline from 30 days to 15 and provided for $90 million in election infrastructure upgrades. It also eliminated straight ticket voting.

The majority opinion, written by Judge Mary Hannah Leavitt, a Republican, said that voting “requires the physical presence of the elector” and ruled that the legislature could not make changes to voting laws without amending the state Constitution.

Democrats in Pennsylvania said they were not surprised that the Commonwealth Court, which they said leans conservative, ruled against the law. They expressed confidence that the appeal to the state Supreme Court, which has sided with the state on voting issues both during and following the 2020 election, would be successful.

In a statement, Josh Shapiro, the Democratic Pennsylvania attorney general who is also running for governor, criticized the state court’s decision as “faulty”

Dig deeper into the moment.
Special offer: Subscribe for $1 a week.
“This opinion is based on twisted logic and faulty reasoning, and is wrong on the law,” Mr. Shapiro said in a statement.

Republicans in the state celebrated the decision, claiming that the law had been warped by Democratic state leaders in the run-up to the 2020 election.

“After what occurred in the 2020 and 2021 elections, I have no confidence in the no-excuse mail in ballot provisions,” said Jake Corman, the top Republican in the State Senate. “There is no doubt that we need a stronger election law than the one we have in place today.”

Editors’ Picks

When It’s Winter in Miami, It’s Time for Churros and Hot Chocolate

Toni Morrison’s Only Short Story Addresses Race by Avoiding Race

After 600 Years, Swiss City at Last Has a Woman on Night Watch
The bipartisan law was praised by both sides when it was passed, but it became a target of conservatives during the 2020 election, as former President Donald J. Trump unspooled falsehoods and lies about fraud involving mail-in voting. Eleven of the 14 lawmakers who sued to kill the law voted for it in 2019.

Sign Up for On Politics  A guide to the political news cycle, cutting through the spin and delivering clarity from the chaos. Get it sent to your inbox.
Following the 2020 election, Representative Mike Kelly, a Republican from northwestern Pennsylvania, filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn the results in the federal races and claimed that Act 77 was unconstitutional.

But his effort was sternly rebuffed by the state’s Supreme Court, which ruled that the law had been in place for well over a year with no legal challenge until Mr. Trump lost Pennsylvania.

“Unsatisfied with the results of that wager, they would now flip over the table, scattering to the shadows the votes of millions of Pennsylvanians,” Justice David Wecht wrote following the election. “It is not our role to lend legitimacy to such transparent and untimely efforts to subvert the will of Pennsylvania voters. Courts should not decide elections when the will of the voters is clear.”

An appeal by Mr. Kelly to the United States Supreme Court was also denied.

Yet the Republican attempts to overturn the 2020 election based on challenges to Act 77 continued. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, a Republican, challenged the slate of electors from Pennsylvania on Jan. 6, 2021, claiming that the state’s lawmakers had passed Act 77 “irregardless of what the Pennsylvania Constitution said.”

Soon after, rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol. Later that night, Pennsylvania’s electors were seated.

“This is just a continuation of attacking and undermining our electoral process,” said State Senator Jay Costa, the Democratic minority leader.

Title: Judge suppresses GA voting machine report
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 29, 2022, 08:32:38 AM

https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-wont-budge-as-voting-machine-report-fuels-conspiracies?fbclid=IwAR0DFEOF7BYj1o4kDeD1KK04V6larTimXBJ2_EhMl5xW2MvT1bRuHeZQP4A

Title: Felon vote?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 02, 2022, 05:29:19 PM

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/02/felon-voting-rights-states-00004372?fbclid=IwAR37710fgJL0HAySoiayQpaWZLHdziTQwNsIRcz4iTfhYeBxiPsVJQSBgic

Title: NY
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 03, 2022, 03:34:01 AM

NEW YORK

Voting integrity group sues to stop NYC noncitizen voting

Argue move will dilute Black voters’ power

BY STEPHEN DINAN THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A group dedicated to voting integrity efforts sued Wednesday to block New York City’s new law allowing noncitizens to vote, saying it will illegally dilute Black residents’ political power.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation sued on behalf of four Black residents, saying the city council adopted the noncitizen voting law despite warnings that Black voters could be hurt.

PILF, run by former Justice Department voting rights specialist J. Christian Adams, pointed to several instances during debate over the legislation where backers explicitly said the measure was about racial voting power.

One council member griped about “white men’s power,” while another, in Spanish, said the point of the legislation was to increase the political power of Asians and Hispanics, PILF said.

“The 15th Amendment prohibits any race-based voting restrictions. Legislators made statements that this was about race.This law violates the Constitution,” Mr. Adams said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.

The complaint was filed in state court in Staten Island.

Mr. Adams had teased the lawsuit in a Washington Times story last month.

The Times has reached out to New York’s Law Department for comment on the new complaint.

New York’s new law allows noncitizens who have lawful permanent presence in the U.S., or who have been approved for work permits, to cast ballots in elections on city matters. That would include immigrants who are in the country illegally and under temporary protections such as the DACA program, Temporary Protected Status or even applications for victim’s visas or asylum.

The city figures perhaps 800,000 residents could be eligible.

Noncitizens are barred by federal law from participating in federal elections.

In debating the bill last year Council Member Laurie Cumbo warned colleagues they needed to learn more about its effects on Black residents.

“This particular legislation is going to shift the power dynamics in New York City in a major way, and we do not have the numbers or the information to know how that is going to impact African American communities,” she said.

She complained, in particular, that many more Latino voters than Black voters backed President Trump in elections.

Her requests to delay the bill for more study were blocked, PILF says.

According to the lawsuit, voting in New York is already deeply polarized along racial lines, and adding hundreds of thousands of new foreign citizens to the pool — most of them Asian or Hispanic — will give Black voters less of a say.


The Public Interest Legal Foundation sued on behalf of four Black residents of New York City on Wednesday arguing the city council adopted the noncitizen voting law despite warnings that Black voters could be hurt. ASSOCIATED PRES

Title: Re: Felon vote?
Post by: DougMacG on February 03, 2022, 06:18:49 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 02, 2022, 05:29:19 PM

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/02/felon-voting-rights-states-00004372?fbclid=IwAR37710fgJL0HAySoiayQpaWZLHdziTQwNsIRcz4iTfhYeBxiPsVJQSBgic

We had better start competing for the felon vote.  Wouldn't they be better off in a robust entreprenurial economy than under statism?

Title: Re: Felon vote?
Post by: G M on February 03, 2022, 06:24:05 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on February 03, 2022, 06:18:49 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 02, 2022, 05:29:19 PM

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/02/felon-voting-rights-states-00004372?fbclid=IwAR37710fgJL0HAySoiayQpaWZLHdziTQwNsIRcz4iTfhYeBxiPsVJQSBgic

We had better start competing for the felon vote.  Wouldn't they be better off in a robust entreprenurial economy than under statism?

They do fine under the left’s anarco-tyranny. See California or Minnesota as examples.

Title: Re: Felon vote?
Post by: DougMacG on February 03, 2022, 12:18:38 PM

Quote from: G M on February 03, 2022, 06:24:05 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on February 03, 2022, 06:18:49 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 02, 2022, 05:29:19 PM

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/02/felon-voting-rights-states-00004372?fbclid=IwAR37710fgJL0HAySoiayQpaWZLHdziTQwNsIRcz4iTfhYeBxiPsVJQSBgic

We had better start competing for the felon vote.  Wouldn't they be better off in a robust entrepreneurial economy than under statism?

They do fine under the left’s anarco-tyranny. See California or Minnesota as examples.

G M sarcasm alert - but to be clear, no they don't.  Best thing someone not trusted by big business and big government can do for themselves is start a needed business,  cf. pillow guy. 

Best thing government can do for people discriminated against for any reason is to remove the barriers to starting a business for people who don't have teams of lawyers, lobbyists, accountants and compliance people.  Where is that message to this new voting bloc, and to everyone else?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 03, 2022, 01:54:26 PM

"Best thing someone not trusted by big business and big government can do for themselves is start a needed business,  cf. pillow guy. "

sans the 25 x per nightly for years same old face voice and marketing pitch

 :roll:

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, PA video
Post by: DougMacG on February 07, 2022, 06:17:39 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/07/exclusive-whistleblower-videos-show-systemic-issues-with-pennsylvania-elections/

Title: PA: Videos show systemic issues with 2020 elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 07, 2022, 07:00:14 PM

Exclusive: Whistleblower Videos Show Systemic Issues With Pennsylvania Elections
BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND
FEBRUARY 07, 2022
9 MIN READ
Delaware County, Penn. election workers
IMAGE CREDITTHE FEDERALIST / YOUTUBE
These videos indicate there were widespread violations of the election code in a large Pennsylvania county, followed by coverups.


According to a new whistleblower video obtained by The Federalist, 80 percent of Delaware County, Pennsylvania precincts lacked a valid chain of custody for the provisional ballots cast in the November 2020 election.

This video and two others just obtained by The Federalist provide further evidence that, while officials continue to deny that irregularities occurred during the last presidential election, there were widespread violations of the election code in the large Pennsylvania county, followed by efforts to cover up those problems.


Regina Miller, a contract worker assisting Delaware County officials, secretly filmed the videos as she helped election employees gather material in response to a “Right to Know Request” that sought documentation to confirm the election results certified by the county.

In one of the several most-recent videos The Federalist obtained from someone familiar with the situation, two employees are speaking. The first woman states, “This is what a provisional bag looks like.” As she continues to explain the process for safeguarding provisional ballots following the close of polls, she notes, “And what we currently do not have is a valid chain of custody for the provisional ballots.”

The shocked whistleblower repeats the claim as a question: “So are you saying we never had a chain of custody?” The other woman replies that only “20 percent of precincts have locked the blue bag in the past,” a reference to the bag in which provisional ballots are to be stored and safeguarded.

“Personally, I think that this is happening in every county in Pennsylvania,” the Delaware County election official notes. “We’re working on this antiquated law,” she explains, “on top of the new law,” an apparent reference to changes instituted shortly before the 2020 election.





A second video shared with The Federalist on Friday captures a discussion between Delaware County poll worker coordinator Christina Iacono and Tom Gallagher, an attorney for Delaware County, about “V drives.” Those are removable drives that contain the election results obtained from the county’s individual voting machines.

This video begins with the whistleblower saying she was concerned with the way the V drives were returned to the county. Gallagher then detailed what happened, with the hidden camera capturing him saying the county employee “dumped them in a bag, put them in a box,” and “puts it on the top of the hood of her car.”

The election worker then started rattling off problems, according to Gallagher. “She goes . . . we don’t have anything for Chester 11,” and another precinct “is missing.” Gallagher mimics what the employee, identified in the video merely as Loureen, said as she passed the box of V drives and other election material to the county attorney.

“Do you have a piece of paper with that on it?” Gallagher explains he asked her. She didn’t, Gallagher continued, noting she said, “No, that’s why I’m telling it to you.” She also didn’t have an inventory or anything showing what V drive she was providing and what was missing. Gallagher added that he left her a message but didn’t expect any response.




Gallagher’s discussion of the missing V drive provides further context to The Federalist’s earlier reporting on another whistleblower video that captured Delaware County election officials plotting to recreate missing election data from the November 2020 contest.

According to a source familiar with the video, the clip captured James Savage, who served as the voting machine warehouse supervisor during the November 2020 election, discussing a Right to Know Request with another election worker. That request was served on Delaware County after the presidential election and sought documentation confirming the vote totals.

In the video, Savage inquired of another individual off-camera about “recreating data.” The second election official offers his suggested approach, with them recreating results for “these jokers,” and “then create another set for the next set of jokers” — an apparent reference to the citizens seeking the confirmation of the election results under the Right-to-Know request — “but we cut it up and then we create a permanent record,” he explains.

“Here you go, here you go,” the election official says, apparently explaining how they would then provide the recreated data to individuals who filed the Right To Know requests. The individual, who was blocked from view on the camera, then continues, “We scan those cut, copied sheets in.”

Savage continues, “The first part has a lot of work, but it might save us work in the long run, if it’s gonna be a drip, drip, drip.” The duo then discuss the process more, with Savage asking about whether they would go to every machine and put in a clean V drive. The off-camera election worker appears to agree with that approach.

A third just-obtained video now provides evidence suggesting Delaware County officials later executed that plan. That video begins with the whistleblower talking about missing V drives and the fact that “some had to be recreated.”

A man off-camera, identified for The Federalist by a person familiar with the videos as Savage, then notes that “John” “came here with a V drive.” The off-camera man then continues, “I don’t know what the process was ‘cause I wasn’t [there] … I put one of my staff with him to get the machine out and open it up for em’ and then he did everything else.”

“He was able to pull the data from the scanner onto to that V-drive,” the individual identified as Savage explained. The whistleblower then interjected to ask about the “machine tapes” and whether they needed to reprint those to go with the V drives, but no one seemed to know.

However, with the discussion moving on to the missing “machine tapes,” the video unwittingly exposes yet another problem in Delaware County: missing machine tapes that should have existed to verify the voting “return sheets” given the county after the November 2020 election.

According to sources familiar with the video, Delaware County election official James Ziegelhoffer is seen on tape explaining that “most people produced” the tape, referring to a paper printout from the voting machines. Some didn’t, however, Ziegelhoffer added, causing the whistleblower to ask, “What do you do with those return sheets?” a reference to the document individual precincts remitted to the county with a tally of the November 2020 poll results.

Ziegelhoffer explained that “the people that never came” with the tapes, “that was reported to the DA.” After that, Ziegelhoffer seemed to say, he didn’t know what happened.

The Federalist asked Delaware County District Attorney Jack Stollsteimer whether his office launched an investigation into those referrals and if so, the results of the investigation, but received no response.

Private citizens of Delaware County also seemed to have no luck getting satisfactory answers from government officials, leading several residents to file a sprawling lawsuit in mid-November 2021 against former Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar, Delaware County, the Delaware County Board of Elections, and more than a dozen individual election officials.

Given the pending litigation, Adrienne Marofsky, the public relations director for Delaware County, previously told The Federalist the county is not responding to press questions. However, Marofsky then added that “the County is confident that the elections in 2020 and 2021 were conducted fairly and fully complied with state and federal laws.”

The county’s claim conflicts with on-camera statements made by Delaware County, Pennsylvania’s Christina Perrone, who told fellow election-related workers during a Zoom meeting after the November 2020 election that this time—referring to the upcoming elections—“we’re going to actually follow the law fully.”

At least one member of the Delaware County Council is likewise continuing to deny problems with the November 2020 election that the videos obtained by The Federalist seem to establish.

Notwithstanding the whistleblower videos capturing election workers apparently discussing the missing V drives, conversing on how to recreate the data, and then explaining that new V drives were created, at a January 19, 2022, county council meeting, one member of the council, identified on the tape as Christine Reuther, declared, “There were no missing drives. It’s been debunked. It’s been before the board of elections. It’s been addressed in court. There’s been testimony about it. There were no missing drives.”

Reuther then explained it was such misinformation being spread in the comments on Facebook that led her to believe that the county should remove the ability for public comment on its Facebook posts.

“We have a circumstance where a lot of research has shown that the way misinformation spreads, or one of the ways that misinformation spreads through social media is the hijacking of trusted websites,” Reuther said. “I can tell you that the county’s comments on its Facebook page were hijacked,” the council member continued, noting that one area in which “misinformation was spread were about elections.” She then stated unequivocally, “There were no missing drives.”


The Federalist asked Reuther whether her position was “that the drives were never missing or that they were ‘not missing’ because they were recreated.” Alternatively, did Reuther believe “those whistleblower videos are altered”? The Federalist inquired. Reuther did not respond to these questions.

While these latest videos provide more evidence of significant issues with the November 2020 election in Delaware County, the totality of the whistleblower tapes has two broader implications: First, the problems captured on video suggest systemic issues with American elections. Second, without whistleblowers filming the behind-the-scenes chaos, the public would remain blissfully ignorant of the apparent banana republic-like state of our electoral process.

Even with the videos, public officials continue to brand the evidence “misinformation.” Americans need to wake up—and soon.


Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 08, 2022, 06:57:06 AM

"Whistleblower Videos Show Systemic Issues With Pennsylvania Elections"

the dirty shysters were in on it

all planned out

they got away with it.......

Title: A liberal piece on AL gerrymander SCOTUS decision
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 10, 2022, 12:04:53 AM

The Supreme Court Has Crossed the Rubicon
Feb. 9, 2022


Credit...Joshua Lott/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images


1587
Linda Greenhouse
By Linda Greenhouse

Ms. Greenhouse, the winner of a 1998 Pulitzer Prize, reported on the Supreme Court for The Times from 1978 to 2008 and was a contributing Opinion writer from 2009 through 2021.

You know the Rubicon has been crossed when the Supreme Court issues a conservative voting rights order so at odds with settled precedent and without any sense of the moment that Chief Justice John Roberts feels constrained to dissent.

This is the same John Roberts who in 1982, as a young lawyer in the administration of President Ronald Reagan, fought a crucial amendment to the Voting Rights Act of 1965; whose majority opinion in 2013 gutted one-half of the Voting Rights Act and who joined an ahistoric opinion last summer that took aim at the other half; and who famously complained in dissent from a 2006 decision in favor of Latino voters in South Texas that “it is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

Yes, that Chief Justice Roberts. What the 5-to-4 majority did was that far out of line.

The unsigned order that drew the chief justice’s dissent Monday night blocked the decision by a special three-judge Federal District Court ordering the Alabama Legislature to draw a second congressional district in which Black residents constitute a majority. Alabama’s population is 27 percent Black. The state has seven congressional districts. The lower court held that by packing some Black voters into one district and spreading others out over three other districts, the state diluted the Black vote in violation of the Voting Rights Act.

The Supreme Court will hear Alabama’s appeal of the district court order in its next term, so the stay it granted will mean that the 2022 elections will take place with district lines that the lower court unanimously, with two of the three judges appointed by President Donald Trump, found to be illegal.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

Chief Justice Roberts objected that the ordinary standards under which the Supreme Court grants a stay of a lower court opinion had not been met. “The district court properly applied existing law in an extensive opinion with no apparent errors for our correction,” he wrote. Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, also dissented in a more extensive opinion that accused the majority of using the court’s emergency “shadow docket” not only to intervene improperly on behalf of the state but also to change voting rights law in the process.

This is no mere squabble over procedure. What happened Monday night was a raw power play by a runaway majority that seems to recognize no stopping point. It bears emphasizing that the majority’s agenda of cutting back on the scope of the Voting Rights Act is Chief Justice Roberts’s agenda too. He made that abundantly clear in the past and suggested it in a kind of code on Monday with his bland observation that the court’s Voting Rights Act precedents “have engendered considerable disagreement and uncertainty regarding the nature and contours of a vote dilution claim.” But in his view, that was an argument to be conducted in the next Supreme Court term while permitting the district court’s decision to take effect now.

Dig deeper into the moment.
Special offer: Subscribe for $1 a week.
While the majority as a whole said nothing, Justice Brett Kavanaugh took it upon himself to offer a kind of defense. Only Justice Samuel Alito joined him. Perhaps the others — Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — chose not to sign onto his rude reference to Justice Kagan’s “catchy but worn-out rhetoric about the ‘shadow docket.’ ” Or perhaps his “To reiterate: The court’s stay order is not a decision on the merits” rang a little hollow when, as Justice Kagan pointed out, “the district court here did everything right under the law existing today” and “staying its decision forces Black Alabamians to suffer what under that law is clear vote dilution.”

In other words, when it comes to the 2022 elections, for Black voters in Alabama the Supreme Court’s procedural intervention is the equivalent of a ruling on the merits.

Or maybe the others couldn’t indulge in the hypocrisy of Justice Kavanaugh’s description of the standards for granting a stay. The party asking for a stay, he wrote, “ordinarily must show (i) a reasonable probability that this court would eventually grant review and a fair prospect that the court would reverse, and (ii) that the applicant would likely suffer irreparable harm absent the stay.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

But wait a minute. Weren’t those conditions clearly met back in September when abortion providers in Texas came to the court seeking a stay of the Texas vigilante law, S.B. 8, which was about to go into effect? That law, outlawing abortion after six weeks of pregnancy and authorizing anyone anywhere in the country to sue a Texas abortion provider for damages, was flagrantly unconstitutional, and the law was about to destroy the state’s abortion infrastructure. But did Justice Kavanaugh or any of the others in Monday’s majority vote to grant the requested stay? They did not. Chief Justice Roberts did.

It’s impossible not to conclude that what we see at work is not some neutral principle guiding the Supreme Court’s intervention but simply whether a majority likes or doesn’t like what a lower court has done. In his opinion, Justice Kavanaugh sought to avoid that conclusion by arguing that when it comes to election cases, the Supreme Court will more readily grant a stay to counteract “late judicial tinkering with election laws.” But there was no late “tinkering” here. The legislature approved the disputed plan in November, after six days of consideration, and the governor signed it. The district court conducted a seven-day trial in early January and on Jan. 24 issued its 225-page opinion. The election is months away — plenty of time for the legislature to comply with the decision.

Disturbing as this development is, it is even more alarming in context. Last July, in a case from Arizona, the court took a very narrow view of the Voting Rights Act as a weapon against vote denial measures, policies that have a discriminatory effect on nonwhite voters’ access to the polls. That case, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, was brought under the act’s Section 2, which prohibits voting procedures that give members of racial minorities “less opportunity than other members of the electorate to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.” Justice Alito’s opinion for a 6-to-3 majority set a high bar for showing that any disputed measure is more than just an ordinary burden that comes with turning out to vote.

It was an unusual case, in that Section 2 has much more typically been used as it was in Alabama, to challenge district lines as causing vote dilution. Obviously, at the heart of any Section 2 case is the question of how to evaluate the role of race. In its request for a stay, Alabama characterized the district court of having improperly “prioritized” race, as opposed to other districting factors, in ordering a second majority Black district. In response, the American Civil Liberties Union and the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, representing the Alabama plaintiffs, called this a mischaracterization of what the district court had actually done when it took account of the compactness and cohesion of the Black community and the history of white Alabama voters refusing to support Black candidates.

Stripped to its core, Alabama is essentially arguing that a law enacted to protect the interests of Black citizens bars courts from considering race in evaluating a redistricting plan. Justice Kagan’s dissenting opinion contained a warning that granting the stay amounted to a tacit acceptance of that startling proposition. She said the stay reflected “a hastily made and wholly unexplained prejudgment” that the court was “ready to change the law.”

The battle over what Section 2 means has been building for years, largely under the radar, and now it is front and center. The current Supreme Court term is all about abortion and guns. The next one  will be all about race. Along with the Alabama case, Merrill v. Milligan, the Harvard and University of North Carolina admissions cases are also on the docket — to be heard by a Supreme Court that, presumably, for the first time in history, will have two Black justices, and all in the shadow of the midterm elections. The fire next time.

Linda Greenhouse, the winner of a 1998 Pulitzer Prize, reported on the Supreme Court for The Times from 1978 to 2008. She is the author of “Justice on the Brink: The Death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Rise of Amy Coney Barrett, and Twelve Months That Transformed the Supreme Court.”

Title: Is there anything to this NPR piece?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 10, 2022, 12:24:47 AM

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/09/1076529761/right-wing-conspiracies-have-a-new-target-a-tool-that-fights-actual-voter-fraud?fbclid=IwAR1HQgECeXJ89NgmnmObp4wYUgN571FH4v3e1tAbCm2eR4EJqma8hPQrsYw

Right-wing conspiracies have a new target: a tool that fights actual voter fraud
February 9, 20225:00 AM ET
Miles Parks
MILES PARKS

Twitter

A Trump supporter holds up a "no voter fraud" sign in Arizona in 2020. The accelerating far-right disinformation campaign about a national voter-verification system is taking its toll.
Courtney Pedroza/Getty Images
If Republicans over the past few years have made one thing clear, it's that they really care about voter fraud.

Sometimes they call it "election irregularities" or "shenanigans," but the issue has become a calling card for a party whose voters by and large falsely think elections in the U.S. are tainted.

Which is what makes a currently blossoming election conspiracy so strange: The far right is now running a disinformation campaign against one of the best tools that states have to detect and prevent voter fraud.

And experts worry voting policy is already starting to suffer as a result.

A data-sharing revolution
The tool is a shared database called the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC for short. It allows states to securely share voter registration data across state lines and with a number of other government agencies, like the Social Security Administration and departments of motor vehicles.

That data-sharing allows participating states to expand ballot access by giving officials information that helps them reach out to eligible voters who have moved into the jurisdiction but have not yet registered to vote. But it also increases election security by notifying those same officials when a registered voter moves away or dies, allowing states to maintain more accurate voter rolls.

Article continues after sponsor message

"When you move away from a state, you don't call your old state and say, 'Please take me off the voter lists,' " said David Becker, an elections expert and former Justice Department attorney who led the development of ERIC while working at the Pew Charitable Trusts. "So to get really strong data that someone moved to another state — got a driver's license there or maybe registered to vote — that's really powerful information that allows states to keep their data up to date."

The Toll Of Conspiracy Theories: A Voting Security Expert Lives In Hiding
ELECTIONS
The Toll Of Conspiracy Theories: A Voting Security Expert Lives In Hiding
The decade-old program now includes more than 30 states spanning the political spectrum, from Republican-led places like Alabama and South Carolina to more liberal states like Connecticut and Oregon. And it's helped states remove more than 500,000 dead people from voter rolls since its founding, according to a tracker on the partnership website.

But that bipartisan unity is being tested, as some pockets of conservative media have ignited a pressure campaign against ERIC.

'Cutting their nose to spite their face'
On Jan. 20, the far-right blog The Gateway Pundit published the first of a number of articles about the program, falsely implying it is part of a left-wing election conspiracy.

Seven days later, Louisiana withdrew its membership, becoming the first state since ERIC's founding to do so.

Louisiana Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin announced the move quietly in a press release, citing "concerns raised by citizens, government watchdog organizations and media reports."

His office declined an interview request from NPR, but a member of Ardoin's staff said the secretary is still in touch with ERIC staff "to better understand the mechanics of ERIC" despite having "serious reservations."

Other Republican election officials told NPR the far-right misinformation campaign is reverberating in their states, too.

"We have had a number of emails from some very ill-informed, uninformed or uneducated people," said Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill, a Republican.

Merrill is a supporter of former President Donald Trump, but also of ERIC. He's not running for reelection this fall, however, and at least one Republican candidate to replace Merrill has announced he would withdraw the state from ERIC should he be elected.

That far-right pushback has been somewhat frustrating to Merrill, who noted the system provides the only way states have to accurately check whether someone has illegally cast a ballot in the same election in two states.

"It helps identify duplicate registrations," Merrill said. "It helps identify dual participation in elections. That's a concern [and] there's no other way that any state in the union can do that independently of ERIC."

Here's where election-denying candidates are running to control voting
ELECTIONS
Here's where election-denying candidates are running to control voting
So why is this system being targeted then?

Becker, who now runs the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, says it's because election deniers don't actually want voting to be more secure or efficient. It's the same reason, he says, they often oppose ballot drop boxes even though they are considered a more secure way to return mail ballots than using the Postal Service.

"They don't care about actual integrity," Becker said. "They only care that their side wins. That is the most anti-democratic idea that I can imagine."

In a Twitter thread posted shortly after Louisiana's decision, Becker noted that since the state joined ERIC in 2014, the program has identified more than 16,000 dead people on Louisiana's voting lists and more than 54,000 people who have moved out of the state. But by choosing to leave, the state will no longer have access to that data.

"If a state leaves ERIC, what they're doing is cutting their nose to spite their face," Becker said. "They're handcuffing their ability to keep their lists accurate."

Title: Re: Is there anything to this NPR piece?
Post by: G M on February 10, 2022, 07:14:42 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/cleaning-voter-rolls-soros-founded-funded-eric-now-used-31-states/

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 10, 2022, 12:24:47 AM

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/09/1076529761/right-wing-conspiracies-have-a-new-target-a-tool-that-fights-actual-voter-fraud?fbclid=IwAR1HQgECeXJ89NgmnmObp4wYUgN571FH4v3e1tAbCm2eR4EJqma8hPQrsYw

Right-wing conspiracies have a new target: a tool that fights actual voter fraud
February 9, 20225:00 AM ET
Miles Parks
MILES PARKS

Twitter

A Trump supporter holds up a "no voter fraud" sign in Arizona in 2020. The accelerating far-right disinformation campaign about a national voter-verification system is taking its toll.
Courtney Pedroza/Getty Images
If Republicans over the past few years have made one thing clear, it's that they really care about voter fraud.

Sometimes they call it "election irregularities" or "shenanigans," but the issue has become a calling card for a party whose voters by and large falsely think elections in the U.S. are tainted.

Which is what makes a currently blossoming election conspiracy so strange: The far right is now running a disinformation campaign against one of the best tools that states have to detect and prevent voter fraud.

And experts worry voting policy is already starting to suffer as a result.

A data-sharing revolution
The tool is a shared database called the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC for short. It allows states to securely share voter registration data across state lines and with a number of other government agencies, like the Social Security Administration and departments of motor vehicles.

That data-sharing allows participating states to expand ballot access by giving officials information that helps them reach out to eligible voters who have moved into the jurisdiction but have not yet registered to vote. But it also increases election security by notifying those same officials when a registered voter moves away or dies, allowing states to maintain more accurate voter rolls.

Article continues after sponsor message

"When you move away from a state, you don't call your old state and say, 'Please take me off the voter lists,' " said David Becker, an elections expert and former Justice Department attorney who led the development of ERIC while working at the Pew Charitable Trusts. "So to get really strong data that someone moved to another state — got a driver's license there or maybe registered to vote — that's really powerful information that allows states to keep their data up to date."

The Toll Of Conspiracy Theories: A Voting Security Expert Lives In Hiding
ELECTIONS
The Toll Of Conspiracy Theories: A Voting Security Expert Lives In Hiding
The decade-old program now includes more than 30 states spanning the political spectrum, from Republican-led places like Alabama and South Carolina to more liberal states like Connecticut and Oregon. And it's helped states remove more than 500,000 dead people from voter rolls since its founding, according to a tracker on the partnership website.

But that bipartisan unity is being tested, as some pockets of conservative media have ignited a pressure campaign against ERIC.

'Cutting their nose to spite their face'
On Jan. 20, the far-right blog The Gateway Pundit published the first of a number of articles about the program, falsely implying it is part of a left-wing election conspiracy.

Seven days later, Louisiana withdrew its membership, becoming the first state since ERIC's founding to do so.

Louisiana Secretary of State Kyle Ardoin announced the move quietly in a press release, citing "concerns raised by citizens, government watchdog organizations and media reports."

His office declined an interview request from NPR, but a member of Ardoin's staff said the secretary is still in touch with ERIC staff "to better understand the mechanics of ERIC" despite having "serious reservations."

Other Republican election officials told NPR the far-right misinformation campaign is reverberating in their states, too.

"We have had a number of emails from some very ill-informed, uninformed or uneducated people," said Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill, a Republican.

Merrill is a supporter of former President Donald Trump, but also of ERIC. He's not running for reelection this fall, however, and at least one Republican candidate to replace Merrill has announced he would withdraw the state from ERIC should he be elected.

That far-right pushback has been somewhat frustrating to Merrill, who noted the system provides the only way states have to accurately check whether someone has illegally cast a ballot in the same election in two states.

"It helps identify duplicate registrations," Merrill said. "It helps identify dual participation in elections. That's a concern [and] there's no other way that any state in the union can do that independently of ERIC."

Here's where election-denying candidates are running to control voting
ELECTIONS
Here's where election-denying candidates are running to control voting
So why is this system being targeted then?

Becker, who now runs the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation & Research, says it's because election deniers don't actually want voting to be more secure or efficient. It's the same reason, he says, they often oppose ballot drop boxes even though they are considered a more secure way to return mail ballots than using the Postal Service.

"They don't care about actual integrity," Becker said. "They only care that their side wins. That is the most anti-democratic idea that I can imagine."

In a Twitter thread posted shortly after Louisiana's decision, Becker noted that since the state joined ERIC in 2014, the program has identified more than 16,000 dead people on Louisiana's voting lists and more than 54,000 people who have moved out of the state. But by choosing to leave, the state will no longer have access to that data.

"If a state leaves ERIC, what they're doing is cutting their nose to spite their face," Becker said. "They're handcuffing their ability to keep their lists accurate."

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 10, 2022, 08:14:18 AM

Very helpful!

Title: ET: Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 13, 2022, 05:30:24 AM

Biden Administration Urges Court Not to Allow Release of ‘Secret Report’ on Dominion Voting Machines
By Zachary Stieber February 12, 2022 Updated: February 12, 2022biggersmaller Print
Top officials at a U.S. federal cybersecurity agency are urging a judge not to authorize at this time the release of a report that analyzes Dominion Voting Systems equipment in Georgia, arguing doing so could assist hackers trying to “undermine election security.”

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was recently provided an unredacted copy of the report, which was prepared by J. Alex Halderman, director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society.

The report discusses “potential vulnerabilities in Dominion ImageCast X ballot marking devices,” or electronic voting devices, according to the government.

While CISA supports public disclosure of any vulnerabilities and associated mitigation measures with election equipment, allowing the release of the report at this point “increases the risk that malicious actors may be able to exploit any vulnerabilities and threaten election security,” government lawyers said in a Feb. 10 filing in the case.

The case was brought in 2017 by good-government groups and voters who say the lack of paper ballots undermines the voting process.

U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg, an Obama nominee overseeing the case, was urged by CISA to reject attempts to release a redacted version of Halderman’s report for now.

CISA officials want to review the information in the report and help Dominion resolve the vulnerabilities identified before the report is released. They said they weren’t able to provide a date by which they’ll be finished.

Totenberg must weigh the request against the wishes of Georgia Secretary State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican and one of the defendants, who called in late January for the release to happen immediately.

John Poulos, Dominion’s CEO and president, said in a statement released by Raffensperger’s office that Halderman’s review lacked “a holistic approach,” adding that Dominion “supports all efforts to bring real facts and evidence forward to defend the integrity of our machines and the credibility of Georgia’s elections.”

Plaintiffs, including the Coalition for Good Governance, also support the release of the report, David Cross, one of their lawyers, confirmed to The Epoch Times.

The plaintiffs said in a filing before a copy was sent to CISA that the agency should get a copy and begin its evaluation process, but that the evaluation “should not unreasonably delay the public disclosure of the report, which must be promptly disclosed to Georgia state and county election officials, and filed on the public docket, so that public officials can secure the upcoming May primary elections.”

They asked Totenberg to order them to file a redacted version of the report on the docket, which would make it accessible to the public, no later than March 4.

Title: POTP: Fraud proof ballots?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 18, 2022, 11:33:19 AM

It is POTP so predictable snark and smears are part of the story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/18/authentix-fraud-proof-ballots-finchem-arizona/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F361539a%2F620fd1e19d2fda34e7996f0c%2F61cdf026ae7e8a4ac205b2b3%2F14%2F72%2F620fd1e19d2fda34e7996f0c

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on February 19, 2022, 08:53:23 AM

From a political cartoon:

Cincinnati Bengals just received a late, mail-in touchdown and are now Super Bowl champions!

Sorry L.A. Rams.  Better luck next time!

Title: AZ 2020, 200k mis-matched signatures
Post by: DougMacG on February 28, 2022, 06:23:54 AM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/maricopa-countys-200k-mail-ballots-mismatched-signatures-not-cured-2020

Title: Zuck bucks in WI in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 02, 2022, 07:02:47 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/1/election-report-finds-facebook-moguls-zuck-bucks-b/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=lIMpr9X9grZr92%2FII8EM6BRx6kiTiUoiQMudkFsPHlW0InGkxXLXYFr5XavHtMMe&bt_ts=1646228121651

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 02, 2022, 09:26:37 AM

Zucker Bezos
Schmidt
the google boys
cook and the msft people gates et al

are American oligarchs

we should take their yachts and freeze their personal accounts

Title: WI 2020 Nursing home vote cheating
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 03, 2022, 01:40:12 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/2/wisconsin-probe-finds-2020-election-riddled-nursin/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=zCdF5vifK6lJBDV51E7hNnZ6TvVj6ygdmkMXW36aUQ6lVleOcOideFG50yOrkPBt&bt_ts=1646263403811

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 03, 2022, 05:16:49 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/2/wisconsin-probe-finds-2020-election-riddled-nursin/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=zCdF5vifK6lJBDV51E7hNnZ6TvVj6ygdmkMXW36aUQ6lVleOcOideFG50yOrkPBt&bt_ts=1646263403811

as a voter who used to go to 5 nursing homes in NJ
I can tell you now the aids there are not Republicans

I would have been more shocked if the Democrooks were NOT doing this.
They have their people who work inside the home just print out lists of residents
and make sure they pick up any that did not vote
I am not sure how they might necessarily know which ones did not vote
family members could be bringing in mail in ballots for some
perhaps they pick the residents who get no or few visitors

Title: WI special counsel alleges massive misconduct
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2022, 02:20:38 PM

ET
Wisconsin Special Counsel Alleges Massive Misconduct in 2020 Election
By Steven Kovac March 4, 2022 Updated: March 6, 2022biggersmaller Print
Special Counsel Michael Gableman says in a 136-page interim report that he has uncovered numerous instances of alleged lawbreaking in Wisconsin in the 2020 election.

The former justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court was hired last summer by the Republican Speaker of the State Assembly, Robin Vos, to investigate suspected election fraud during the 2020 presidential election.

In the report released March 1, Gableman wrote that his investigation uncovered instances of numerous mentally incompetent nursing home residents, non-citizens, and ineligible felons casting votes.

He cited the use by municipal and county clerks of unstaffed absentee ballot drop-boxes, in violation of state law.

Laws were also allegedly violated when the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) allegedly exceeded its authority by ordering local election officials to disregard state statutes that regulate absentee voting.

The Special Counsel raised concerns that private money influenced municipal officials in the state’s five largest cities to “disfavor” many of their own citizens, as well as the vast majority of state residents, by spending millions of dollars of grant money on voter registration drives, absentee voter efforts, and Get-Out-The-Vote campaigns designed to serve certain favored, and specifically targeted, racial groups, in violation of the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitution.

Wisconsin Continues Counting Ballots Through The Night Amid Close Election
Claire Woodall-Vogg, executive director of the Milwaukee election commission, collects the count from absentee ballots in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on Nov. 4, 2020. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Gableman offered a list of suggested reforms designed to restore public confidence in Wisconsin elections.

Among Gableman’s recommendations was a call to abolish the WEC, prohibit outside money and personnel from participating in election administration, and improved training to better acquaint local election officials with their powers, duties, and rights.

He also laid out the legal rationale for decertifying the state’s 10 electors who voted for Democrat Joe Biden.

Biden was declared the winner of Wisconsin’s popular vote by six-tenths of one percent, or 20,000 votes.

Relying on the common law principle that fraud or illegality invalidate results under an illegal or fraudulent process, Gableman asserted that the state legislature had the constitutional plenary power to decertify the results of the 2020 presidential election in Wisconsin because state laws were broken.

Democrat Governor Tony Evers released a statement the day the Special Counsel’s Report came out, saying: “This circus has long surpassed being a mere embarrassment to our state … Every day this effort continues, it is an increasingly dangerous and ongoing threat to our democracy.”

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, who has sued to block, or curtail, subpoenas issued by the Office of the Special Counsel (OSC), said in a March 1 statement that Gableman’s report was a “full-throated attack on democracy” and an attempt to “overturn the will of the voters.”

Kaul said that Republican state legislators “have an obligation to our democracy to condemn, and end, this preposterous fake investigation.”

The OSC report detailed instances of what it called “obstruction” on the part of some state officials and private interest groups, which have filed nine lawsuits against the OSC and snowed it under with what it calls “dilatory,” “frivolous,” and “voluminous” public information requests.

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers holds a press conference in Madison,
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers speaks in Madison, Wis., on Feb. 6, 2020. (Steve Apps/Wisconsin State Journal via AP)
Gableman alleges in his report that Democrat political operatives, paid for by grants from the Zuckerberg-funded non-profit Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), all but took over administration of the 2020 election in five of Wisconsin’s largest cities.

According to OSC’s report, as the COVID-19 pandemic raged in the spring and summer of 2020, CTCL donated nearly $8.8 million to county clerks and municipal election administrators throughout Wisconsin.

The stated purpose of the grant funding was to help ensure that communities had enough money to be able to conduct elections in accordance with public health safety guidelines.

Five of Wisconsin’s largest cities—Milwaukee, Madison, Green Bay, Racine, and Kenosha—received a total of $6.3 million in grant funding, ostensibly to purchase PPE and other health-related equipment, such as plexiglass barriers and hand-sanitizer.

The grants were conditioned on the five cities agreeing to guidelines of the Wisconsin Safe Voting Plan (WSVP).

Gableman alleged that WSVP was little more than a partisan campaign program designed to maximize voter registration and turnout in heavily minority-populated precincts.

The report states that the Wisconsin Elections Commission supported the WSVP Get-Out-The-Vote program, an action Gableman asserts is not part of the agency’s mission.

How Did the Five Cities Spend the Grant Money?
The cities used grant funds to pay for curbside voting tents, mobile polling places operated out of trucks, and for a drive-thru voting window at one city hall.

The cities spent grant money on voter education, a multi-media advertising and phone blitz, geo-fencing (a computer technique used to pin-point particular areas of geographic and demographic interest) and they paid for personnel called “voter navigators” (also known as ballot harvesters), whose job was to shepherd a prospective voter through the process of voting.

The municipalities purchased and installed in strategic locations, unstaffed absentee ballot drop-boxes in violation of Wisconsin law.

The OSC report presented data showing that the city of Green Bay spent eight-tenths of one percent of its $1 million in grant funding on PPE and health equipment.

Green Bay spent $50,000 for ballot drop-boxes and purchased a couple of new Ford trucks. The city paid a public relations firm $150,ooo for a voter outreach campaign.

The public relations campaigns in each city zeroed in on preferred racial groups, which, coincidentally matched the demographic profile of Biden voters, according to the OSC report.

The report said the cities’ actions were discriminatory and “disfavored” city and state residents who did not fit the targeted profile, raising issues of unequal treatment under the law.

CTCL and other private workers, called “grant mentors,” along with many volunteers, worked for weeks assisting city election officials and county clerks in conducting the 2020 presidential election.

What kind of assistance did the CTCL-supplied workers provide?

According to the OSC report, representatives of private organizations participated in much of the planning and administration of the election.

Tasks they performed included, curing defective mail-in ballots, challenging voted ballots, verifying photo ID, setting up voting equipment and vote counting centers, training volunteers, and writing instructions controlling the activities of count observers

Workers provided by private organizations assigned inspectors for polling places and vote counting centers, transported ballots to city hall and counting centers, issued a purchase order, made decisions whether or not to accept ballots after 8 p.m. on Election Day, participated in the counting of ballots, and set up wireless digital networks in polling places, clerks’ offices, and other buildings, according to the report.

The OSC report stated that local election officials, made beholden to private organizations by grant funding, could be susceptible to leverage pressuring them to do things in violation of their oath of office.

Other Alleged Offenses and Abuses by State and Local Election Officials
The special counsel alleged that rampant fraud and abuse occurred statewide in many of Wisconsin’s 6,875 nursing homes (housing 92,000 residents) during the 2020 election.

When visited by OSC investigators, many nursing home residents who are on record as having voted absentee in the election, were unaware of their surroundings, what year it was, or to whom they were speaking.

Some nursing home residents who purportedly voted had been adjudicated by a court to be mentally incompetent and whose voting rights had been taken away.

Wisconsin election laws require that a nursing home resident desiring to vote absentee must be visited by a Special Voting Deputy (SVD) designated by the local clerks or election boards to assist the resident and supervise the application and voting process.

Under the statute, only the resident’s immediate family, or an SVD, can have any contact with the ballots. They are never to be mailed.

Epoch Times Photo
Meagan Wolfe, the head of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, speaks during a virtual press conference on Nov. 4, 2020. (Wisconsin Elections Commission via Reuters)
In June 2020, for reasons of public health, the Wisconsin Elections Commission directed all clerks to handle nursing home voting according to the rules governing ordinary mail-in voting, thereby disrupting the strictly limited chain of custody of residents’ ballots—a direct violation of Wisconsin law.

The result was thousands of application forms, ballot envelopes, and ballots were illegally handled by nursing home employees, according to the report.

The report alleges nursing home administrators and staff members illegally assisted residents in marking their ballots. Some family members have reported suspected cases of staff forging the voter’s signature.

According to the OSC, the result was an “improbably high” voting rate, with many nursing homes reporting that 100 percent of their residents voted in the 2020 election.

Wisconsin Elections Commission Administrator Meagan Wolfe said in a statement: “The integrity of the November 2020 election, and of the WEC, has been shown time, and time again, through court cases and previous investigations.”

Correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated the number of nursing homes in Wisconsin. The correct number is 6,875 nursing homes. The Epoch Times regrets the error.

Title: TX: 10K uncounted ballots found
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 09, 2022, 04:37:17 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/10000-uncounted-ballots-found-in-texas-county-officials_4323984.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-03-09&utm_medium=email&est=YNf6CEnPCTmJEpgf3yVfP1Axmt6nVyMKg%2Bt1i7HExgInXgNiL4nFOmZZKi4hRVt6QGgM

Title: WI-- too late to decertify
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 17, 2022, 02:10:10 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/wisconsin-assembly-speaker-rejects-calls-to-decertify-2020-election_4344147.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-03-17-3&utm_medium=email&est=HYqtM%2BrFgn01CFiO4WwWZh%2BohwVdMpOXwnAbO%2FwoSP8bJhIP8oq6QnOhGhSW2XGXdjBM

Title: Re: WI-- too late to decertify
Post by: DougMacG on March 17, 2022, 02:30:16 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 17, 2022, 02:10:10 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/wisconsin-assembly-speaker-rejects-calls-to-decertify-2020-election_4344147.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-03-17-3&utm_medium=email&est=HYqtM%2BrFgn01CFiO4WwWZh%2BohwVdMpOXwnAbO%2FwoSP8bJhIP8oq6QnOhGhSW2XGXdjBM

It's too late to go back in time but not too late to get it right for history and for next time.

Title: Re: WI-- too late to decertify
Post by: G M on March 17, 2022, 09:40:47 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on March 17, 2022, 02:30:16 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 17, 2022, 02:10:10 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/wisconsin-assembly-speaker-rejects-calls-to-decertify-2020-election_4344147.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-03-17-3&utm_medium=email&est=HYqtM%2BrFgn01CFiO4WwWZh%2BohwVdMpOXwnAbO%2FwoSP8bJhIP8oq6QnOhGhSW2XGXdjBM

It's too late to go back in time but not too late to get it right for history and for next time.

The constitution is quite clear, if someone steals the election, no givebacks!

Title: ET: Election workers call for more protection
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 18, 2022, 07:03:24 AM

US Elections Officials, Workers Call for More Protection
By John Haughey March 16, 2022 Updated: March 17, 2022biggersmaller Print

Three-quarters of local elections officials and staff workers who responded to a nationwide survey say the federal government isn’t doing enough to support their needs or protect them from a rising tide of threats since the 2020 elections.

That perceived lack of support and fears of “false political attacks on the election system” is why at least 20 percent of locally elected elections officials and professional staff plan to leave their posts before the 2024 election, according to a survey released this month by the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.

The center canvassed 596 of roughly 9,250 local election officials nationwide between late January and mid-February.

Of those who responded, 71 percent said the federal government must do more than create a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) task force to investigate threats against local election officials to protect them; 42 percent said they weren’t aware the task force even existed.

Half the respondents said their states must do more to boost election worker security, and about a quarter said local governments, counties specifically, must also step up protections for elections officials and staff.

About 20 percent of survey respondents said they’re “very unlikely” or “somewhat unlikely” to continue serving through 2024, citing political attacks on the system, stress, and retirement plans as primary reasons for leaving sooner than previously planned.

Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections (FSASE) President Wesley Wilcox says the 20 percent attrition forecast may be conservative.

In Florida, the state’s 67 county elections supervisors are elected every four years. While most who are currently serving were elected in 2020, Wilcox said, one has resigned already and others have made it “crystal clear” they won’t seek reelection in 2024.

“As soon as we get past the midterms, I think we will see a flood of others” resigning or opting not to seek reelection, he said.

“I would not be shocked to see 25 percent” attrition, not only among elected supervisors, Wilcox said, but among administrative workers at county elections offices.

“When you think about it, this is the front-line staff that unfortunately takes a public beating” as nonpartisan bystanders in the crossfire of heated post-2020 election politics, he said.

While 30 percent of survey respondents who plan to leave their positions cited “stress associated with the job” as the primary motivator, another 29 percent said they were retiring as planned.

“Some of this attrition is retirement. Some have been there for a long time and it is just time for them to go,” Election Center Executive Director Tim Mattice said on March 17, agreeing with the Brennan Center’s 20 percent attrition forecast.

Epoch Times Photo
A file photo shows election workers processing ballots (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)
The “incredible experience in running an election—a presidential election, no less—during a pandemic” was demanding and exhausting for elections workers, but “additional pressures” have mounted since 2020, he said.

The 2020 election was “something they had never experienced before. That certainly would be a motivator for some folks to say, ‘Hey, maybe it’s time for me to step aside,’” Mattice said.

“It’s definitely been a different type of environment” since 2020.

The Elections Center is operated by the National Association of Elections Officers, based in Katy, Texas. The nonprofit, which represents more than 1,350 members in 44 states, has joined other groups in calling on federal and state governments to take threats against elected officials and administrative professionals seriously.

The National Association of State Election Directors, which represents state elections officials and staff in all 50 states from its Washington, D.C., headquarters, maintains that election officials “will persevere and will continue to administer fair elections in 2022,” amid an “unacceptable” wave of “threats, harassment and intimidation” directed at elections workers “for doing their jobs.”

Epoch Times Photo
Election workers count ballots in Philadelphia, on Nov. 4, 2020. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
The Election Official Legal Defense Network, operated by the Washington-based Center for Election Innovation and Research, is providing pro-bono legal help to election workers and calling for more state and federal prosecutors dedicated to addressing what it calls “domestic terrorism.”

They point to a 2022 measure adopted by Oregon legislators that makes it a crime to harass an election official, punishable by up to a year in jail and a possible $6,250 fine, as an example of legislation that other states should replicate.

Lawmakers in at least eight states have introduced bills during 2022 to better protect election workers and more harshly punish offenders, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Wilcox said local elections workers need federal protections because threats are rarely from local constituents.

“We in Florida, we get people from Illinois or Missouri who have heard something, call attempting to berate us. We are having challenges there,” he said.

“I don’t know what you could do. We need to sit down and have some serious conversations about what are some good measures to put in place to ensure not only the physical and mental safety of our elections officials and personnel but also the safety of our democracy.”

The attacks get personal, Wilcox said.

“There needs to be a better way, or at least a more punitive way, to get people who are just maliciously fabricating stories and stuff,” he said.

“Right now, as an elected official, you can virtually say anything you want about me without any repercussions,” unless “there is an explicit threat of violence.”

Mattice said there will be high turnover between now and the 2024 elections, but there will be no shortage of elected officials and administrative workers to conduct local elections.

“We also know that for the number of people who are leaving, the local jurisdictions will fill these positions with new people coming in,” he said. “You hope there is a transition period where the folks with all the knowledge can share” their institutional insights with those taking their places.

Wilcox worries about the motivations of those who are running for some Florida county elections supervisor seats in upcoming elections, predicting the state soon may have “for lack of a better word, a new crop of supervisors” who are more partisan than their predecessors.

Mattice said there’s a distinction between employees in county election offices and those who serve, often in volunteer capacities, as poll-watchers during elections.

Most elections workers “try very hard to be nonpartisan” and are committed professionals “not looking at party, but at putting out a fair, equitable process that people can have trust in,” he said.

“Elections officials across the country work long hours and take a lot of abuse and don’t get paid a lot,” Mattice said. “We hope the people who are coming in are coming in for the right reasons. They are the gatekeepers of our democracy.”

Title: Indiana mandates paper back up
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 21, 2022, 11:45:04 AM

Indiana Governor Signs Bill Mandating Paper Backup for All Voting Machines
By Jack Phillips March 20, 2022 Updated: March 20, 2022biggersmaller Print
Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb has signed legislation that requires all counties using certain voting machines to leave a paper trail before the 2024 presidential election.

The new state law, HEA 1116, requires Indiana counties that use electronic voting machines to install “voter-verifiable paper audit trails”—a backup system that allows people to check their votes on a paper printout before confirming their votes, before the 2024 election.

It also “provides that, after July 1, 2022, a county must meet certain requirements when using any direct record electronic voting system that does not include a voter-verifiable paper audit trail for an election,” according to the legislation.

The measure also “specifies requirements of a statement that must be printed on the envelope of an absentee ballot application” and stipulates that voters will now have to provide a driver’s license number, state identification number, or the last four digits of their Social Security number when they submit an electronic request for an absentee ballot.

It will also require counties to have an electronic poll book that has the “capacity to transmit certain information that a voter cast a provisional ballot,” an outline of the measure reads. The new law also extends a cybersecurity contract between Indiana counties and the Indiana Secretary of State’s Office until 2028.

Most of Indiana’s counties use machines made by MicroVote, Election Systems & Software, Hart InterCivic, and Unisyn, according to the Indiana government’s website. Barbara Tully, of Indiana Vote by Mail, said during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on Feb. 24 that 59 of Indiana’s 92 counties use MicroVote.

Holcomb, a Republican, signed the measure on March 15, while Indiana Secretary of State Holli Sullivan later praised the move.

“It also allows me and the Secretary of State’s office to better partner with our county election administrators to do post-election recounts, if needed, as well as post-election audits,” Sullivan, a Republican, said in a statement to local media outlets.

Sullivan said she believes electronic voting machines with paper ballot backups are the “perfect blend,” adding that it allows for “quick results and the ability to do a recount that is very reliable and fast.”

The state will now provide funding by July 1 to every county that needs paper backup systems.

The new law will also allow the secretary of state to “determine the number of elections that are subject to a post-election audit,” changing the term “risk-limiting audit” to “post-election audit,” and other measures, according to the outline of the legislation.

Title: Re: Indiana mandates paper back up
Post by: DougMacG on March 21, 2022, 01:40:51 PM

This is a good start.  Stop the cheating where we can and set the standard for clean elections for all the rest to see.

We think of Indiana as a red state but it went for Obama in 2008:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_States_presidential_election_in_Indiana

Title: Arkansas judge strikes down Electoral Integrity Law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 21, 2022, 06:54:13 PM

Judge Strikes Down Election Integrity Laws in Arkansas as Unconstitutional
By Matthew Vadum March 20, 2022 Updated: March 21, 2022biggersmaller Print
An often-reversed Arkansas judge struck down four new election integrity laws approved by the Republican-controlled state legislature, finding the statutes unconstitutional—but an appeal to the state’s supreme court seems imminent.

Pulaski County Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen permanently enjoined the laws—Acts 249, 728, 736, and 973—on March 18 after a four-day trial. The statutes came as part of a nationwide wave of new state-level election laws that followed irregularities during the 2020 presidential election.

In court, Griffen reportedly said the defendants, including Arkansas Secretary of State John Thurston, a Republican, hadn’t demonstrated a need for the laws and that the state’s fears about election integrity were “based entirely on conjecture and speculation,” which “cannot be permitted to supply the place of proof.” Griffen said he would issue a detailed order at a later date.

The lawsuit was initiated by the League of Women Voters of Arkansas (LWVAR), Arkansas United, and five voters. They claimed the statutes disproportionately harmed voters of color.

LWVAR president Bonnie Miller said on social media that she was pleased with the court decision.

“We’re celebrating this victory for democracy and are confident that justice will continue to prevail despite the attorney general’s inevitable appeal.”

Andrew Collins, a Democrat who is a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives, also reacted favorably to the ruling.

“Each of these laws, passed amidst a flood of misinformation, represents a counterproductive ‘solution’ in search of a problem,” Collins wrote on Twitter. “Meaningful election security is important, but these laws aren’t necessary to achieve it, and they make it harder for people to vote legitimately.”

Act 249 dealt with how provisional ballots are counted. Act 728, which came in response to complaints about groups giving food and water to voters, prohibited individuals from being within 100 feet of a polling place unless they are entering or leaving the facility. Act 736, a measure aimed at ballot harvesting, stated that the possession by an individual of more than four absentee ballots “creates a rebuttable presumption of intent to defraud.” Act 973 reduced the timeframe for voters to ask for absentee ballots.

State Sen. Kim Hammer, a Republican who supported the reforms, told CNN last year that the new laws were about “protecting the integrity of the vote.”

“These were taken from real examples that happened here in the state,” he said, adding that lawmakers had worked with local election officials in writing the legislation.

State leaders who support the election integrity measures were disappointed by the ruling.

“States should be left with the flexibility to protect the integrity of the ballot box and the [Arkansas] Supreme Court will have the opportunity to review the constitutionality of these laws,” Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a Republican, told reporters.

An aide to Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge said Rutledge would review the court decision and decide what to do next.

“The Attorney General is committed to fighting for the integrity of elections in the state of Arkansas,” spokeswoman Stephanie Sharp said in a statement.

Griffen, known for his left-wing activism, is a controversial figure in Arkansas. Some Republican state lawmakers advocate impeaching and removing him as a judge. Compared by some to Rev. Jeremiah Wright, former President Barack Obama’s pastor whose fiery sermons blasted the United States as an inherently racist country, Griffen is also a Baptist preacher known for wearing an African dashiki when delivering sermons, as Wright did.

Griffen was barred from hearing cases that could lead to the death penalty after he attended an anti-capital punishment protest outside the governor’s mansion in 2017 while strapped to a cot as if he were about to be executed by lethal injection. The protest came the same day as he issued a ruling blocking the state’s execution schedule.

Griffen also denounced President-elect Donald Trump days after his election in November 2016.

“White nationalism and white male supremacy never left this country,” Griffen said, according to Arkansas Money and Politics. It is a “fallacy … that somehow the nation had moved on beyond the hatefulness, the fearfulness, the misogyny.”

Matthew Vadum
Matthew Vadum
CONTRIBUTOR

Title: Two wins
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2022, 04:12:03 AM

Two wins for election transparency

Cleaning up voter rolls so dead can’t vote and elections can’t be stolen

By J. Christian Adams

After 2020, election integrity is all the rage. That is a welcome change, but election integrity involves grunt work. The grunt work is more important than snazzy lawsuits that lose. Two landmark court decisions in the last week represent real progress toward cleaner elections.

Federal courts in Maine and Illinois handed down two rulings to make elections more transparent. This is important because so much of the 2020 election was shrouded in bureaucratic defensiveness, outright secrecy and just enough hide-the-ball to raise doubts about the outcome.

First Illinois. In 2019, the Public Interest Legal Foundation — which I head — asked Illinois for a copy of state voter rolls.

Voter rolls are the ultimate record representing who state election officials think are eligible to vote. They are an essential election integrity document. Unfortunately, we have found rolls in other states filled with dead registrants, folks who live in other states and even voters registered up to seven times at a single address.

Of course, Illinois denied our request. After all, no election official likes to hear how badly they do voter list maintenance. Had we obtained the Illinois voter rolls in 2019, we would have added them to our nationwide database before the critical 2020 election to see who is registered in Illinois and other states at the same time.

When Illinois denied our request, we sued, alleging that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 — often called Motor Voter — made rolls public. This month, the federal court agreed, granting us summary judgment that the rolls are public under Motor Voter. Things got so haywire in the Illinois election office during the litigation that the top election official resigned over allegations he was being extorted through an online app.

No doubt Illinois won’t look good after we get the rolls.

In other states, including Pennsylvania and Michigan, we found tens of thousands of active dead registrants, some dead for decades. Judith Presto was one of those dead voters in Pennsylvania. Our database showed she registered to vote after she died. Pennsylvania election officials argued in federal court that a post-death registration, like Presto’s, had to be an error in our data, not a mistake on their part. Ultimately, Presto’s husband was criminally charged, and our analysis was the only way Pennsylvania election officials knew about it — despite criticizing it in court.

Maine was the next big win this month. There, a federal court ruled in a similar case of ours that the voter rolls are also public under Motor Voter. Remaining to be decided in court is how much a state may punish and fine groups like ours for using the rolls to find mistakes and problems by election officials.

You read that right. Maine might give you the voter rolls but has a law that punishes and fines anyone who reports problems, such as voters registered multiple times or registered and voting in other states in addition to Maine.

This is how far some states will go to hide the bad job they do running elections.

These rulings are important because obtaining voter rolls is the first step to holding election officials accountable. So much energy and money were wasted after the 2020 election on baseless election litigation. Those cases hurt the cause.

Establishing that voter rolls are public records under federal law allows groups to conduct real research and careful nationwide analysis of where the problems are in our system and which election officials are dropping the ball.

Once we have Maine and Illinois voter rolls, they will be added to our nationwide database to reveal how many problems are on the rolls. Those results go back to election officials to help them fix the problems.

All of this illustrates that avoiding another 2020 election doesn’t enjoy a silver bullet solution. Election integrity is grunt work and requires careful judgment. Most of all, it would sure help if election officials stopped hiding their work.

J. Christian Adams is president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, former Justice Department lawyer and commissioner on the United States Commission on Civil Rights

Title: Re: Two wins
Post by: G M on March 22, 2022, 09:33:47 AM

Why would election officials hide things if everything was lawful and legitimate?

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2022, 04:12:03 AM

Two wins for election transparency

Cleaning up voter rolls so dead can’t vote and elections can’t be stolen

By J. Christian Adams

After 2020, election integrity is all the rage. That is a welcome change, but election integrity involves grunt work. The grunt work is more important than snazzy lawsuits that lose. Two landmark court decisions in the last week represent real progress toward cleaner elections.

Federal courts in Maine and Illinois handed down two rulings to make elections more transparent. This is important because so much of the 2020 election was shrouded in bureaucratic defensiveness, outright secrecy and just enough hide-the-ball to raise doubts about the outcome.

First Illinois. In 2019, the Public Interest Legal Foundation — which I head — asked Illinois for a copy of state voter rolls.

Voter rolls are the ultimate record representing who state election officials think are eligible to vote. They are an essential election integrity document. Unfortunately, we have found rolls in other states filled with dead registrants, folks who live in other states and even voters registered up to seven times at a single address.

Of course, Illinois denied our request. After all, no election official likes to hear how badly they do voter list maintenance. Had we obtained the Illinois voter rolls in 2019, we would have added them to our nationwide database before the critical 2020 election to see who is registered in Illinois and other states at the same time.

When Illinois denied our request, we sued, alleging that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 — often called Motor Voter — made rolls public. This month, the federal court agreed, granting us summary judgment that the rolls are public under Motor Voter. Things got so haywire in the Illinois election office during the litigation that the top election official resigned over allegations he was being extorted through an online app.

No doubt Illinois won’t look good after we get the rolls.

In other states, including Pennsylvania and Michigan, we found tens of thousands of active dead registrants, some dead for decades. Judith Presto was one of those dead voters in Pennsylvania. Our database showed she registered to vote after she died. Pennsylvania election officials argued in federal court that a post-death registration, like Presto’s, had to be an error in our data, not a mistake on their part. Ultimately, Presto’s husband was criminally charged, and our analysis was the only way Pennsylvania election officials knew about it — despite criticizing it in court.

Maine was the next big win this month. There, a federal court ruled in a similar case of ours that the voter rolls are also public under Motor Voter. Remaining to be decided in court is how much a state may punish and fine groups like ours for using the rolls to find mistakes and problems by election officials.

You read that right. Maine might give you the voter rolls but has a law that punishes and fines anyone who reports problems, such as voters registered multiple times or registered and voting in other states in addition to Maine.

This is how far some states will go to hide the bad job they do running elections.

These rulings are important because obtaining voter rolls is the first step to holding election officials accountable. So much energy and money were wasted after the 2020 election on baseless election litigation. Those cases hurt the cause.

Establishing that voter rolls are public records under federal law allows groups to conduct real research and careful nationwide analysis of where the problems are in our system and which election officials are dropping the ball.

Once we have Maine and Illinois voter rolls, they will be added to our nationwide database to reveal how many problems are on the rolls. Those results go back to election officials to help them fix the problems.

All of this illustrates that avoiding another 2020 election doesn’t enjoy a silver bullet solution. Election integrity is grunt work and requires careful judgment. Most of all, it would sure help if election officials stopped hiding their work.

J. Christian Adams is president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, former Justice Department lawyer and commissioner on the United States Commission on Civil Rights

Title: Meadows and wife create problem for us
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 23, 2022, 09:34:10 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/03/23/debra-meadows-appears-have-filed-three-false-voter-forms/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3662eff%2F623b46093e6ed13ade36ae29%2F61cdf026ae7e8a4ac205b2b3%2F22%2F68%2F623b46093e6ed13ade36ae29

Title: Dem MD gerrymander thrown out
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 25, 2022, 06:33:02 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/maryland-judge-tosses-democrat-drawn-congressional-map-for-extreme-partisan-gerrymandering/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=27153125

Title: Prof Lott study finds 255,000 excess votes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2022, 07:53:05 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/mar/28/joe-biden-got-255000-excess-votes-fraud-tainted-sw/?fbclid=IwAR2auY7_L_EecI9iLFu3xpjQPWWXyRRQ7w3HJBDIkIRltiybX9vdx5fkqS0

Title: NY gerrymander overturned for now
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 01, 2022, 01:51:10 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10674993/Republican-NY-Supreme-Court-judge-rules-Democrats-gerrymandered-congressional-districts.html

Title: AZ passes law adding citizenship requirement to federal elections.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 01, 2022, 02:48:27 AM

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/arizona-proof-of-citizenship-voter-registration-law/index.html?fbclid=IwAR3m4L6InWXHim9mAbEhXF6mcmkB1xDAZmUdtm3QsDNTs6cCdHWiFtBBwog

Title: Watchdog True the Vote: 137k illegal ballots in WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 01, 2022, 02:54:33 AM

Not sure I understand the use of cell phone pings here, , ,

https://www.theepochtimes.com/voting-integrity-group-uncovers-over-137000-ballots-that-were-trafficked-in-wisconsin_4369214.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-04-01&utm_medium=email&est=KIxijtMlbpNlj%2Bx23%2BsbbBkn5C%2B90J7iXA3STA0StXIpzhdNAWJcq8uI2TA%2BfrZe80QZ

Election Watchdog Finds 137,500 Ballots Unlawfully Trafficked in Wisconsin

10 trillion unique cell phone 'pings' were used to reconstruct the movements of ballot box intermediaries in 2020 election
By Steven Kovac March 29, 2022 Updated: March 30, 2022biggersmaller Print

At least 137,500 absentee ballots were cast through unlawful vote trafficking throughout several of Wisconsin’s largest cities in the 2020 election, according to research presented last week to the state Assembly’s Committee on Campaigns and Elections by the public interest organization True the Vote (TTV).

Ballot trafficking is an activity in which absentee ballots and votes are solicited, sometimes in exchange for money or other valuables. They are then collected through a process called “harvesting” and delivered to drop boxes by intermediaries (someone other than the voter), who are often paid a per-ballot fee by partisan actors.

“An organized crime against Americans” is how TTV cyber expert Gregg Phillips described to the committee what happened in Wisconsin and elsewhere during the 2020 election.

Based on his 15-month study of election practices in Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Michigan, Phillips estimates that at least 4.8 million votes were trafficked nationally.

According to the True the Vote report, 242 intermediaries in metro Atlanta made 5,668 stops at drop boxes during elections in late 2020. In its report, TTV said it obtained 4 million minutes of drop box video surveillance tape that helped to document its Georgia findings.

“Many of the traffickers we spoke with do not recognize what they are doing as being a problem,” TTV spokesperson Catherine Engelbrecht said.

The study found that in Arizona, 202 intermediaries made 4,282 separate visits to ballot boxes in Maricopa County.

Several Arizonans have since been indicted for election law violations, with at least one conviction, according to Phillips.

Epoch Times Photo
Poll workers count ballots inside the Maricopa County Election Department in Phoenix, on Nov. 5, 2020. (Olivier Touron/AFP via Getty Images)
Phillips told the committee that, in the states studied, TTV purchased from commercial brokers 10 trillion unique cell phone identity signals called “pings.”

Human rights organization First Freedoms funded the time-consuming and costly project.

Using a technique called geospatial mobile device signal analysis, Phillips said researchers are able to reconstruct a four-dimensional “pattern of life” of cell phone holders.

“From these pings, it can be determined where you work, where you sleep, and even what floor you are on within inches,” he said.

The Wisconsin study focused primarily on the Milwaukee County area, with some partial initial data coming from Racine and Green Bay, where the study will soon be further expanded, Phillips said.

In those three areas, TTV’s cell phone ping research found that in the two weeks from Oct. 20 through Nov. 3, 2020, 138 individuals each visited the location of a nongovernmental organization at least five times and made a combined total of 3,588 trips to absentee ballot drop boxes.

“That’s an average of 26 trips per person to drop boxes in the Milwaukee area,” Phillips said.

“Is this evidence of fraud?” committee member Lisa Subeck, a Democrat, asked.

“Vote trafficking is being done through the process. It is illegal,” replied Engelbrecht, who stated that every vote cast illegally cancels the vote of a legitimate voter.

Wisconsin Statute 6.87 (4)(b)1 provides that an absentee ballot envelope, in which the cast absentee ballot is placed, must be “mailed by the elector, or delivered in person, to the municipal clerk issuing the ballot or ballots.” The Circuit Court in Waukesha County in Teigen v. Wisconsin Elections Commission, has agreed, holding that use of drop boxes for absentee voting violates Wisconsin law.

Drop boxes, if unattended by a municipal clerk or in an unauthorized location, are illegal under Wisconsin law. The law is currently being challenged in the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

In her testimony, Engelbrecht stressed that the TTV report was focused on the process and wasn’t attempting to prove the 137,551 votes were illegal votes.

State Rep. Dave Murphy, a Republican member of the committee, stated: “If you vote in an illegal way, it is an illegal vote. If the process is illegal, the vote is illegal.”

Earlier in March, the report of special counsel Michael Gabelman on voter fraud revealed that some personnel of nongovernmental organizations are suspected of coordinating the 2020 ballot harvesting operations in Wisconsin’s five largest heavily Democrat-run cities—Milwaukee, Kenosha, Green Bay, Madison, and Racine.

When asked by Rep. Donna Rozar, a Republican, to name the NGOs in the study that were repeatedly visited by intermediaries, Phillips declined.

A spokesperson for Micah Inc., a leading Milwaukee nonprofit philanthropic organization, told The Epoch Times that Micah does conduct “voter engagement efforts,” but declined to say more.

Phillips and Engelbrecht testified that enormous nonprofits, such as National Vote at Home, are promoting voting from home and favor doing away with in-person voting on Election Day entirely.

“Most countries around the world vote in person on election day, including Ukraine,” Phillips said.

Engelbrecht argued that some countries have perfected secure blockchain electronic voting and said she thinks U.S. technology is advanced enough to at least ensure accurate election data.

She said that some U.S. election jurisdictions view inaccurate voting rolls as a “feature rather than a bug.”

“Our rolls are abysmal. Bad records are the gateway to fraud,” Engelbrecht said.

“If you can’t verify identity, you can’t do anything else,” Phillips said.

Rep. Ron Tusler, a Republican, asked if TTV could identify the 138 alleged ballot harvesters (also known as “mules”).

“We know the names but are not disclosing them,” Phillips said. “Anyone can buy them commercially. However, law enforcement would need a warrant.”

In the other states studied, government-made video surveillance tapes of ballot drop boxes obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests were used as part of the process of estimating how many ballots were trafficked, along with personal interviews with intermediaries and other tipsters and cell phone ping data.

Engelbrecht told the committee that in Wisconsin, in September of 2020, her organization set up a hotline to receive tips from informants.

Unlike other states where video surveillance footage of the drop boxes was made available to TTV investigators, Engelbrecht said that only one of the 17 Wisconsin localities studied provided TTV with video.

Engelbrecht stated that in the summer of 2020, the Wisconsin Election Commission (WEC) announced it approved of video surveillance of the state’s drop boxes, as recommended by the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

“WEC did not follow through,” she said.

Neither did WEC provide to localities written guidelines based on CISA’s recommendations for the locations where the drop boxes were to be placed, according to Engelbrecht.

She testified that across the country, the majority of the ballot drops surveilled typically happened between 8 p.m. and 5 a.m.

Epoch Times Photo
Democratic National Committee headquarters in Washington, in January 2020. (Masooma Haq/The Epoch Times)
She told the committee that the removal of 234,000 problem names from Wisconsin’s registered voter rolls, as recommended by the Electronic Registration Information Center, was stopped by a lawsuit.

Forty-nine-year veteran elections attorney James Bopp Jr. came before the committee to provide a legal perspective to the facts presented in the TTV report.

Bopp has litigated 200 election lawsuits and is currently legal counsel to TTV. He is also representing special counsel Gabelman in several lawsuits against him stemming from his investigation.

Bopp testified that filing an avalanche of lawsuits was part of a years-long effort by Democrats “to make the whole system more susceptible to fraud and abuse.”

He said 425 lawsuits were filed across America by Democratic Party operatives or front organizations in the runup to the 2020 election.

Bopp asserted the suits were designed to ensure ineligible people were maintained on voting rolls; to expand voting to every voter on the rolls, whether active or inactive; and “to tear down every other anti-fraud protection, such as prohibiting signature verification and striking down witness requirements for absentee voting.”

Turning to Wisconsin, Bopp pointed the committee to what he called “the corrupt and illegal activity and administration of election laws for partisan ends engaged in by your Wisconsin state government and municipalities designed to maximize the number of Democrat votes.”

Addressing the alleged embedding of partisan get-out-the-vote efforts within local governments in Wisconsin’s largest cities, Bopp said the practice evades federal and state campaign contribution limits of just a few thousand dollars, and gives real-time, hour-by-hour, cost-free access to voter rolls to partisan actors.

Bopp said the practice disguises its partisan nature, disguises the identity of out-of-state billionaire donors contributing millions, thereby violating the principle of transparency and exceeding contribution limits.

“Despite clear and unequivocal state law, drop boxes created the infrastructure to accomplish all of this,” he said. “Drop boxes left unstaffed and located anywhere clearly violated state statutes.”

He criticized what he said was the “grossly partisan, corruptly political, and blatantly illegal” actions of the people administering Wisconsin election laws.

Bopp asserted that the actions in Wisconsin gave significant partisan political advantage to Democrats, exactly the people the plan was designed to help.

“Ruthlessly exploited by large-scale organized and illegal ballot harvesting operations, involving not-for-profits and the people working with them, (the scheme) could very well have influenced the outcome of the 2020 election,” he said.

“What has been disclosed—and, in my view, proven—is that there were sufficient irregularities in the 2020 election that a court, at the time, could have reached the conclusion that the true result cannot be determined. But that time has passed.

“It’s not about overturning the 2020 election. It’s about the future. The situation is crying for reform.”

Rozar reminded the audience that numerous election reforms passed by the legislature have been vetoed by Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat.

Neither Evers nor state Attorney General Josh Kaul, also a Democrat, responded by press time to requests for comment.

Title: GIS
Post by: ccp on April 01, 2022, 05:12:30 AM

https://geods.geography.wisc.edu/song/papers/2018_MobileGISLBS.pdf

"  Even when not in use, our phones send location signals. " ->

https://www.esri.com/about/newsroom/blog/big-data-geospatial-tools-reveal-human-mobility/

[ :-o]

Title: Election Integrity
Post by: DougMacG on April 01, 2022, 10:21:24 AM

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/03/30/are-we-sure-the-2020-election-was-clean/
--------

We are not raising confidence in our elections by banning investigation and discussion.

Title: Re: Election Integrity
Post by: G M on April 01, 2022, 01:58:55 PM

If the left actually believed 2020 was honest, they would be happy for a detailed examination. Funny how they aren’t.

Quote from: DougMacG on April 01, 2022, 10:21:24 AM

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/03/30/are-we-sure-the-2020-election-was-clean/
--------

We are not raising confidence in our elections by banning investigation and discussion.

Title: The decision overturning Florida law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 01, 2022, 07:29:20 PM

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/21564733/ndfl-voting.pdf

Title: Rick Scott everyone should pay Federal tax
Post by: ccp on April 01, 2022, 08:51:35 PM

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/04/01/rick_scott_wants_all_americans_to_pay_taxes_even_if_its_just_a_dollar__147419.html

Title: Re: Rick Scott everyone should pay Federal tax
Post by: DougMacG on April 01, 2022, 10:35:58 PM

Quote from: ccp on April 01, 2022, 08:51:35 PM

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/04/01/rick_scott_wants_all_americans_to_pay_taxes_even_if_its_just_a_dollar__147419.html

This is right and Reagan and some others had this wrong.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_in_the_Game_(book)

Title: Georgia: Ballot traffickers using Dem offices
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 07, 2022, 06:35:37 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/exclusive-democrats-implicated-georgia-ballot-traffickers-using-democrat-officials-offices-stopping-points-ballot-drop-runs/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on April 07, 2022, 06:48:41 AM

". https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/exclusive-democrats-implicated-georgia-ballot-traffickers-using-democrat-officials-offices-stopping-points-ballot-drop-runs/"

Wow

here is the PROOF

of what we all knew was going on

the shysters can't BS out of this one - so they will simply ignore

Title: Alabama leads the way
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 07, 2022, 01:47:57 PM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18403/ensuring-election-integrity

Title: GA: Judge says keep records indefinitely
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 08, 2022, 02:56:33 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-2020-election-records-in-key-georgia-county-must-be-preserved-indefinitely_4392250.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-04-08-3&utm_medium=email&est=Fu22ew31pw2YKcHwPHw5158bt3aAyXSnEjet670xksgZbAtnUYRznbRsY3b0GDha%2F1dH

Title: WT: WI drop boxes questioned
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 14, 2022, 01:22:42 AM

Skeptical Wisconsin Supreme Court justices question ballot drop boxes

BY SCOTT BAUER ASSOCIATED PRESS MADISON, WIS. | Skeptical Wisconsin Supreme Court justices questioned Wednesday whether state law allows for voters to give their absentee ballot to someone else to return or whether drop boxes can be placed outside municipal clerk offices. The court’s ruling later this spring or summer is expected to establish rules for the upcoming midterm election where the battleground state’s Democratic governor and Republican U.S. senator are on the ballot.

The court in February barred the use of drop boxes outside election clerk offices for the April spring election where local offi ces such as mayor, city council and school board were decided. But the larger question the court has yet to address is whether to allow the boxes going forward in places such as libraries and grocery stores.

The fight is being closely watched as Republicans push to limit absentee voting following President Biden’s 2020 win in Wisconsin, beating Donald Trump by just under 21,000 votes. Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers and U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson are on the ballot in November.

State law is silent on drop boxes, but the bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission has told local election officials they can be placed at multiple locations and that ballots can be returned by people other than the voter.

Justice Brian Hagedorn, a conservative who sometimes sides with the court’s liberal minority, zeroed in Wednesday on what it means to deliver a ballot and whether wording in the law means someone other than the voter can return it. “If I’m mailing an absentee ballot and my wife takes the three steps to put it in the mailbox, have I violated the law?” Justice Hagedorn asked. “Do we need to decide that question?”

Attorney Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative law firm Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty that brought the lawsuit, said that question did need to be addressed. In response to questions, Mr. Esenberg said he did not think it would be legal for someone to hand their ballot to a family member within feet of a mailbox and have that person drop it in.

“I’m sure you can appreciate how absurd that result is,” liberal Justice Jill Karofsky said.

Justice Hagedorn also asked whether a ballot would be delivered “in person” if the voter had it dropped off by a representative of a political party. Charles Curtis, attorney for the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, said he thought that it would be legal as long as the ballot wasn’t tampered with.

Conservative Justice Rebecca Bradley appeared to doubt that the law would allow for anyone other than the voter to return an absentee ballot.

Advocates for people with disabilities and others argue that not allowing someone other than the voter to return a ballot makes it more difficult for voters who have limited mobility or other physical impairments.

Justice Hagedorn also questioned exactly where an absentee ballot drop box could be placed and still be considered legal.

“I think its really important that we define this carefully and not generically,” he said.

In January, Justice Hagedorn sided with liberals and put on hold a lower court’s ruling barring drop boxes outside clerk offices for the February primary. But in February, he reversed and sided with the conservative majority in reinstating the lower court’s ruling that put the ban in effect for the April election and beyond pending the Supreme Court’s ruling.

The elections commission rescinded its guidance pending the outcome of the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Wisconsin’s top elections offi cial testified last year that at least 528 drop boxes were used by more than 430 communities in the presidential election. The popularity of absentee voting exploded during the pandemic in 2020, with more than 40% of all voters casting mail ballots, a record high.

Republicans who control the Wisconsin Legislature have also tried to enact laws limiting the use of absentee ballots, but Mr. Evers has vetoed them.


Wisconsin law is silent on election ballot drop boxes, but the state elections panel has told local officials that they can be placed at multiple locations and ballots can be returned by people other than the voter. ASSOCIATED PRES

Title: WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 15, 2022, 04:44:54 PM

https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-supreme-court-state-legislature-d9714f51739a01751aba0af674442f3a?fbclid=IwAR02Lh5NgrS1cbT0NQZXKkOraH2CvC3xeySdWfwkH9DVLaiAiRZ_G9nq6-E

Title: WSJ: Rivkin & Grossman: Averting a 2024 election disaster in 2023
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 25, 2022, 01:18:44 PM

How to Avert a 2024 Election Disaster in 2023
With a clear decision in a redistricting case, the Supreme Court can head off dangerous litigation.
By David B. Rivkin Jr. and Andrew M. Grossman
April 24, 2022 2:30 pm ET

Pennsylvania lawmakers in 2019 decided to allow mail-in voting for the first time. They enacted a statute providing that “a completed mail-in ballot must be received in the office of the county board of elections no later than eight o’clock P.M. on the day of the primary or election.” In 2020 the state Democratic Party went to court, arguing that in light of the Covid pandemic, the deadline “results in an as-applied infringement” of the right to vote.

The Democrat-dominated Pennsylvania Supreme Court—its members are chosen in partisan elections—sided with the party and ordered a deadline extension, even as it acknowledged the statutory language was clear and unambiguous. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal, so the 2020 election was conducted under this and other new, judge-imposed rules.

Usually there’s no reason for the high court to review a state-court decision about state law. But election law is different. The U.S. Constitution mandates that state legislatures make the laws governing federal elections for Congress and the presidency. The Pennsylvania ruling was therefore unconstitutional. But the justices in Washington, perhaps chastened by the enduring political controversy over Bush v. Gore (2000), seem reluctant to take up such cases close to an election. Fortunately, they will soon have an opportunity to address the issue and to avert the possibility of an electoral meltdown in 2024.

Pennsylvania wasn’t alone in 2020. Faced with Republican control of many state legislatures, the Democrats and their allies took advantage of the pandemic to upend that year’s voting process. Longstanding wish-list items like near-universal voting by mail, ballot “harvesting,” drop boxes, extended deadlines, and loosened identification and signature-match requirements came to pass in much of the country, often by state court order.


The pandemic disruption may be behind us, but litigation over election rules continues. One reason is the success of the Democrats’ 2020 efforts, which their current cases treat as setting a new legal baseline. Returning to ordinary pre-pandemic procedures, they claim, amounts to unlawful “voter suppression.”

But there’s another reason for the state-court litigation explosion: redistricting after the 2020 Census. If state judges are willing to second-guess voting laws, why not the maps too? New maps are often litigated, but what’s different this time is the number of cases asking courts to toss out alleged partisan gerrymanders. The U.S. Supreme Court closed the door to such claims under the federal Constitution in Rucho v. Common Cause (2019), reasoning that there was no “clear, manageable, and politically neutral” standard for courts to apply. The same objection applies to suits brought under state law, but Rucho didn’t address that question.

So they proliferated. Many states where Democrats could pick up House seats with a different map have faced lawsuits based on open-ended state constitutional provisions, such as North Carolina’s proclaiming “all elections shall be free.” Several states’ top courts have tossed out legislature-enacted maps; the North Carolina justices even authorized a lower court to hire its own mapmakers. Republicans won state-court decisions against Democratic gerrymanders in Maryland and New York state.

None of this passes constitutional muster. State courts can interpret and apply laws governing federal elections and consider challenges to them under federal law, including the Constitution. But they have no authority to strike those laws down under state constitutions, let alone a freestanding power to contrive their own voting rules and congressional maps. The U.S. Constitution often assigns powers and duties to the “states” generally, but Article I’s Elections Clause directs that the “times, places and manner” of conducting congressional elections shall “be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof,” unless overridden by Congress. The Electors Clause similarly vests the “manner” of choosing presidential electors in “the legislature.”

In McPherson v. Blacker (1892), the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that the Electors Clause “leaves it to the legislature exclusively to define the method” of choosing electors and that this power “cannot be taken from them or modified by their state constitutions.” In State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (2015), it held that “redistricting is a legislative function, to be performed in accordance with the State’s prescriptions for lawmaking.”

Still, it’s no wonder plaintiffs and state judges have felt emboldened to buck these limitations. The decision of a state supreme court can be appealed only to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has shied away from such cases. Around the same time the justices declined to hear the 2020 Pennsylvania case, they turned back a request to block North Carolina officials from altering legislatively enacted mail-in ballot deadlines. This year, they denied emergency requests to block judge-made maps in North Carolina and Pennsylvania from being used in November.

Election-law cases present unique timing considerations, given the potentially disruptive consequences of changing laws or maps with an election approaching. When courts make changes weeks before a filing deadline or Election Day, the justices’ ability to right the wrong is severely constrained. There’s rarely a serious basis to press the issue after votes have been cast. Those circumstances apply in most election-law cases.


But unlike state-court orders meddling with voting procedures, which typically apply to one election only, congressional maps remain in place until they’re altered, which usually isn’t for a decade. So there’s no timing issue to prevent the court from hearing a redistricting case.

Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented from last month’s denial of the North Carolina stay application, arguing that the case was a good vehicle to consider the power of state courts to rework federal-election laws. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote separately to say that the court should take a case raising the issue, but this one came too close to the 2022 election. North Carolina’s House speaker has petitioned the court to take the case in its next term. If it does, a decision would likely come next summer, nearly a year and a half before the 2024 election.

The court’s failure to resolve this issue could spell catastrophe. If the 2024 presidential vote is close in decisive states, the result will be an onslaught of litigation combining all the worst features of the 2000 and 2020 election controversies. The court’s precedents in this area all point toward legislature supremacy but leave the door cracked enough for canny litigants, abetted by state judges, to shove it open and seize electoral advantage. To avoid a constitutional crisis, the justices need to articulate with clarity that state courts can’t rely on state constitutions or their own judicial power to alter either congressional redistricting maps or voting rules in federal elections.

Mr. Rivkin served at the Justice Department and the White House Counsel’s Office in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations. Mr. Grossman is an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute. Both practice appellate and constitutional law in Washington.

Title: democrat lawyers and judges rigged the 2020 election
Post by: ccp on April 25, 2022, 01:59:20 PM

"Pennsylvania wasn’t alone in 2020. Faced with Republican control of many state legislatures, the Democrats and their allies took advantage of the pandemic to upend that year’s voting process. Longstanding wish-list items like near-universal voting by mail, ballot “harvesting,” drop boxes, extended deadlines, and loosened identification and signature-match requirements came to pass in much of the country, often by state court order."

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2021/10/20/republican-party-cant-leave-big-lie-why-im-leaving/8527660002/

so they tell us with screeching nails on black boards on the MSM

Title: WI county bans private funding of elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 27, 2022, 01:41:03 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/wisconsin-county-takes-the-lead-in-banning-private-funding-of-elections_4431235.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-04-27-3&utm_medium=email&est=Ynu2OYiOhotS%2BV3gv8Il4y2xH8PdapOLktYLhtLHozu%2Fdv9jbmUhOlS8w2z37gOv8hHW

Title: From 2005 Carter Election Commission recommends
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 28, 2022, 03:51:31 PM

https://www.jurist.org/news/2005/09/election-commission-recommends/

Election commission recommends overhaul of US election system
Kate Heneroty
SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 10:48:00 AM

[JURIST] The private Commission on Federal Election Reform [commission website], a 21-member bipartisan panel headed by former US President Jimmy Carter [Wikipedia profile] and former Secretary of State James Baker [Wikipedia profile], recommended Monday that widespread changes be made to the federal electoral process to ensure fairness and accuracy. The Commission, which spent five months studying the most pressing problems with the nation's electoral system, issued 87 recommendations [PDF summary; full text, PDF] and urged Congress to enact the changes if political parties don't change the system by 2008. The Commission's recommendations include requiring a paper trail for electronic voting machines, requiring photo ID at the polls, a reorganization of the presidential primary system, unrestricted access for all "legitimate domestic and international election observers" and prohibiting senior election officials from serving political campaigns in a partisan way. According to Commission Executive Director Robert Pastor, "Many of the recommendations build on the Help America Vote Act, while correcting its vagueness and limitations." The Help America Vote Act [text] was passed by Congress in 2002 with the intention of helping states update voting systems, streamline voter registration and provide voter and poll worker education. The Los Angeles Times has more. American University's Center for Democracy & Election Management has additional resources.
=====================

https://www.jurist.org/news/2005/09/carter-baker-election-commission/?fbclid=IwAR0_i70E3tfKMTpE5I5ltMLk458FFk6TVwALBwie9GbNTLWT4Gnhi4v5kKc#

Title: Summary of Carter-Baker Commission
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 28, 2022, 04:08:17 PM

Second post

https://pureintegritymichiganelections.org/the-carter-baker-commission-on-federal-election-reform/

Title: MUST! VOTE! HARDER! Alaska edition
Post by: G M on May 01, 2022, 01:30:38 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/rinos-democrats-just-stole-future-elections-deep-red-alaska-republican-party-not-lift-finger-stop/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 01, 2022, 01:43:40 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/researcher-featured-in-2000-mules-documentary-explains-how-local-election-fraud-was-grown-to-national-scale_4437085.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-01-3&utm_medium=email&est=idYYMvUgT%2BmkPAkqLyhmVAoXAA6lJAbFPTp4YgJaE9jmqKfsHSslT5XhfKZ6phPx%2B9N0

Title: 2000 Mules, D'inesh, D'Sousa
Post by: DougMacG on May 02, 2022, 03:27:36 PM

I've been saying we need a Project Veritas undercover approach to discovering and eliminating the fraud.  This is even better if true. They went through state camera footage obtained through freedom of information act requests.

What exactly did they find?  Massive scale, in violation of laws, they have the footage, will anyone investigate further and prosecute?

My understanding is that D'Souza is a reliable source.  Agree?

We need to send our correspondent to the launch.

Sebastian Gorka had Dinesh on today.

Title: Re: 2000 Mules, D'inesh, D'Sousa
Post by: G M on May 02, 2022, 03:33:06 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on May 02, 2022, 03:27:36 PM

I've been saying we need a Project Veritas undercover approach to discovering and eliminating the fraud.  This is even better if true. They went through state camera footage obtained through freedom of information act requests.

What exactly did they find?  Massive scale, in violation of laws, they have the footage, will anyone investigate further and prosecute?

My understanding is that D'Souza is a reliable source.  Agree?

We need to send our correspondent to the launch.

Sebastian Gorka had Dinesh on today.

Reminder, Project Veritas DID election stings. Who went to jail? NO ONE.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ivn0C8oebg

Title: Dinesh D'Souza
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 02, 2022, 07:08:29 PM

Of Mules and Donkeys
Dinesh D’Souza
May 2, 2022 Updated: May 2, 2022
Commentary
Today, I release a new documentary film called “2000 Mules.”

The film releases in 300 theaters on May 2 and May 4, and there’s an in-home virtual premiere on May 7. After that, it will be available for digital download, but only on two uncancellable platforms: the Rumble-owned platform Locals and the Salem Media platform SalemNow. I’ve made six documentaries, but in an age of censorship, you have to create a novel way of distributing them.

Here I want to talk about mules and donkeys. Strictly speaking, of course, a mule is a cross between a horse and a donkey. A few months after I came to the United States as an exchange student from India, my host parent in Arizona took me to the Grand Canyon.

“We can try to walk down,” they told me, “or we can ride a mule.”

We chose to walk, but on the way down we saw mules carrying tourists and sure-footedly making their way down the treacherous pathways to the bottom of the canyon.

2000 Mules: Extended Trailer

The term mule is now commonly used in drug trafficking and sex trafficking. The mule is the middleman, the guy who makes the transport. My friend Catherine Engelbrecht, who runs the election intelligence organization True the Vote, borrowed this term to apply it to the paid political operatives who engage in ballot trafficking. Mules are professional deliverymen and women who are hired by left-wing organizations to deliver fraudulent and illegal ballots to mail-in dropboxes.

Now let’s turn to the evidence in the movie that was assembled by True the Vote. The organization purchased 10 trillion pings of cellphone data. Basically, they bought the data covering all cellphone movements in key urban areas of the five swing states in which the 2020 election was decided. True the Vote then ran a search algorithm seeking to ferret out mules who picked up stashes of ballots from left-wing organizations embedded in those cities and then made delivery drops of those ballots to 10 or more drop boxes.

The point of this high bar was to avoid false positives and only capture the most industrious mules. After all, there might be some reason why a person might stop by a local activist organization and then go to, say, two drop boxes. Perhaps he dropped off his ballot at the first and then had to tie his shoelace, causing him to stop at the second. But can anyone think of a rational reason for someone to go to 10 mail-in drop boxes? The only conceivable reason is to dump illegal ballots.

Since each of our cellphones has a distinct ID, True the Vote has the cellphone IDs of more than 2,000 mules hired by left-wing organizations to do ballot trafficking in Atlanta, Phoenix, Detroit, Milwaukee, and the greater Philadelphia area. These mules alone generated approximately 400,000 illegal ballots. When you break down the fraud state by state, you see that it was more than enough fraud to tip the balance in the presidential election. Trump should have won, not Biden.

The geotracking evidence is corroborated by video evidence, and I’m talking about the official surveillance video taken by the states themselves. True the Vote obtained more than 4 million minutes of video, and the movie shows mule after mule after mule stuffing illegal ballots into the drop boxes.

Typically, this occurred in the middle of the night. In many cases, you can see the mules stuffing in multiple ballots. Some mules wear gloves, so as not to leave fingerprints. Mules typically take photos of the ballots going into the boxes, evidently to confirm that they’re performing the work so that they can get paid.

All of this is flatly illegal. To understand this, we must make an important distinction between vote harvesting—legal in some states—and paid ballot harvesting—illegal in all states. In Georgia, for example, it’s legal to give your absentee ballot to a family member or caregiver to drop off. In no state, however, can money change hands, whether it’s money paid to a voter or money paid to a mule or other type of delivery man.

Who’s deploying the mules? I believe the answer is the donkeys. By donkeys, I obviously mean the Democrats—the party of the donkey. Donkeys are the recognized experts at election fraud. They’ve been doing it since the 19th century. In the Tammany Hall days, for instance, Democrats would greet immigrants coming right off the boat, ask them to sign ballots that the Democrats would later fill out on their behalf, and give them in exchange a bottle of alcohol or a reference for someplace where they might find work.

This fraud operation was ramped up in the 2020 election, largely because of the changes in the rules instituted under the pretext of COVID-19. Suddenly, mail-in ballots were dispatched by the tens of millions. Suddenly, mail-in drop boxes proliferated, especially in the major donkey strongholds. No wonder the fraudsters saw their opportunity to escalate their operations—and they did.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Dinesh D’Souza

Title: Re: Dinesh D'Souza
Post by: G M on May 02, 2022, 07:30:07 PM

I'm sure once AG Garland (Deep State Andy approved!) sees the movie, he'll pull the FBI off of hunting J6 protesters and get the DOJ focused on ending vote fraud forever!

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 02, 2022, 07:08:29 PM

Of Mules and Donkeys
Dinesh D’Souza
May 2, 2022 Updated: May 2, 2022
Commentary
Today, I release a new documentary film called “2000 Mules.”

The film releases in 300 theaters on May 2 and May 4, and there’s an in-home virtual premiere on May 7. After that, it will be available for digital download, but only on two uncancellable platforms: the Rumble-owned platform Locals and the Salem Media platform SalemNow. I’ve made six documentaries, but in an age of censorship, you have to create a novel way of distributing them.

Here I want to talk about mules and donkeys. Strictly speaking, of course, a mule is a cross between a horse and a donkey. A few months after I came to the United States as an exchange student from India, my host parent in Arizona took me to the Grand Canyon.

“We can try to walk down,” they told me, “or we can ride a mule.”

We chose to walk, but on the way down we saw mules carrying tourists and sure-footedly making their way down the treacherous pathways to the bottom of the canyon.

2000 Mules: Extended Trailer

The term mule is now commonly used in drug trafficking and sex trafficking. The mule is the middleman, the guy who makes the transport. My friend Catherine Engelbrecht, who runs the election intelligence organization True the Vote, borrowed this term to apply it to the paid political operatives who engage in ballot trafficking. Mules are professional deliverymen and women who are hired by left-wing organizations to deliver fraudulent and illegal ballots to mail-in dropboxes.

Now let’s turn to the evidence in the movie that was assembled by True the Vote. The organization purchased 10 trillion pings of cellphone data. Basically, they bought the data covering all cellphone movements in key urban areas of the five swing states in which the 2020 election was decided. True the Vote then ran a search algorithm seeking to ferret out mules who picked up stashes of ballots from left-wing organizations embedded in those cities and then made delivery drops of those ballots to 10 or more drop boxes.

The point of this high bar was to avoid false positives and only capture the most industrious mules. After all, there might be some reason why a person might stop by a local activist organization and then go to, say, two drop boxes. Perhaps he dropped off his ballot at the first and then had to tie his shoelace, causing him to stop at the second. But can anyone think of a rational reason for someone to go to 10 mail-in drop boxes? The only conceivable reason is to dump illegal ballots.

Since each of our cellphones has a distinct ID, True the Vote has the cellphone IDs of more than 2,000 mules hired by left-wing organizations to do ballot trafficking in Atlanta, Phoenix, Detroit, Milwaukee, and the greater Philadelphia area. These mules alone generated approximately 400,000 illegal ballots. When you break down the fraud state by state, you see that it was more than enough fraud to tip the balance in the presidential election. Trump should have won, not Biden.

The geotracking evidence is corroborated by video evidence, and I’m talking about the official surveillance video taken by the states themselves. True the Vote obtained more than 4 million minutes of video, and the movie shows mule after mule after mule stuffing illegal ballots into the drop boxes.

Typically, this occurred in the middle of the night. In many cases, you can see the mules stuffing in multiple ballots. Some mules wear gloves, so as not to leave fingerprints. Mules typically take photos of the ballots going into the boxes, evidently to confirm that they’re performing the work so that they can get paid.

All of this is flatly illegal. To understand this, we must make an important distinction between vote harvesting—legal in some states—and paid ballot harvesting—illegal in all states. In Georgia, for example, it’s legal to give your absentee ballot to a family member or caregiver to drop off. In no state, however, can money change hands, whether it’s money paid to a voter or money paid to a mule or other type of delivery man.

Who’s deploying the mules? I believe the answer is the donkeys. By donkeys, I obviously mean the Democrats—the party of the donkey. Donkeys are the recognized experts at election fraud. They’ve been doing it since the 19th century. In the Tammany Hall days, for instance, Democrats would greet immigrants coming right off the boat, ask them to sign ballots that the Democrats would later fill out on their behalf, and give them in exchange a bottle of alcohol or a reference for someplace where they might find work.

This fraud operation was ramped up in the 2020 election, largely because of the changes in the rules instituted under the pretext of COVID-19. Suddenly, mail-in ballots were dispatched by the tens of millions. Suddenly, mail-in drop boxes proliferated, especially in the major donkey strongholds. No wonder the fraudsters saw their opportunity to escalate their operations—and they did.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Dinesh D’Souza

Title: Informant from D'Souza's film detail ballot harvesting operation
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 02, 2022, 09:35:02 PM

https://www.westernjournal.com/informant-appearing-dsouzas-doc-film-2000-mules-details-alleged-ballot-harvesting-operation-worked/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=conservativetribune&utm_content=2022-05-02&utm_campaign=manualpost&fbclid=IwAR1IRUnZXrTEScsRbBIVfzztvBqVMGiorlHWVm6vQe10v6jYM_qrFMoJHpg

Title: Gatestone: Election Integrity Dead
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 03, 2022, 03:39:33 AM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18475/election-integrity-dead

Title: Re: Gatestone: Election Integrity Dead
Post by: G M on May 03, 2022, 03:52:01 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 03, 2022, 03:39:33 AM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18475/election-integrity-dead

Don’t worry, we will just vote harder!

Right guys?

Title: Dinesh : 2000 Mules
Post by: ccp on May 07, 2022, 10:34:07 AM

trailor:

https://dinesh.locals.com/post/2083099/2000-mules

I want to see it
I guess I have to buy a streaming version

Dinesh - superstar !!

I like him like VDH. Newt , Tucker  8-)

PS - we all knew this happened
        amazing it took cell phone pings to prove it
       MSM - LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: Re: Dinesh : 2000 Mules
Post by: G M on May 07, 2022, 10:38:47 AM

Wait for the sequels, they'll be even better.

Quote from: ccp on May 07, 2022, 10:34:07 AM

trailor:

https://dinesh.locals.com/post/2083099/2000-mules

I want to see it
I guess I have to buy a streaming version

Dinesh - superstar !!

I like him like VDH. Newt , Tucker  8-)

PS - we all knew this happened
        amazing it took cell phone pings to prove it
       MSM - LIES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Title: MI police seize vote machine during investigation into possible breaches
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 07, 2022, 12:34:39 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/michigan-police-seize-voting-machine-during-investigation-into-possible-election-breaches_4452131.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-07-3&utm_medium=email&est=C6SHgAA2Mkuh91FoaZrYyJV2HheJq7sKEHrW5dh%2FgPw0ciKitV6EijmUdTZM0ESye5dX

Title: PAC s
Post by: ccp on May 08, 2022, 10:12:56 AM

https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/what-is-a-pac

I think this was tested at the SCOTUS level

but I still don't like it

it skirts the the concept of keeping the rich dominating elections

Title: D'Souza
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 09, 2022, 10:14:03 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/enough-fraudulent-votes-identified-to-change-2020-election-outcome-dinesh-dsouza_4446415.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-09-1&utm_medium=email&est=PTFkx1mLlz89djYgVNyon1YG1ZJUY3tlMkXX5ZEoCvaeQPEWQIuGq0rN%2FThpr1PQX0On

Title: left's response to 2200 mules
Post by: ccp on May 09, 2022, 10:46:05 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/colorado-voting-officials-adopt-safety-080736604.html


of course

Title: I see dead people...
Post by: G M on May 09, 2022, 08:37:09 PM

https://www.theburningplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Screenshot-2022-05-07-at-9.13.32-PM-768x1192.jpg

(https://www.theburningplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Screenshot-2022-05-07-at-9.13.32-PM-768x1192.jpg)

Title: 2000 Mules, D'inesh, D'Sousa review
Post by: DougMacG on May 10, 2022, 04:39:37 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2022/05/05/2000-mules-documentary-provides-compelling-evidence-that-2020-election-was-stolen/

Title: See 2000 Mules here!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 10, 2022, 03:08:42 PM

https://dinesh.locals.com/post/2083099/2000-mules

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 11, 2022, 08:59:26 AM

Group launches bid to elect officials committed to secure elections

BY HARIS ALIC THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A center-right political group announced Monday a $2 million endeavor to elect state election officials committed to strengthening the integrity of the ballot.

The Election Transparency Initiative (ETI) plans to be active in several states this election cycle targeting at least 10 swing states, including Arizona, Michigan, Georgia and Pennsylvania considered pivotal ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

“It’s easy for candidates running for office to embrace the concept of election integrity, but it takes a greater examination to determine if they actually support free and fair elections in practice,” said Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia attorney general and ETI’s national chairman.

A coalition of several influential national conservative groups, including FreedomWorks and the legislative affiliate of the Family Research Council, are working in support of ETI’s effort, but not financing its work.

ETI will specifically work to elect candidates to state legislatures, as well as secretary of state offices — two public positions that have significant sway over elections.

State legislatures are responsible for determining policy, including how individuals vote or if they need to prove identity to do so. Secretaries of state, meanwhile, administer elections, overseeing everything from voter rolls to the date and times that polls are open.

To receive the coalition’s endorsement, which includes campaign financing help and get-outthe- vote efforts, candidates will have to back voter ID laws. They will also have to pledge to oppose early voting, ballot harvesting, same-day voter registration and the private funding of elections, among others.

“If candidates truly support making it easy to vote and hard to cheat in our elections, they should have no hesitation backing up their public pronouncements and campaign promises by signing their name to the coalition’s comprehensive election integrity pledge,” Mr. Cuccinelli said. “Election integrity is a decisive issue for successful campaigns in 2022.” The effort is meant to push back on the stark politicization of elections that has taken place since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic. This year alone, Republicans and Democrats are targeting state Supreme Court and secretary of state races across the country.

Both parties say that holding such offices will be critical in 2024, especially if there is another close election. President Biden, himself, summed up the sentiment earlier this year when pushing an unsuccessful rewrite of the nation’s voting laws.

“Not just whether or not people get to vote, [but] who counts the vote,” Mr. Biden said. “That’s what this is about.”

At the height of the pandemic in 2020, state legislatures overhauled voting laws to hold elections as safely as possible.

In some instances, states signifi cantly expanded early voting and implemented new guidelines allowing for temporary vote-bymail. The changes were not uniform among individual counties, let alone all 50 states.

Since the 2020 contest, numerous state elected officials have admitted that many of the pandemic voting laws were flawed.

“I was as frustrated as anybody else,” Georgia’s Republican Gov. Brian Kemp said at a recent gubernatorial debate. “That’s why we passed the strongest election integrity act in the country, because a lot of things were done by other people.”

Last year, under Mr. Kemp, Georgia streamlined its voting laws. The overhaul greatly changed the requirements for regular and absentee voting and added ballot security measures.

Voters seeking absentee ballots are now required to provide proof of identification.

Previously, voters had to ensure only that the signature on their absentee ballot matched the signature on file with local elections officials.

The law also prohibited political organizations from handing out food and water within 150 feet of a polling location or 25 feet of a voter. During the 2020 election, some groups had solicited voters outside polling locations with items inscribed with a candidate’s message, symbol or likeness.

The new law makes such political advertising at the polls a misdemeanor offense. Democrats, who are working just as feverishly to elect state election officials, say such legislation is a throwback to the era of racial segregation.

Title: Election fraud and the nattering nabobs of negativity
Post by: DougMacG on May 16, 2022, 09:22:51 AM

Above Spiro Agnew quote meant in good fun but the message is mission critical.  There is no point in pursuing good content on a site that mocks conservatives for voting and tells them to give up.  I've tried everything to change your mind, but no.

I can't affiliate with that message - even though I agree with you on maybe 99% of issues.

* "Local is all you have the chance to control, state and federal elections have been and will be stolen." *

It's from another thread because that is the message coming through on all the threads.  'All is lost, don't bother trying to stop it'. 

Maybe we won't win but 'can't win' is wrong in so many ways, no matter how quick or strong the dismissals.

FEDERAL ELECTIONS draw in voters for LOCAL elections.  By telling people don't bother with state and federal, to the extent anyone reads here or similar messages elsewhere, you are helping to make the red jurisdictions fewer and fewer and less red - while more optimistic messages have accomplished the opposite.

In the category of elections that matter, no one mentioned the Supreme Court where a 6-3 or 5-4 majority is won only by winning Presidential and Senatorial elections over an extended period.  It's the only thing left holding up the constitution - which is also mission critical.  Funny that it's now Democrats who think they can't do that.

Do the math on cheating.  The state of the fraud argument today is the 2000 Mules documentary.  Let's assume this and more is true regarding organized Democrat cheating.  We are talking about 330 thousand votes out of 330 million people.  One out of a thousand.  Reduce that to eligible voters, maybe it's one in 500.  That was enough to sway the election - because we failed to otherwise win the argument on the candidates and the issues to better than about a 49-49% tie.  And the Senate is 50-50, while the states lean conservative by more like 30-20.  Closer to a 60-40 R Senate is attainable, as is 270+ electoral votes consistently.

Leave the current cheat in (we won't) and we have to change one in a thousand from D to R to offset it.  We can't change the mindset and vote of one in a thousand?  Are you kidding?  We're changing minds faster than ever just by watching Democrats govern.  If we came out with a coherent and persuasive message, we could own the electoral market share of millions of disillusioned liberals and independents and maybe win more conservatives too.  Have you seen the markets lately (of course you have)?  Inflation is going crazy, real wages are shrinking, energy is basically banned with no backup coming.  It's a true war on the working AND the investing classes.  And we can't win the who-can-govern-better argument by better than 50-50?

'Well, they will just cheat more and more.'   - No, they will cheat less and less when the rules tighten up, when the prosecutions begin, when these 24 hours drop off boxes are closed and every ballot is monitored. 

80% want voter ID.  Can't pass that?  B*llsh*t.  'We stop the cheating one way and they will do it another way?'  Yes, but they will be less effective from prison.  Less effective when they are out of power.  Less effective under tighter rules and enforcement.

Instead of pointing out no enforcement, how about we cause enforcement?

The repeating negative message around here doesn't have to be the outcome.  We stop the cheating by winning the elections - in more counties, in more states, by wider margins.  Not by retreating, by winning.

If that's not the mission, I'm out.

Title: Re: Election fraud and the nattering nabobs of negativity
Post by: G M on May 16, 2022, 12:57:24 PM

I go dangerous places and do dangerous things sometimes. Seeing things the way you want things to be, rather than seeing things as they are is a good way to get hurt or worse.

Truth matters.

The 2020 election was painfully, obviously stolen. Not just the dems took part, much of the republican party was involved. The Deep State illegally spied on Candidate Trump and did what was one of their "Color Revolutions" on the American Republic. They not only violated their oaths to the constitution, they violated MANY federal laws.

Who went to jail? No one.

Who will go to jail? No one.

The quasi-official militias of the Deep State/DNC are free to BURN/LOOT/MURDER without consequence.

Meanwhile, the Deep State can kill or imprison anyone who protests in Garland's Gulag, often without the token elements of due process.

Think you still live in a free country? Explain the below to me:

https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/sharyl-attkisson-fbi-intended-to-plant-child-porn-on-my-husbands-computer/

The walls of a police state are being erected around us. You don't get to vote your way out of tyranny and you sure don't get to vote your way out of genocide.

https://allthatsinteresting.com/holodomor-ukrainian-famine#23

"Just wait for the midterms, Stalin!"

Read up on the Ghost Dancers. They really believed that if they performed the correct rituals, the destruction of their way of life would be magically reversed.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ghost-Dance

I guess they should have voted harder.

Quote from: DougMacG on May 16, 2022, 09:22:51 AM

Above Spiro Agnew quote meant in good fun but the message is mission critical.  There is no point in pursuing good content on a site that mocks conservatives for voting and tells them to give up.  I've tried everything to change your mind, but no.

I can't affiliate with that message - even though I agree with you on maybe 99% of issues.

* "Local is all you have the chance to control, state and federal elections have been and will be stolen." *

It's from another thread because that is the message coming through on all the threads.  'All is lost, don't bother trying to stop it'. 

Maybe we won't win but 'can't win' is wrong in so many ways, no matter how quick or strong the dismissals.

FEDERAL ELECTIONS draw in voters for LOCAL elections.  By telling people don't bother with state and federal, to the extent anyone reads here or similar messages elsewhere, you are helping to make the red jurisdictions fewer and fewer and less red - while more optimistic messages have accomplished the opposite.

In the category of elections that matter, no one mentioned the Supreme Court where a 6-3 or 5-4 majority is won only by winning Presidential and Senatorial elections over an extended period.  It's the only thing left holding up the constitution - which is also mission critical.  Funny that it's now Democrats who think they can't do that.

Do the math on cheating.  The state of the fraud argument today is the 2000 Mules documentary.  Let's assume this and more is true regarding organized Democrat cheating.  We are talking about 330 thousand votes out of 330 million people.  One out of a thousand.  Reduce that to eligible voters, maybe it's one in 500.  That was enough to sway the election - because we failed to otherwise win the argument on the candidates and the issues to better than about a 49-49% tie.  And the Senate is 50-50, while the states lean conservative by more like 30-20.  Closer to a 60-40 R Senate is attainable, as is 270+ electoral votes consistently.

Leave the current cheat in (we won't) and we have to change one in a thousand from D to R to offset it.  We can't change the mindset and vote of one in a thousand?  Are you kidding?  We're changing minds faster than ever just by watching Democrats govern.  If we came out with a coherent and persuasive message, we could own the electoral market share of millions of disillusioned liberals and independents and maybe win more conservatives too.  Have you seen the markets lately (of course you have)?  Inflation is going crazy, real wages are shrinking, energy is basically banned with no backup coming.  It's a true war on the working AND the investing classes.  And we can't win the who-can-govern-better argument by better than 50-50?

'Well, they will just cheat more and more.'   - No, they will cheat less and less when the rules tighten up, when the prosecutions begin, when these 24 hours drop off boxes are closed and every ballot is monitored. 

80% want voter ID.  Can't pass that?  B*llsh*t.  'We stop the cheating one way and they will do it another way?'  Yes, but they will be less effective from prison.  Less effective when they are out of power.  Less effective under tighter rules and enforcement.

Instead of pointing out no enforcement, how about we cause enforcement?

The repeating negative message around here doesn't have to be the outcome.  We stop the cheating by winning the elections - in more counties, in more states, by wider margins.  Not by retreating, by winning.

If that's not the mission, I'm out.

Title: Let's see what the State Legislatures do with this.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 17, 2022, 02:33:35 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/facts-matter-may-16-2nd-state-featured-in-2000-mules-issues-subpoenas-for-the-names-of-ballots-mules-and-funding-ngos_4470123.html?utm_source=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-05-17-1&utm_medium=email&est=wG4jtWbaASc5Ak2tJDrSEmIRKudgUL7qd%2F4SG9rA1vbrOpbn59dsJkpCZE77Ln8TCo5r

Title: VOTE HARDER next time!
Post by: G M on May 18, 2022, 07:23:19 PM

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/106/859/143/original/bf81aa5b35f42e38.jpeg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/106/859/143/original/bf81aa5b35f42e38.jpeg)

Title: I was told this wouldn't happen again!
Post by: G M on May 19, 2022, 06:58:38 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/deja-vu-uniparty-stealing-pa-gop-primary-dr-oz-delaying-results-allegheny-county-third-world-tactics/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 19, 2022, 07:21:37 AM

so very strange so  many elections are soooooo close
 :?

I don't trust this one if OZ squeaks ahead


sad

I cannot trust elections anymore

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 19, 2022, 07:37:52 AM

Quote from: ccp on May 19, 2022, 07:21:37 AM

so very strange so  many elections are soooooo close
 :?

I don't trust this one if OZ squeaks ahead


sad

I cannot trust elections anymore

I guess we must VOTE EVEN HARDER!

Yes?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 19, 2022, 07:58:44 AM

"I guess we must VOTE EVEN HARDER!

Yes?"

look , we fight as hard as we can
and never give up

everybody wrote off Ukrainians
yet they never gave up
and the Ruskis are paying big time
maybe even vlad
 poisoned

NEVER give in
prepare for the worst
and  fight for the best

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 19, 2022, 08:05:23 AM

Actual fighting is coming.

Be in a place where you are allowed to defend yourself when it starts.

Tick-tock.

Quote from: ccp on May 19, 2022, 07:58:44 AM

"I guess we must VOTE EVEN HARDER!

Yes?"

look , we fight as hard as we can
and never give up

everybody wrote of Ukrainians
yet they never gave up
and the Ruskis are paying big time
maybe even vlad
 poisoned

NEVER give in
prepare for the worst
and  fight for the best

Title: Pillow Lindell sanctioned over frivolous election suit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2022, 03:14:12 AM

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-19/mypillow-s-lindell-sanctioned-over-frivolous-election-suit?fbclid=IwAR0VJz-G6SRcYF9yWqKdGzvjLtambK7d_aKHYmfxk6LsgPql7Oun6E-9AGk

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 20, 2022, 05:36:32 AM

Lindell

well he tried

probably he was right

but he couldn't come up with the goods

Dinesh has

but of course he is ignored banned

and only in. few "patriot" theaters

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2022, 07:30:21 AM

For me, Lindell blustered and failed to deliver the substance he promised and instead farted a pillow ad.

One example of many as to why our claims of electoral fraud are not taken seriously.

Title: MSM blows off proof of fraud in '20
Post by: ccp on May 23, 2022, 09:21:18 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-lies-2020-election-root-150004262.html

obviously NYT totally ignores 2000 Mules

and will continue to do so
or discredit it if they are pushed to do so.

Republicans do not want to make the '22 or '24 election about the the '20 but they need to get serious about preventing this from happening again

and too many are not
 :-(

Title: Washington Post
Post by: ccp on May 23, 2022, 02:49:35 PM

of course claims all of 2000 mules is simply bogus and offers NO evidence of massive fraud:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/19/even-geolocation-maps-2000-mules-are-misleading/

 :roll:

Title: This was then , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2022, 04:42:57 PM

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/19/opinion/location-tracking-cell-phone.html?fbclid=IwAR3czwoczWQyyHHnHFs5OQywMJ_giSnKYiU8UTwkzB8SuiInb3wEQsuEV5c

Title: GA vote turnout just fine
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 24, 2022, 02:43:03 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/05/the-big-lie-about-georgia-voting-has-been-shredded/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Friday%202022-05-23&utm_term=NRDaily-Smart

Title: cell phone tracking
Post by: ccp on May 24, 2022, 06:30:11 AM

I assumed when I saw 2000 Mules all of us in the theater were  being tracked and catalogued on someone's list somewhere.

I am on someone's enemy watch list, or terrorist watch list somewhere............

just because I saw a movie that does not jive with the DNC swamp

Title: Re: cell phone tracking
Post by: G M on May 24, 2022, 07:54:59 AM

Quote from: ccp on May 24, 2022, 06:30:11 AM

I assumed when I saw 2000 Mules all of us in the theater were  being tracked and catalogued on someone's list somewhere.

I am on someone's enemy watch list, or terrorist watch list somewhere............

just because I saw a movie that does not jive with the DNC swamp

They have plans for us.

Plan accordingly.

Title: CISA warns about Dominion machines
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 02, 2022, 03:31:11 AM

https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2022/06/01/republicans-pounce-in-3-2-1-cisa-warns-of-vulnerabilities-in-dominion-voting-machines-currently-used-in-16-states-ap-reports/?bcid=a1714aba6c197395707aecde9ada65a65090b7be5f45291f6611e9cf3bd6bace&utm_campaign=nl&utm_medium=email&utm_source=twtydaily

Title: Rep poll watchers in Dem strongholds?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 03, 2022, 08:17:48 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jun/2/gop-poll-workers-democratic-strongholds-election/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=morning&utm_term=newsletter&utm_content=morning&bt_ee=f8iX8KJdbrsRR3Tghjf6O7aSVyB5HI1rsXdAe4L5YDcUVheVHF0a0BpkkSHN3Y92&bt_ts=1654249553338

Title: AZ: Two years too late, fraud proved
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 04, 2022, 01:46:58 PM

2020 Election: Arizona Woman Pleads Guilty to ‘Sophisticated’ Ballot Harvesting Scheme
By Gary Bai June 3, 2022 Updated: June 4, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
6:08



1

An Arizona woman has pleaded guilty to using her position in the Democratic Party to illegally harvest ballots in a ballot abuse scheme.

Guillermina Fuentes, the 66-year-old former mayor of San Luis, Arizona, pleaded guilty on June 2 to one count of ballot abuse for her role in an August 2020 primary election ballot harvesting scheme, according to the Arizona Attorney General’s office. Arizona attorney general’s office investigators said the operation was “sophisticated,” reported The Associated Press.

The scheme involved early ballots from other voters that were collected and deposited into a ballot box on primary election day, the office said.

Fuentes’s plea came as a result of an ongoing election fraud investigation conducted by the Arizona Attorney General office’s Election Integrity Unit. She was indicted in December 2020.

Fuentes, of Yuma County, is the owner of a local construction business, former mayor of San Luis, Arizona, and a Democratic precinct committee person.

She admitted to “knowingly” collecting early ballots from four persons who is not her family member, household member, or caretaker, or on or about Aug. 4, 2020, the day of the primary election, according to her plea agreement.

Fuentes further admitted that the early ballots were later provided to Alma Juarez, who pleaded guilty in January to one count of ballot abuse, a misdemeanor with a maximum sentence of six months with probation available, according to Juarez’s plea agreement.

The former mayor will be sentenced on June 30.

Fuentes told The Epoch Times on Friday that the charge was a result of “political witchcraft” and that her political opponents “hated” her.

In a response to a press inquiry from The Epoch Times, Fuente’s attorney called Arizona’s ballot abuse law a race-based “ongoing anti-democratic, state-wide, and national voter suppression efforts.”

Parallel Investigations
Tania Pavlak, a spokesperson from the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office, told The Epoch Times that the Sheriff’s office has not been involved in prosecuting Fuentes, as the Arizona Attorney General’s office and the county sheriff’s office are conducting separate and parallel investigations on voting fraud allegations in the state.

Pavlak said the sheriff’s office is conducting its own voter fraud investigation and currently has 16 open cases related to either the 2020 election or the 2022 primaries. She declined to comment on how many cases are related to either election.

The “pattern of fraudulent voter registration forms,” according to a May 11 statement made by the sheriff’s office, include impersonation fraud, false registrations, duplicate voting, and fraudulent use of absentee ballots.


The spokesperson said the Yuma County Recorder’s Office detected a pattern of fraudulent voter registration, in which a number of people sent in duplicate forms or documents with false information on them, and referred the cases to the county’s sheriff.

“We already had been investigating these cases for the past few months and so the sheriff wanted to make sure we sent out that information with election season now hot and up and running. That way, people were aware of what was happening and also could stay vigilant,” Pavlak said.

“What they’re seeing is that there are registration forms that are being either falsified or people that are double registering with information that doesn’t match their current registration,” she added.

Ballot Harvesting Hearing
Fuentes’s guilty plea came two days after a hearing at the Arizona legislature where the state’s Senate and House lawmakers heard evidence and allegations pertaining to a state-wide ballot harvesting campaign during the 2020 presidential election.

Election integrity organization “True the Vote” at the hearing presented evidence of cell phone tracking data showing that more than 200 devices had visited ballot drop boxes in two of the state’s largest counties no less than 5,700 times during the 2020 election.

“When we started the project, we didn’t know [what we would find],” said Catherine Engelbrecht, the Texas group’s founder and president, at the May 31 hearing.

“We began to think through what is a realistic expectation or threshold for when going to a drop box is too many times. We wanted to focus on a clear, narrow data set [to demonstrate] extreme outlier behavior.”

Epoch Times Photo
True the Vote founder and president Catherine Engelbrecht makes a point during a presentation on ballot trafficking at the Arizona statehouse on May 31, 2022. Seated next to her is True the Vote data investigator Gregg Phillips. (Allan Stein/The Epoch Times)
The group’s investigators settled on 10 visits as outlier behavior—but in Arizona, they found that each alleged ballot harvestor went an average of 21 times each, Engelbrecht said.

In Yuma County, the study found 1,435 unique drop box visits by 41 target devices based on cell phone signals, or “pings.”

Lawmakers—all Republican—vowed to move forward with bill HB-2289 that would make ballot drop boxes illegal in Arizona.

“The only thing I would like to see come out of this meeting is people going to jail,” said State Rep. Quang Nguyen (R). “I would just like to see people cuffed.”

Engelbrecht told The Epoch Times on June 3 that the state attorney general’s investigation, which led to the indictments of Fuentes and Juarez, shows that this issue is “getting a broader look.”

“Based on our research, the ‘Arizona model’ is one that is followed across the country, and it involves national organizations,” she said, referring to alleged widespread ballot harvesting.

“So we, the American people, need to continue the pressure on to continue investigations moving forward to get to the bottom of what’s happening, not just in Yuma County, Arizona, but in many counties across this country.”

Zachary Stieber and Allan Stein contributed to this report.

Title: Dinesh on Megyn Kelly podcast :ie 2000 Mules
Post by: ccp on June 05, 2022, 11:09:59 AM

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dinesh-dsouza-on-ballot-trafficking-election-integrity/id1532976305?i=1000562920658

Title: GA election fraud?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 08, 2022, 10:37:54 AM

https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/bombshell-georgia-election-fraud?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web&s=r

Title: South Philly? But of course , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 08, 2022, 11:12:01 AM

second

Note who the players were!!!

Both welcome and surprising that this was taken to conviction!
===========================

Former US Congressman Pleads Guilty to Election Fraud
By Zachary Stieber June 8, 2022 Updated: June 8, 2022biggersmaller Print

 

A former U.S. congressman has pleaded guilty to several election fraud charges, including bribery and falsification of voting records.

Former Rep. Michael Myers (D-Pa.), 79, admitted to bribing an election judge in Philadelphia, Domenick Demuro, to illegally add votes for certain candidates, including candidates for federal and state officers.

Myers and Demuro, both Democrats, supported fellow Democrat candidates. Myers would receive payments from the candidates, by cash or check, and send a portion of the funds to Demuro.

The judge of elections for the 39th Ward, 36th Division in South Philadelphia would then add fraudulent votes for Myers’s clients.

“At Myers’s direction, Demuro would add these fraudulent votes to the totals during Election Day, and then would later falsely certify that the voting machine results were accurate,” the Department of Justice said in a statement.

The fraud took place during elections starting in 2014 and going through 2018, authorities said.

Myers also admitted to conspiring to commit fraud with Marie Beren, a judge of elections for the 39th Ward, 2nd Division in Philadelphia. Myers acknowledged directing Beren to add votes to candidates he supported, including candidates for judicial office who had hired Myers.

Demuro pleaded guilty in 2020 to conspiring to deprive people of civil rights and using interstate facilities in aid of bribery. Demuro was supposed to be sentenced on June 30, 2020, but sentencing has repeatedly been postponed. It is currently scheduled to take place on June 14.

Beren, another Democrat, pleaded guilty in 2021. The charges to which she pleaded guilty weren’t clear because the details are sealed. Beren was set to be sentenced on Feb. 15 but the hearing was postponed until Aug. 16.

“Voting is the cornerstone of our democracy. If even one vote has been illegally cast or if the integrity of just one election official is compromised, it diminishes faith in process,” U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Jennifer Williams, a Biden appointee, said in a statement. “Votes are not things to be purchased and democracy is not for sale. If you are a political consultant, election official, or work with the polling places in any way, I urge you to do your job honestly and faithfully. That is what the public deserves and what the federal government will enforce.”

“One thing you can say about Ozzie Myers: his values have long been out of whack,” added Jacqueline Maguire, the special agent in charge of the FBI’s Philadelphia Division. “Decades ago, he valued a fake sheikh’s bribes more than the ethical obligations of his elected federal office. This time around, he valued his clients’ money and his own whims more than the integrity of multiple elections and the will of Philadelphia voters. Free and fair elections are critical to the health of our democracy, which is why protecting the legitimacy of the electoral process at every level is such a priority for the FBI.”

Myers entered Congress in late 1976, but was expelled in 1980 after he was taped taking a bribe from undercover FBI agents. He was convicted on charges of bribery and conspiracy and spent several years in prison.

Myers is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 27. He faces up to 60 years in prison, up to three years of supervised release, and a fine of up to $1.25 million.

Title: Two women trying to secure elections
Post by: G M on June 09, 2022, 10:11:00 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/two-utah-moms-file-open-records-requests-election-records-state-lt-gov-tips-off-reporter-blocks-access-calls-feds/

Now what, Doug?

Title: What happens when you vote harder for a candidate that the FedGov arrests?
Post by: G M on June 09, 2022, 10:19:01 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/joe-biden-jokes-sending-political-opponents-jail-less-12-hours-fbi-raids-home-michigan-gubernatorial-candidate-attending-jan-6-rally/

Title: FBI all in
Post by: ccp on June 09, 2022, 10:33:03 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/joe-biden-jokes-sending-political-opponents-jail-less-12-hours-fbi-raids-home-michigan-gubernatorial-candidate-attending-jan-6-rally/

if we win presidency in '24
first thing - or maybe second

 clean house at FBI.....

Title: Re: FBI all in
Post by: G M on June 09, 2022, 10:39:25 AM

If...

Yeah, be ready for Dinesh to have a big sequel to "2000 Mules".

If he doesn't commit Arkancide before then.

Quote from: ccp on June 09, 2022, 10:33:03 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/joe-biden-jokes-sending-political-opponents-jail-less-12-hours-fbi-raids-home-michigan-gubernatorial-candidate-attending-jan-6-rally/

if we win presidency in '24
first thing - or maybe second

 clean house at FBI.....

Title: PA: SCOTUS reopens count on last year's election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 11, 2022, 06:45:38 AM

Supreme Court Lifts Stay, Allows Counting of Questionable Ballots in Pennsylvania Judicial Election
Justices Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch dissent from ruling
By Matthew Vadum June 10, 2022 Updated: June 10, 2022biggersmaller Print


Over the opposition of three conservative justices, the Supreme Court allowed officials in Pennsylvania to resume counting disputed undated mail-in ballots in a state-level judicial election that took place last year in Lehigh County.

The high court’s order came near the end of the business day on June 9 and despite a state law that requires that ballots received on time but missing a handwritten date on the envelope be rejected. The Pennsylvania Republican Party takes the position that undated mail-in ballots should not be counted.

The Supreme Court decision, which will affect other elections in the Keystone State, came too late for former hedge fund CEO David McCormick, who on June 3 conceded the U.S. Senate primary contest to celebrity heart surgeon Mehmet Oz who was endorsed by former President Donald Trump.

McCormick had sued in state court trying to force election officials to count absentee and mail-in ballots that were received on time and stamped by the county boards but on which voters failed to write a date on the exterior mailing envelope. On June 2, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court ruled (pdf) in McCormick’s favor, ordering that contested ballots be included in the count, The Epoch Times reported.

In the election for the judgeship, Republican David Ritter currently holds a 71-vote lead over Democrat Zachary Cohen. Citing state law, Ritter attempted to prevent the processing of additional ballots, but the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), acting on behalf of a group of voters, asked for the count to continue.

On May 27, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit ordered (pdf) the state to count the undated mail-in ballots.

Judge Theodore McKee, who was appointed by then-President Bill Clinton, wrote for the panel that Congress passed the Materiality Provision of the federal Civil Rights Act “to ensure qualified voters were not disenfranchised by meaningless requirements that prevented eligible voters from casting their ballots but had nothing to do with determining one’s qualifications to vote.”

“Ignoring ballots because the outer envelope was undated, even though the ballot was indisputably received before the deadline for voting serves no purpose other than disenfranchising otherwise qualified voters. This is exactly the type of disenfranchisement that Congress sought to prevent,” McKee wrote.

On May 31, the Supreme Court got involved in the judicial election when Justice Samuel Alito temporarily stayed (pdf) the 3rd Circuit ruling “pending further order of the undersigned or of the Court.”

But late on June 9, the Supreme Court vacated Justice Samuel Alito’s temporary stay order.

The new order (pdf) in the case known as Ritter v. Migliori, court file 21A772, was unsigned and there is no indication of which justices voted to lift the stay, but three justices voted against removing it. Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined a dissenting opinion written by Alito.

The decision by the 3rd Circuit is probably wrong, Alito wrote in the dissent, expressing concern about “the effect that the Third Circuit’s interpretation” of federal law “may have in the federal and state elections that will be held in Pennsylvania in November.”

“The Third Circuit’s interpretation broke new ground, and at this juncture, it appears to me that that interpretation is very likely wrong. If left undisturbed, it could well affect the outcome of the fall elections, and it would be far better for us to address that interpretation before, rather than after, it has that effect.”

The circuit court’s interpretation “seems plainly contrary to the statutory language,” Alito wrote.

“When a mail-in ballot is not counted because it was not filled out correctly, the voter is not denied ‘the right to vote.’ Rather, that individual’s vote is not counted because he or she did not follow the rules for casting a ballot.”

It follows, Alito added, that a state’s “refusal to count the votes of these voters does not constitute a denial of ‘the right to vote.’”

Title: "Ritter v. Migliori "
Post by: ccp on June 11, 2022, 07:46:03 AM

I would add to CD's post above
I heard Mark Levin discussing this on radio
last week

he was furious about the conservatives voting for this

Robers Kavanaugh and Barrett
Kavanaugh he said was predictable at outset was not Thomas style conservative

and Barrett he states is major disappointment

I am not knowledgeable to judge
just posting his opinion on this

but I do have to wonder

is having the justices  homes and their families member names being distributed around militant Left Wing circles
not clouding their judgements ?

hard to think that Amy while considering a very volatile case is not in the back of her mind thinking :  could my decision  harm my five children.   

Title: Re: "Ritter v. Migliori "
Post by: G M on June 11, 2022, 07:52:35 AM

The American Republic is dead.

The rule of law is dead.

Prepare to submit, or prepare to fight.

Quote from: ccp on June 11, 2022, 07:46:03 AM

I would add to CD's post above
I heard Mark Levin discussing this on radio
last week

he was furious about the conservatives voting for this

Robers Kavanaugh and Barrett
Kavanaugh he said was predictable at outset was not Thomas style conservative

and Barrett he states is major disappointment

I am not knowledgeable to judge
just posting his opinion on this

but I do have to wonder

is having the justices  homes and their families member names being distributed around militant Left Wing circles
not clouding their judgements ?

hard to think that Amy while considering a very volatile case is not in the back of her mind thinking :  could my decision  harm my five children.   

Title: PA Supreme Court denies Rep request
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 12, 2022, 11:26:15 AM

ELECTION INTEGRITY
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Denies Republican Request to Throw out Ruling Requiring Questionable Ballots to Be Accepted
By Matthew Vadum June 12, 2022 Updated: June 12, 2022biggersmaller Print


The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has quietly dismissed Republicans’ application to overturn a lower state court’s order requiring that absentee and mail-in-ballots that lack a date handwritten by the voter be counted.

Pennsylvania was a hotbed of election-related litigation during the 2020 presidential election. Although former President Donald Trump won the state in 2016, President Joe Biden won it in 2020, according to official results.

Barring any unforeseen future developments, the ruling means that even though Pennsylvania law requires that ballots that arrive without a signed, dated declaration from the voter are to be discarded, such ballots will be counted in upcoming elections.

The ruling came June 10 as the court accepted former hedge fund CEO David McCormick’s request to discontinue litigation still pending before the court after he narrowly lost a Republican primary contest for a Pennsylvania seat in the U.S. Senate seat against celebrity heart surgeon Mehmet Oz. McCormick conceded the race to Oz on June 3. After a recount, state election officials declared Oz the winner by 951 votes on June 8.

In granting McCormick’s application to withdraw, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania made the following order: “In addition, upon consideration of the Application to Vacate Memorandum Opinion and Order of June 2, 2022, (Application to Vacate) filed by Oz [and his campaign], in which [Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Pennsylvania] join, and the answer filed by the [Acting] Secretary [of the Commonwealth, Leigh Chapman], the Application to Vacate is DENIED.”

The June 2 order was by President Judge Renee Cohn Jubelirer, a Republican who sits on a lower court, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. In a 40-page memorandum opinion (pdf), Jubelirer laid out the legal issue.

She wrote: “Sections 1306(a) and 1306-D(a) of the Pennsylvania Election Code provide, respectively, that, after an elector marks their ballot and secures it in the secrecy envelope, the elector is to place that envelope into a second envelope (outer or exterior envelope) on which, among other things, is printed a ‘declaration of the elector’ which ‘[t]he elector shall then fill out, date and sign’ … Whether ballots can be counted that do not contain a handwritten date on the outer envelope as described in these sections is the issue.”

Republicans have a history of insisting that state election laws be enforced strictly.

The Republican Party of Pennsylvania wrote on Twitter on May 23 that the state party would support whoever wins the Senate primary, but “we absolutely object to the counting of undated mail-in ballots. Pennsylvania law and our courts have been very clear that undated ballots are not to be counted. We have worked hard towards restoring confidence in our elections, and we call upon everyone to respect, uphold and follow the clear law on this issue.”

But McCormick went in the opposite direction, asking the Commonwealth Court to declare that absentee and mail-in ballots received on time but lacking the required dated declaration from the voter be counted. McCormick argued that Pennsylvania’s dating provisions were unenforceable under both state and federal law.

The Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Pennsylvania argued in the case that the dating provisions serve a necessary purpose. Including a date on the exterior envelope “provides proof of both when the voter cast his or her ballot and whether the voter completed the ballot within the proper timeframe. Including a date also prevents fraudulent backdating,” Jubelirer wrote, explaining the Republican argument.

Jubelirer concluded that McCormick and his campaign “established that they are likely to succeed on the merits,” and this conclusion “weighs heavily in favor” of their request for an injunction requiring election officials not to discard ballots lacking the required date.

The state’s “Election Code should be liberally construed so as not to deprive electors of their right to elect the candidate of their choice. The power to throw out a ballot for minor irregularities should be used very sparingly, and voters should not be disenfranchised except for compelling reasons.”

Jubelirer ordered election officials “to segregate the ballots that lack a dated exterior envelope” from those with a properly completed dated declaration and report two vote tallies to Chapman, who as chief election officer would presumably make a decision later about which ballots to include in the official count.

It was unclear at press time if the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania provided reasons for its June 10 decision.

On June 11, Democratic Party lawyer Marc Elias, who fights election integrity laws claiming they unfairly disenfranchise voters, posted a court docket entry and celebrated the ruling on Twitter.

“Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismisses GOP appeal in undated ballot case. Importantly, the court DENIES Republican motion to vacate the lower court decision,” Elias wrote, referring to Jubelirer’s June 2 order.

The post came after the U.S. Supreme Court on June 9 allowed officials in Pennsylvania to resume counting disputed undated mail-in ballots in a state-level judicial election that took place last year in Lehigh County, as The Epoch Times reported.

On May 31, Justice Samuel Alito temporarily stayed a May 27 ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit that had allowed election officials to count undated mail-in ballots in the race, but on June 9 the full Supreme Court vacated the stay, allowing the count to resume.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined a dissenting opinion written by Alito.

The 3rd Circuit decision is “very likely wrong,” Alito wrote. “If left undisturbed, it could well affect the outcome of the fall elections, and it would be far better for us to address that interpretation before, rather than after, it has that effect.”

“When a mail-in ballot is not counted because it was not filled out correctly, the voter is not denied ‘the right to vote.’ Rather, that individual’s vote is not counted because he or she did not follow the rules for casting a ballot.”

It follows, Alito added, that a state’s “refusal to count the votes of these voters does not constitute a denial of ‘the right to vote.’”

Title: Post election breach in Coffee County GA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 13, 2022, 05:57:28 AM

Court filing offers new evidence of post-election breach in Coffee County, Ga.
By Emma Brown and Amy Gardner
June 12, 2022 at 11:21 a.m. EDT

Incumbent Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) talks with journalists as he arrives for an election night party in Peachtree Corners, Ga., on May 24. (Ben Gray/AP)

A cybersecurity executive who has aided efforts by election deniers to investigate the 2020 vote said in a recent court document that he had “forensically examined” the voting system used in Coffee County, Ga. The assertion by executive Benjamin Cotton that he examined the county’s voting system is the strongest indication yet that the security of election equipment there may have been compromised following Donald Trump’s loss.

Representatives of Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) said in April that while his office had investigated several election-related issues in Coffee County, none appeared to amount to a breach of equipment. In May, The Washington Post reported that former county elections official Misty Hampton had opened her offices to a man who was active in the election-denier movement to help investigate after the 2020 vote. Recounting the incident to The Post, Hampton said she did not know what the man, bail bond business owner Scott Hall, and his team did in her office.

In the new document, a sworn declaration filed Wednesday in a civil case in federal court in Arizona, Cotton, founder of the digital forensics firm CyFIR, wrote that he had examined Dominion Voting Systems used in several jurisdictions. Among them were Coffee County, Mesa County, Colo., and Maricopa County, Ariz., where he worked as a contractor on a Republican-commissioned ballot review.

The episode in Coffee County is one in a steady drip of revelations since the 2020 election about attempts by Trump allies to examine or copy tightly guarded voting machines to search for evidence of fraud. Some of those attempts have been aided by like-minded election officials, raising concerns about insiders as a growing threat to election security. Tina Peters, the clerk of Mesa County, was indicted in March on charges stemming from her participation in a successful effort to allow outsiders to copy voting-machine hard drives. Peters has denied wrongdoing and is running to be the Republican nominee for secretary of state.


The federal government considers voting systems to be “critical infrastructure” vital to national security, and preventing unauthorized physical access to machines is seen as essential to protecting them from manipulation. Since 2020, machines in several jurisdictions have been decertified because their chain of custody after the election was broken or uncertain.

Cotton, who said in his declaration that he has more than 26 years of experience in computer forensics and has testified as an expert witness, did not detail which components of the Coffee County voting system he claimed to have examined. Nor did he explain how he gained access to voting system data from Coffee or provide evidence of his examination beyond the descriptions of his findings. The findings generally describe what Cotton says he found in the counties’ systems collectively and are not specific to Coffee.


The Cotton declaration was first reported by a disinformation researcher who posts on Twitter under the name Trapezoid of Discovery. The document alleges a number of security vulnerabilities in the Dominion systems. It concludes that the election system machines and networks do not meet industry certification standards.

The declaration was filed by lawyers for two Republican candidates who are suing to block Arizona from using electronic voting machines in the November 2022 midterm election, citing in part the findings of Cotton and others who worked on the GOP-commissioned ballot review. The plaintiffs — election deniers who have sought to overturn Joe Biden’s 2020 victory — are Kari Lake, who is running for governor, and Mark Finchem, who is running for secretary of state.

The defendants, supervisors in Maricopa and Pima counties and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs (D), have moved to dismiss the case, arguing that it is based on a host of misleading and false claims. The specific claims about security vulnerabilities arising from the ballot review were, the counties said, “baseless ‘findings’” that “have been debunked.” Hobbs called them “vague, speculative allegations of potential security risks.”

Cotton did not respond to requests for comment. Lawyers for Lake and Finchem also did not respond to requests for comment.


A worker passes a Dominion Voting ballot scanner while setting up a polling location at an elementary school in Gwinnett County, Ga., outside of Atlanta, on Jan. 4, 2021, ahead of a runoff election in the state. (Ben Gray/AP)
Asked about Cotton’s declaration, a spokeswoman for Dominion referred The Post to materials the company previously published in response to allegations of election fraud in Antrim County, Mich., Maricopa and elsewhere. No court has found those claims to have merit, and many local, state and federal officials have said there is no evidence of vote manipulation in the 2020 election. In multiple jurisdictions, hand counts of paper ballots substantiated tallies by Dominion machines.


Cotton’s court declaration comes just two weeks after the federal Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency notified election officials in more than a dozen states that use Dominion Voting machines of several vulnerabilities and recommended measures to help detect or prevent attempts to exploit those vulnerabilities.

But the agency, an arm of the Department of Homeland Security, also said it found no evidence that flaws in the machines have ever been exploited, including in the 2020 election. Dominion said in a statement that the advisory reaffirms that its machines “are accurate and secure.” The issues identified by the agency “require unfettered physical access to election equipment, which is already prohibited by mandatory election protocols,” the company said.

Allegations of improper access in Coffee County arose earlier this year in a long-running federal lawsuit filed by the Coalition for Good Governance and others against defendants including the Georgia secretary of state’s office. The plaintiffs argue that the state’s election system is so insecure that it violates the rights of voters. In a recorded phone call filed as part of that case, Hall claimed to have arranged for a plane to take people to Coffee County — a rural county Trump won by 40 points — to scan ballots and copy data from voting equipment.


Hall did not respond to requests for comment.

Attorneys for Raffensperger told the court in April that the secretary of state’s office launched the investigation as soon as it became aware of the recorded phone call. They said state officials have not found evidence of a security breach.

Jordan Fuchs, deputy secretary of state and Raffensperger’s chief of staff, declined to comment on Cotton’s statement Friday other than to say, “We take investigations seriously and will continue to be thorough throughout this litigation process.”

Marilyn Marks, executive director of the Coalition for Good Governance, called the Cotton declaration “alarming” and said the plaintiffs in her case “are serving subpoenas to obtain more information on the details of the alleged breach and compromise of Georgia’s system in Coffee County.”


Hampton told The Post that she could not remember when Hall’s visit occurred or what he and the others — whom she did not name — did when they were there. She said she did not know whether they entered the room housing the election management system server, the central computer used to tally election results.

Hampton said Friday that she knew of Cotton, but did not know anything about his alleged access to voting system data from Coffee County.

The Daily Beast, citing text messages, reported in early June that the team of outsiders spent several hours at the office on Jan. 7, 2021, and included Paul Maggio of the Atlanta data security firm SullivanStrickler.

Neither the founders of SullivanStrickler nor Maggio responded to requests for comment from The Post.

Cotton’s declaration also raises questions about the possibility of an additional, previously unreported election security breach in Fulton County, Ga., home to Atlanta. Cotton wrote that his conclusions were based on his “analysis of the Analyzed Election Systems” in several jurisdictions including Fulton.


“Fulton County is not aware of any analysis performed by Mr. Cotton of our voting systems or our election processes,” said Jessica Corbitt-Dominguez, the county’s director of external affairs. “Fulton County uses the exact same voting system used by all other Georgia counties, as required by the Secretary of State.”

There have been no public allegations of unauthorized access to machines in Fulton County, Ga. The Pennsylvania secretary of state, however, did order the decertification of machines in Fulton County, Pa., after she said they were improperly accessed in December 2020 by individuals seeking to investigate the election. That order is being challenged in court.

Cotton submitted a sworn declaration last year in a case in Antrim County, on behalf of a local real estate agent who claimed that the 2020 election results had been manipulated. The lawsuit has been dismissed, and allegations of vote-flipping in Antrim were roundly rejected by a Republican-controlled committee of the Michigan Senate.


In his declaration in that case, Cotton described examining not only Dominion voting equipment used in Antrim but also equipment made by Dominion’s competitor, Election Systems and Software, and used in the 2020 election. The declaration did not say how or in which jurisdiction the ES&S equipment was accessed.

In February, Michigan law enforcement officials launched an investigation into alleged unauthorized access of ES&S machines in the state’s Roscommon County. A county official and a township official in the county told investigators that they gave election equipment to unauthorized third parties after the 2020 election, Reuters reported last week, citing police records.

Title: PP: What does "Election Fraud" mean?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 16, 2022, 05:55:47 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/89080-what-does-election-fraud-mean-2022-06-14?mailing_id=6734&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.6734&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: WSJ: The J6 Committee's Missing Reform
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 16, 2022, 04:10:29 PM

The Jan. 6 Committee’s Missing Reform
Pence saved the day, but where’s a bill so the next Vice President won’t have to?
By The Editorial BoardFollow
June 16, 2022 6:44 pm ET



‘Crazy.” “Nutty.” That’s what President Trump’s legal advisers thought of his plan on Jan. 6 to pressure Vice President Mike Pence into overturning the 2020 election, according to audio testimony played Thursday by the House committee investigating the Capitol riot. The scheme was never likely to work, not that Mr. Trump apparently thought past the first step.


For one thing, Mr. Pence truly believes in the Constitution. In the tumult of Jan. 6, he was the indispensable man, standing his ground no matter the political cost. The committee lauded Mr. Pence’s “courage.” This is worth doing, though it is amusing to watch Democrats praise Mr. Pence after they spent years portraying him as a lackey and religious weirdo.

On the law, Mr. Pence is right: The Constitution does not give the Vice President unilateral power to reject electoral votes. The argument to the contrary came from law professor John Eastman, who exploded his legal reputation in the process. The 12th Amendment says when Congress meets to count the Electoral College, the VP shall “open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” Does that mean Al Gore could have tossed out Florida’s electors in 2000 and waltzed into the Oval Office?

Of course not. Mr. Pence consulted a former federal appeals judge, the conservative J. Michael Luttig. “There was no basis in the Constitution or laws of the United States at all for the theory espoused by Mr. Eastman,” he testified Thursday. Greg Jacob, a lawyer for Mr. Pence, agreed. “We examined every single electoral vote count that had happened in Congress since the beginning of the country,” he said. “No Vice President in 230 years of history had ever claimed to have that kind of authority.”


The Electoral Count Act, passed after the disputed 1876 presidential contest, purports to let Congress reject electoral votes. Mr. Luttig thinks it’s unconstitutional, and we agree. In any case, there was no bona fide dispute in 2020 about the electoral votes. No state Legislature attempted to appoint electors directly. Mr. Trump’s supporters in some places organized pretend electors to cast fake electoral votes, but they had no legal validity.

Even if Mr. Pence had gone along with Mr. Eastman’s scheme, the chances of success were virtually nil. The 12th Amendment says the electoral votes shall be counted “in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives.”

Did Mr. Trump think Speaker Nancy Pelosi would have stood by dumbfounded as the Vice President reversed the 2020 result? Instead she might have ordered the Senate to immediately vacate the House chamber.

Mr. Jacob said he told Mr. Eastman it could have devolved into “a standoff” between Congress and the White House, a “constitutional jump ball.” The President’s term ends at noon on Jan. 20. If Congress never validly counted the Electoral College, the order of succession says that next in line is the Speaker of the House. President Pelosi? Was that the plan? More likely, the Supreme Court would have intervened. Mr. Jacob thinks the Justices would have ruled 9-0 against Mr. Trump. So do we.

***
If Democrats want to prevent such shenanigans in the future, the obvious move is to repeal the Electoral Count Act and clarify that neither the Vice President nor Congress can adjudicate disputes on electors. That’s a job for the courts, and a better law might provide expedited review by the Supreme Court. The President shouldn’t be picked by the Vice President, but the Founders didn’t want Congress to do so either, except in the express case of no candidate getting a majority of electoral votes.

Democrats didn’t move swiftly on the Electoral Count Act after Jan. 6, because they were more interested in trying to pass H.R.1 to take over voting laws nationwide. But perhaps the Jan. 6 inquiry is focusing some liberal minds. There isn’t much time before 2024.

Title: Re: WSJ: The J6 Committee's Missing Reform
Post by: G M on June 16, 2022, 08:25:27 PM

Anyone paying attention knew the election was stolen.

I guess the WSJ thinks that the constitution allows the dems to steal elections fair and square.

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 16, 2022, 04:10:29 PM

The Jan. 6 Committee’s Missing Reform
Pence saved the day, but where’s a bill so the next Vice President won’t have to?
By The Editorial BoardFollow
June 16, 2022 6:44 pm ET



‘Crazy.” “Nutty.” That’s what President Trump’s legal advisers thought of his plan on Jan. 6 to pressure Vice President Mike Pence into overturning the 2020 election, according to audio testimony played Thursday by the House committee investigating the Capitol riot. The scheme was never likely to work, not that Mr. Trump apparently thought past the first step.


For one thing, Mr. Pence truly believes in the Constitution. In the tumult of Jan. 6, he was the indispensable man, standing his ground no matter the political cost. The committee lauded Mr. Pence’s “courage.” This is worth doing, though it is amusing to watch Democrats praise Mr. Pence after they spent years portraying him as a lackey and religious weirdo.

On the law, Mr. Pence is right: The Constitution does not give the Vice President unilateral power to reject electoral votes. The argument to the contrary came from law professor John Eastman, who exploded his legal reputation in the process. The 12th Amendment says when Congress meets to count the Electoral College, the VP shall “open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” Does that mean Al Gore could have tossed out Florida’s electors in 2000 and waltzed into the Oval Office?

Of course not. Mr. Pence consulted a former federal appeals judge, the conservative J. Michael Luttig. “There was no basis in the Constitution or laws of the United States at all for the theory espoused by Mr. Eastman,” he testified Thursday. Greg Jacob, a lawyer for Mr. Pence, agreed. “We examined every single electoral vote count that had happened in Congress since the beginning of the country,” he said. “No Vice President in 230 years of history had ever claimed to have that kind of authority.”


The Electoral Count Act, passed after the disputed 1876 presidential contest, purports to let Congress reject electoral votes. Mr. Luttig thinks it’s unconstitutional, and we agree. In any case, there was no bona fide dispute in 2020 about the electoral votes. No state Legislature attempted to appoint electors directly. Mr. Trump’s supporters in some places organized pretend electors to cast fake electoral votes, but they had no legal validity.

Even if Mr. Pence had gone along with Mr. Eastman’s scheme, the chances of success were virtually nil. The 12th Amendment says the electoral votes shall be counted “in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives.”

Did Mr. Trump think Speaker Nancy Pelosi would have stood by dumbfounded as the Vice President reversed the 2020 result? Instead she might have ordered the Senate to immediately vacate the House chamber.

Mr. Jacob said he told Mr. Eastman it could have devolved into “a standoff” between Congress and the White House, a “constitutional jump ball.” The President’s term ends at noon on Jan. 20. If Congress never validly counted the Electoral College, the order of succession says that next in line is the Speaker of the House. President Pelosi? Was that the plan? More likely, the Supreme Court would have intervened. Mr. Jacob thinks the Justices would have ruled 9-0 against Mr. Trump. So do we.

***
If Democrats want to prevent such shenanigans in the future, the obvious move is to repeal the Electoral Count Act and clarify that neither the Vice President nor Congress can adjudicate disputes on electors. That’s a job for the courts, and a better law might provide expedited review by the Supreme Court. The President shouldn’t be picked by the Vice President, but the Founders didn’t want Congress to do so either, except in the express case of no candidate getting a majority of electoral votes.

Democrats didn’t move swiftly on the Electoral Count Act after Jan. 6, because they were more interested in trying to pass H.R.1 to take over voting laws nationwide. But perhaps the Jan. 6 inquiry is focusing some liberal minds. There isn’t much time before 2024.

Title: The next "Red Mirage"
Post by: G M on June 18, 2022, 08:26:33 AM

https://www.axios.com/2020/09/01/bloomberg-group-trump-election-night-scenarios

Brace yourself for another "red mirage".

"Fortified" elections, for your protection!

Title: Deep Constitutional Issues
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 19, 2022, 08:56:29 AM

MSN

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court seems poised to take on a new elections case being pressed by Republicans that could increase the power of state lawmakers over races for Congress and the presidency, as well as redistricting, and cut state courts out of the equation.

FILE - Election workers perform a recount of ballots from the recent Pennsylvania primary election at the Allegheny County Election Division warehouse on the Northside of Pittsburgh, June 1, 2022. The Supreme Court seems poised to take on a new elections case being pressed by Republicans that could increase the power of state lawmakers over races for Congress and the presidency, as well as redistricting, and cut state courts out of the equation. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar, File)


FILE - Election workers perform a recount of ballots from the recent Pennsylvania primary election at the Allegheny County Election Division warehouse on the Northside of Pittsburgh, June 1, 2022. The Supreme Court seems poised to take on a new elections case being pressed by Republicans that could increase the power of state lawmakers over races for Congress and the presidency, as well as redistricting, and cut state courts out of the equation. (AP Photo/Gene J. Puskar, File)

The issue has arisen repeatedly in cases from North Carolina and Pennsylvania, where Democratic majorities on the states’ highest courts have invoked voting protections in their state constitutions to frustrate the plans of Republican-dominated legislatures.

Already, four conservative Supreme Court justices have noted their interest in deciding whether state courts, finding violations of their state constitutions, can order changes to federal elections and the once-a-decade redrawing of congressional districts. The Supreme Court has never invoked what is known as the independent state legislature doctrine, although three justices advanced it in the Bush v. Gore case that settled the 2000 presidential election.

“The issue is almost certain to keep arising until the Court definitively resolves it,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in March.

It only takes four of the nine justices to agree to hear a case. A majority of five is needed for an eventual decision.

Many election law experts are alarmed by the prospect that the justices might seek to reduce state courts' powers over elections.

“A ruling endorsing a strong or muscular reading of the independent state legislature theory would potentially give state legislatures even more power to curtail voting rights and provide a pathway for litigation to subvert the election outcomes expressing the will of the people.” law professor Richard Hasen wrote in an email.

But if the justices are going to get involved, Hasen said, “it does make sense for the Court to do it outside the context of an election with national implications.”

The court could say as early as Tuesday, or perhaps the following week, whether it will hear an appeal filed by North Carolina Republicans. The appeal challenges a state court ruling that threw out the congressional districts drawn by the General Assembly that made GOP candidates likely victors in 10 of the state's 14 congressional districts.

The North Carolina Supreme Court held that the boundaries violated state constitution provisions protecting free elections and freedoms of speech and association by handicapping voters who support Democrats.

The new map that eventually emerged and is being used this year gives Democrats a good chance to win six seats, and possibly a seventh in a new toss-up district.

Pennsylvania's top court also selected a map that Republicans say probably will lead to the election of more Democrats, as the two parties battle for control of the U.S. House in the midterm elections in November. An appeal from Pennsylvania also is waiting, if the court for some reason passes on the North Carolina case.

Nationally, the parties fought to a draw in redistricting, which leaves Republicans positioned to win control of the House even if they come up just short of winning a majority of the national vote.

If the GOP does well in November, the party also could capture seats on state supreme courts, including in North Carolina, that might allow for the drawing of more slanted maps that previous courts rejected. Two court seats held by North Carolina Democrats are on the ballot this year and Republicans need to win just one to take control of the court for the first time since 2017.

In their appeal to the nation's high court, North Carolina Republicans wrote that it is time for the Supreme Court to weigh in on the elections clause in the U.S. Constitution, which gives each state’s legislature the responsibility to determine “the times, places and manner” of holding congressional elections.

“Activist judges and allied plaintiffs have proved time and time again that they believe state courts have the ultimate say over congressional maps, no matter what the U.S. Constitution says,” North Carolina Senate leader Phil Berger said when the appeal was filed in March.

The Supreme Court generally does not disturb state court rulings that are rooted in state law.

But four Supreme Court justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Kavanaugh — have said the court should step in to decide whether state courts had improperly taken powers given by the U.S. Constitution to state lawmakers.

That was the argument that Thomas and two other conservative justices put forward in Bush v. Gore, although that case was decided on other grounds.

If the court takes up the North Carolina case and rules in the GOP’s favor, North Carolina Republicans could draw new maps for 2024 elections with less worry that the state Supreme Court would strike them down.

Defenders of state court involvement argue that state lawmakers would also gain the power to pass provisions that would suppress voting, subject only to challenge in federal courts. Delegating power to election boards and secretaries of state to manage federal elections in emergencies also could be questioned legally, some scholars said.

“Its adoption would radically change our elections,” Ethan Herenstein and Tom Wolf, both with the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program at the New York University Law School, wrote earlier this month.

Title: Who could have foreseen such a thing?
Post by: G M on June 20, 2022, 08:20:31 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/fix-democrats-start-prep-america-mid-term-steal/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 21, 2022, 06:03:10 AM

well we know what they will do in PA and GA and MI

we need surveillance at all these centers that collect the phony ballots
and later follow mules.

we don't have the manpower

Title: Totally not suspicious!
Post by: G M on June 22, 2022, 08:11:17 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/something-strange-happened-georgia-vernon-jones-latest-trump-endorsed-candidate-lose-run-off-election-peach-state-clean-sweep-never-trump/

I guess they didn't vote harder enough!

Title: Supreme Court 8 to 1 on NC election law
Post by: ccp on June 23, 2022, 01:16:05 PM

legislature wants it enforced while harvard lib did not:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-rules-gop-lawmakers-141909882.html

now look at Josh Stein's election history ; out of over 5.3 million votes cast in 2020 Stein only was elected back as State AG by 13,000

In other words looks like he cannot win without cheating :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_Stein

Title: Re: Who could have foreseen such a thing?
Post by: G M on June 23, 2022, 02:01:08 PM

Quote from: G M on June 20, 2022, 08:20:31 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/fix-democrats-start-prep-america-mid-term-steal/

https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/23/yes-biden-is-hiding-his-plan-to-rig-the-2022-midterm-elections/

Title: the Number 600 again in Dem shyster law fare
Post by: ccp on June 23, 2022, 02:39:28 PM

GM posted :

https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/23/yes-biden-is-hiding-his-plan-to-rig-the-2022-midterm-elections/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/03/07/executive-order-on-promoting-access-to-voting/

*600* Dem shysters were sent around the nation to rig elections all over the country pre 2020
election.

now *600* Fed agencies (I did not now there were that many) are to make available ballots including mail ins available to all locations so  their agents run around collecting ballots and then get to the mules to deposit...

or it will some other scam to  that effect.

Title: Anyone think we will have honest and fair elections going forward?
Post by: G M on June 23, 2022, 08:54:04 PM

https://ace.mu.nu/archives/399715.php

The American Republic and the rule of law is over.

Plan accordingly.

Title: NY: Court- only citizens can vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 27, 2022, 12:03:41 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/new-york-supreme-court-strikes-down-law-allowing-non-citizens-to-vote-in-local-elections/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=28193762

Title: False Flag in SC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2022, 03:22:04 PM

https://concernedpatriot.com/dem-senate-candidate-busted-on-call-with-prison-inmate-on-rigging-elections/?utm_source=cpnl&utm_medium=EMAIL&utm_campaign=62922

Title: good job on project veritas
Post by: ccp on June 29, 2022, 03:58:12 PM

“And I still gotta struggle to raise money for my campaign? Where the f*ck is my black people with money?” she added. “I don’t care about no dope money! Give me that dope boy money! Where the f*cking dope, where the duffle bag boys? Get you fighting with somebody in your family that don’t even know you donating to my campaign and put that sh*t under they names.”

“Honestly, these ain’t the same type of black people that I grew up around,” she added. “I don’t recognize these black people. So I… black because I don’t understand the type of black that they are now. Can I talk intelligently? Can I, I could be, listen. I can move in all kind of circles. But I’m a n***** at heart."

now if we only caught them on tape rigging the '20 election ......

Title: Stranger things
Post by: G M on July 01, 2022, 07:21:48 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/06/strange-things-happened-colorado-primary-election-week-part-1/

Title: What it all looks like to the other side
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 01, 2022, 09:10:01 AM

   
Open in browser
June 30, 2022
Heather Cox Richardson
Jul 1   
Today at noon, Ketanji Brown Jackson was sworn in as the first Black female justice on the Supreme Court.

Before Justice Brown took her oath, the court also signaled the end of the federal government as we know it.

In the past, the Supreme Court has operated on the basis of “stare decisis,” which literally means “to stand by things decided.” The purpose of that principle is to make changes incrementally so the law stays consistent and evenly applied, which promotes social stability. On occasion, the court does break precedent, notably in 1954 with the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka decision, which overturned the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that rubber stamped racial segregation. When that sort of a major change happens, both the court and elected officials work hard to explain that they are changing the law to make it more in line with our Constitution, and to move people along with that change.

With the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision of last Friday, the court simply tore up 49 years of law and history, ending federal recognition of a constitutional right Americans have enjoyed since 1973.

Today, the court’s decision in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency reversed almost 100 years of jurisprudence by arguing that Congress cannot delegate authority on “major questions” to agencies in the executive branch. At stake were EPA regulations that would push fossil fuel producers toward clean energy in order to combat climate change. The vote was 6 to 3, along ideological lines. That the court agreed to hear the case despite the fact that the rules being challenged had been abandoned suggested they were determined to make a point.

That point was to hamstring federal regulation of business. The argument at the heart of this decision is called the “nondelegation doctrine,” which says that Congress, which constitutes the legislative branch of the government, cannot delegate legislative authority to the executive branch. Most of the regulatory bodies in our government are housed in the executive branch. So the nondelegation doctrine would hamstring the modern regulatory state.

To avoid this extreme conclusion, the majority on the court embraced the “major questions” doctrine, which Chief Justice Roberts used today for the first time in a majority opinion.

That doctrine says that Congress must not delegate “major” issues to an agency, saying that such major issues must be explicitly authorized by Congress. But the abuse of the Senate filibuster by Republican senators means that no such laws stand a hope of passing. So the Supreme Court has essentially stopped the federal government from responding as effectively as it must to climate change. And that will have international repercussions: the inability of the U.S. government to address the crisis means that other countries will likely fall behind as well. The decision will likely apply not just to the EPA, but to a whole host of business regulations.

As recently as 2001, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the nondelegation argument in a decision written by Justice Antonin Scalia, who said the court must trust Congress to take care of its own power. But now it has become law.

In the dissent, written by Justice Elena Kagan, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, and Kagan argued that Congress had, in fact, properly given authority to the EPA to act, recognizing that agencies need to be able to respond appropriately to new and big problems. “Congress knows what it doesn’t and can’t know when it drafts a statute; and Congress therefore gives an expert agency the power to address issues—even significant ones—as and when they arise.” She noted that “[t]he Clean Air Act was major legislation, designed to deal with a major public policy issue.” “This is not the Attorney General regulating medical care, or even the CDC regulating landlord-tenant relations. It is EPA (that’s the Environmental Protection Agency, in case the majority forgot) acting to address the greatest environmental challenge of our time. She concluded: “The Court appoints itself—instead of Congress or the expert agency—the decision-maker on climate policy.I cannot think of many things more frightening.”

Kagan’s dissent noted the hypocrisy of the Republican justices claiming to be originalists when they are, in fact, inventing new doctrines to achieve the ends they wish. “The current Court is textualist only when being so suits it,” she wrote. “When that method would frustrate broader goals, special canons like the ‘major questions doctrine’ magically appear as get-out-of-text-free cards. Today, one of those broader goals makes itself clear: Prevent agencies from doing important work, even though that is what Congress directed.”

Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) applauded the ruling, saying it limited the power of “unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats.”

The court also said today that it will consider making even greater changes to our country. It will hear Moore v. Harper, a case about whether state legislatures alone have the power to set election rules even if their laws violate state constitutions.

The case comes from North Carolina, where the state supreme court rejected a dramatically partisan gerrymander. Republicans say that the state court cannot stop the legislature’s carving up of the state because of the “independent state legislatures doctrine.” This is a new idea, based on the clause in the U.S. Constitution providing that “[t]he times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations.” Those adhering to the independent state legislature theory ignore the second part of that provision.

Those advancing the independent state legislature theory also point to another clause of the Constitution. It says: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legis­lature thereof may direct, a Number of Elect­ors.”

Until now, states have interpreted “legislatures” to mean the state’s general lawmaking processes, which include shared power and checks and balances among the three branches of state government. Now, a radical minority insists that a legislature is a legislature alone, unchecked by state courts or state constitutions that prohibit gerrymandering. This interpretation of the Constitution is radical and new. It caught on in 2015, when Republicans wanted to get rid of an independent redistricting commission in Arizona.

This doctrine is, of course, what Trump and his allies pushed for to keep him in power in 2020: Republican state legislatures throwing out the will of the people and sending electors for Trump to Congress rather than the Biden electors the majority voted for.

That doctrine would also give to state legislatures the power to control who can vote, and how and where they can do so. It would strip power from elections commissions and secretaries of state, and it would take from state courts the power to challenge gerrymandering or voter suppression. Republicans currently control 30 state legislatures, in large part thanks to the gerrymandering and voter suppression in place in a number of those states.

Revered conservative judge J. Michael Luttig has been trying for months to sound the alarm that this doctrine is a blueprint for Republicans to steal the 2024 election. In April, before the court agreed to take on the Moore v. Harper case, he wrote: “Trump and the Republicans can only be stopped from stealing the 2024 election at this point if the Supreme Court rejects the independent state legislature doctrine (thus allowing state court enforcement of state constitutional limitations on legislatively enacted election rules and elector appointments) and Congress amends the Electoral Count Act to constrain Congress' own power to reject state electoral votes and decide the presidency.”

And yet in March, when the Supreme Court let the state supreme court’s decision against the radical map stay in place for 2022, justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh indicated they are open to the idea that state courts have no role in overseeing the rules for federal elections.

In the one term Trump’s three justices have been on the court, they have decimated the legal landscape under which we have lived for generations, slashing power from the federal government, where Congress represents the majority, and returning it to states, where a Republican minority can impose its will. Thanks to the skewing of our electoral system, those states are now poised to take control of our federal government permanently.

Almost exactly 35 years ago, when President Ronald Reagan nominated originalist Robert Bork for the Supreme Court, Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA) recognized his legal theory for what it was: an unraveling of the modern United States.

“Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists would be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy.”

“America is a better and freer nation than Robert Bork thinks,” Kennedy said.

And yet, here we are.

—

Notes:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Robert_Bork%27s_America

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1108714345/ketanji-brown-jackson-supreme-court-oath-swearing-in

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a455_5if6.pdf#page=3

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf

https://www.vox.com/23161254/supreme-court-threat-democracy-january-6

https://columbialawreview.org/content/delegation-at-the-founding/

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/06/30/us/supreme-court-epa

Notes:

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Robert_Bork%27s_America

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1108714345/ketanji-brown-jackson-supreme-court-oath-swearing-in

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21a455_5if6.pdf#page=3

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf

https://www.vox.com/23161254/supreme-court-threat-democracy-january-6

https://columbialawreview.org/content/delegation-at-the-founding/

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/06/30/us/supreme-court-epa

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/27/opinions/gop-blueprint-to-steal-the-2024-election-luttig/index.html

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/independent-state-legislature-theory-explained

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/27/opinions/gop-blueprint-to-steal-the-2024-election-luttig/index.html

Title: MD: Dem skullduggery
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 01, 2022, 10:18:32 AM

second

Democrats spend $1 million to boost far-right GOP candidate

Strategists: Raising profile makes Cox look like threat

BY HARIS ALIC THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The Democratic Governors Association is spending heavily to boost a far-right Republican candidate ahead of Maryland’s gubernatorial primary next month.

The DGA has bought television ads totaling more than $1 million promoting state delegate Dan Cox in the two weeks leading up to the July 19 primary. The ads, which will run throughout the Baltimore media market, will highlight Mr. Cox’s endorsement by former President Donald Trump and his hard-line views on the illegitimacy of the 2020 election.

“For months, multiple polls have shown Dan Cox is firmly in the driver’s seat of Maryland’s Republican primary, with the total backing of Donald Trump,” said Sam Newton, the DGA’S deputy communications director. “Given Cox’s frontrunner status and radical MAGA stances, we are starting the general election early and wasting no time to hold him accountable.”

While negative in tone, political strategists say the Democrats are angling to raise Mr. Cox’s profi le by giving GOP primary voters the impression that his candidacy is a severe threat.

“It’s a dishonest tactic, especially from a party that is always harping on about the need to protect democracy,” Towson University political science professor Richard Vatz said. “All in all, supporting a bad candidate on the other side is a smart political tactic, but it’s insanely unethical and it’s bad for politics in Maryland as a whole.”

Mr. Cox is in a heated primary race with former Maryland Secretary of Commerce Kelly Schulz. Mrs. Schulz has the backing of retiring Gov. Larry Hogan and much of the state’s GOP establishment.

Recent polling has shown Mrs. Schulz leading Mr. Cox narrowly, with more than a third of the GOP electorate still undecided.

Mrs. Schulz said the DGA’s meddling within the GOP primary is because Democrats recognize she is a threat to their hopes of taking back the governorship.

“They’re only doing [this] for one reason, they’re doing it because they know I’m the only candidate that can beat a tax and spend liberal in November,” Mrs. Schulz said. “Democrats do not want me to win.”

Mrs. Schulz has raised the most money of any of the Republicans running. In the first six months of this year alone, Mrs. Schulz raised nearly a million dollars.

By mid-June, her campaign had more than $780,000 cash on hand, compared to only $183,000 for Mr. Cox. He has spent just $145,000 on radio ads in the past six months.

Political analysts say that apart from fundraising problems, Mr. Cox is simply too conservative for Maryland — a state that President Biden by more than 30 percentage points.

“Cox has called for a forensic audit of the 2020 election, he’s pushed to impeach Larry Hogan in the past,” Mr. Vatz said. “Those issues don’t fly in deep-blue Maryland, he’s an extremist and there is no chance he could win the governorship.”

Neither Mr. Cox nor the DGA responded to requests for comment.

Democrats are increasingly muscling into GOP primaries this cycle, especially in highly competitive races. In Pennsylvania, Attorney General Josh Shapiro, the Democratic candidate for governor, worked to boost the campaign of controversial state Sen. Doug Mastriano in a nine-person GOP primary.

Mr. Mastriano won the primary but is seen as an underdog in November. Ironically, Mr. Mastriano has endorsed Mr. Cox and even campaigned alongside him last week in Marylan

Title: ET: SCOTUS to hear case on Independent State Legislature Doctrine
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 02, 2022, 05:19:23 AM

SCOTUS to Hear Case That Could Give State Legislatures, Not Judges, Power to Regulate Elections
The 'independent state legislature doctrine' is a longtime favorite of conservative legal thinkers and Republicans
By Matthew Vadum June 30, 2022 Updated: June 30, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
6:06



1

The Supreme Court decided on June 30 to hear an important new case that Republicans hope will re-empower state legislatures to make rules for redistricting and governing congressional and presidential elections.

Republicans say the U.S. Constitution has always directly authorized state legislatures to make rules for the conduct of elections, including presidential elections. Democrats say this idea, encompassed by the Independent State Legislature Doctrine, is a fringe conservative legal theory that could endanger voting rights. The Supreme Court has reportedly never ruled on the doctrine.

The doctrine, if endorsed by the high court, could allow state legislatures to select presidential electors in disputed elections, something critics decry as a threat to democracy.

Election law expert J. Christian Adams, a former U.S. Department of Justice civil rights attorney who now heads the Public Interest Legal Foundation, an election integrity group, praised the Supreme Court for granting the case, which he said was “very important.”

“It means that the Court may take up all the nonsense that has been occurring over the last 10 years,” Adams told The Epoch Times by email.

In a series of Twitter posts, Democratic Party attorney and election law activist Marc Elias denounced the court’s decision to hear the case.

“The Supreme Court will hear a case next term that may validate the dangerous independent state legislature theory,” Elias wrote.

“Congress must enact comprehensive voting rights and anti-subversion legislation before it’s too late,” he wrote, adding “the future of our democracy is on the docket.”

The doctrine has been in the news because conservative Republican activist Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, sent emails to 29 Republican state lawmakers in Arizona urging them to choose the state’s presidential electors despite the disputed popular vote tallies showing Democrat Joe Biden had won the state, The Washington Post reported June 10.

The emails were sent Nov. 9, 2020, after media outlets had called the Arizona race for Biden. The efforts by Republicans to change the result in Arizona were unsuccessful and ultimately the state’s 11 votes in the Electoral College were awarded to Biden.

In her emails, Ginni Thomas, a supporter of then-President Donald Trump, asked Arizona legislators to “stand strong in the face of political and media pressure” and asserted that the responsibility to select electors was “yours and yours alone.” Lawmakers, she wrote, had the “power to fight back against fraud” and “ensure that a clean slate of Electors is chosen.”

The emails attracted the attention of the U.S. House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, security breach at the U.S. Capitol that delayed official congressional certification of the 2020 presidential election by several hours. Democrats also say there is a conflict of interest because Justice Thomas will participate in the court case about the independent state legislature doctrine. Through her lawyers, Ginni Thomas is resisting committee demands that she testify in the ongoing probe that many Republicans, including Trump, say is a sham.

Tim Moore, a Republican who is the speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, explained why he supports the doctrine.

“The U.S. Constitution is crystal clear: state legislatures are responsible for drawing congressional maps, not state court judges, and certainly not with the aid of partisan political operatives,” Moore said in March when he launched an appeal of the Supreme Court of North Carolina’s order redrawing the state’s electoral map against the wishes of the state’s GOP-majority legislature.

“We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will reaffirm this basic principle and will throw out the illegal map imposed on the people of North Carolina by its highest court. It is time to settle the elections clause question once and for all.”

The elections clause in Article 1 states: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”

The presidential electors clause in Article 2 states gives each state the power to appoint presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”

Three Supreme Court justices have said the doctrine applied in the Bush v. Gore case that resolved the disputed 2000 presidential election.

In an unsigned order issued on June 30, in Moore v. Harper, court file 21-1271, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. The justices did not explain why they decided to hear the case, which is their usual practice when deciding which appeals to take on. For such a petition to be granted, at least four of the nine justices must agree. The case is expected to proceed to oral argument in the court’s upcoming term that begins in October.

Moore filed his petition (pdf) with the court on March 17.

It was preceded by an emergency application seeking to stay a Feb. 14 ruling by the Supreme Court of North Carolina that required the state to modify its existing congressional election districts for the 2022 primary and general elections. Respondent Rebecca Harper is one member of a group of 25 individual North Carolina voters.

On March 7, the Supreme Court turned away (pdf) the stay application. In an opinion concurring in the denial of the stay, Justice Brett Kavanaugh invoked the so-called Purcell principle, writing that the high court “has repeatedly ruled that federal courts ordinarily should not alter state election laws in the period close to an election.”

Title: Don't be surprised when the red wave doesn't happen
Post by: G M on July 02, 2022, 02:49:59 PM

(https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2X4yhg55-21876863.jpeg)

Title: Re: Don't be surprised when the red wave doesn't happen
Post by: G M on July 05, 2022, 02:30:40 PM

Quote from: G M on July 02, 2022, 02:49:59 PM

(https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2X4yhg55-21876863.jpeg)

https://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2022/07/reading-signs-november-2022-will-see.html?m=1

Title: Conservatives in 9 states calling for closed primaries by 2024
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 06, 2022, 05:42:28 PM

Conservatives in Nine States Calling for Closed Primaries by 2024
By John Haughey July 6, 2022 Updated: July 6, 2022biggersmaller Print


Conservative leaders in Georgia and Ohio are spearheading calls for Republicans to close their state primaries and allow only voters registered with their parties to participate in inter-party preliminary elections.

Atlanta Tea Party president Debbie Dooley and Ohio Republican gubernatorial candidate Jim Renacci both told The Epoch Times last week that Democrats are “weaponizing” cross-over voting to skew outcomes in key GOP primaries across the country to either ensure the election of moderates or to nominate candidates unlikely to be successful in a general election.

Dooley, Renacci, and other conservatives are calling on Republican lawmakers in their states to close primaries to only those registered with parties.

They join leaders of conservative groups and GOP legislators lobbying for more restrictive primary elections before the 2024 election cycle in at least seven other states—including Alabama, Montana, Missouri, Tennessee, New Hampshire, Wyoming, and Texas.

Tide of ‘Cross-Overs’
“Democrats did mischief” in Georgia, Dooley said, citing analyses from the Associated Press and Landmark Communications that estimate anywhere from 67,000 to 85,000 voters who cast ballots in the state’s 2020 Democratic primaries voted in Republican primaries on May 24, 2022.

The analyses confirmed conservatives’ contentions that a Democrat-orchestrated tide of “crossover” votes proved decisive in Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger garnering the required 50 percent in the GOP primary to avoid a runoff against Trump-backed challenger Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.).

Dooley, co-founder of Tea Party patriots, said unless Georgia tightens up its primary rules Democrats will continue to meddle in GOP primaries, especially to undermine candidates backed by former president Donald Trump.

“In 2024, if he is on the ballot they could use this as a weapon to stop Trump in the GOP primary,” she said.

Dooley said she has drafted a petition that calls for the state to revise its primary rules to require participants be registered with a party 60 days before participating in a primary.

The petition alleges, “there were a minimum of 300,000 Democrats that crossed over and voted in the Republican Primary. Just in South Cobb, DeKalb, and South Fulton (counties,” it  states. “there were 118,000 reliable Democrat voters identified that voted in the Republican primary.”

Her proposed change is simple. “Whatever primary you vote in, you are going to need to be a registered voter in that party,” she said. Such legislation “is sorely needed” to ensure voters don’t cast primary ballots for candidates “they have no plans to vote for in the general election.”

While Dooley has drafted the petition, she has not aggressively circulated it because two state lawmakers have said they will sponsor 2023 bills essentially calling for the same revisions.

State Rep. David Clark (R-Buford) and Sen. Colton Moore (R-Trenton) in a June 6 press conference said they would introduce legislation  “in the name of election integrity” to close the state’s primaries.

Freedom to Associate
“So all we’re asking is that the parties have the freedom to associate with their base, with their voters who are interested in their morals and their principles,” Moore said. “We’re trying to make the primary pure, and that’s election integrity.”

Georgia is one of 15 states with open primaries. In these states, registered voters of any affiliation may vote in any party primary they choose. Voters cannot vote in more than one party’s primary each election, but open primaries are most likely to induce “cross-over” voting.

Georgia House Speaker David Ralston (R-Blue Ridge) has already said he would not support such legislation, saying in a statement that there is “no need to change” the state’s open primary system.

That’s not surprising, Dooley said. “The establishment” of both parties do not want to change Georgia’s primary system because “that way, it can be used as a weapon against us,” that is against conservatives demanding change from the status quo, Dooley said.

Renacci agrees, noting Democrats and independent voters essentiality took over the May 3 Ohio Republican gubernatorial contest, collectively casting 56 percent of a 1.08 million ballots cast.

Unless the state legislature closes primaries to only voters registered with the party, “it always guarantees that conservative candidates have a hard time winning because you are always going to get the liberals, the Democrats, to cross over,” Renacci said.

Ohio is one of six states that has a partially open primary system where voters can cross party lines and request either a Republican or Democratic primary ballot if they do so within deadlines that vary by state.

Democrats Responded
Renacci cited two 2022 Ohio GOP races influenced by cross-over Democrats—J.D. Vance’s victory in the Republican U.S. Senate primary and his own defeat in the party’s gubernatorial primary.

“There wasn’t even a majority of Republicans” voting in those two Republican primaries and others the May 3 slate, he said.

Republican Gov. Mike DeWine won the party’s gubernatorial nod with 48 percent, or nearly 519,600 votes. Renacci finished second at 28 percent, nearly 302,500 votes, and fellow conservative Joe Blystone was third with 21.8 percent, or nearly 235,600 ballots.

Renacci said during the spring Democratic groups sent emails “out that said to ‘Stop the Radical Right from taking the governor seat, the senate seat,’ to go to the polls to vote for DeWine and [Matt] Dolan” in the GOP U.S. Senate primary.

And Democrats responded.

Of ballots cast in Ohio’s Republican primaries, only “44 percent were actual Republicans” with more than 233,000 of the 1 million votes coming from unaffiliated voters and at least 160,000 “pure” Democrats crossing over to disrupt the parties’ elections, Renacci said.

As a result, Vance with just 32 percent of the tally emerged from a crowded field to win the party’s nod and will take on U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), who easily won his party’s contest.

Vance topped Josh Mandel, a former state treasurer who was supported by most conservative groups, investment banker Mike Gibbons, former state Republican Party Chair Jane Timken, and state Sen. Matt Dolan in the GOP primary.

Talk With Legislators
Renacci said Democrats joined the race on behalf of Dolan, “a moderate at best” who had been consistently polling in surveys of “likely Republican voters” at less than 8 percent but scored more than 23 percent in the primary, only 6,000 votes behind Mandel.

With more than 230,000 non-Republicans casting ballots in the Republican gubernatorial election, Renacci said those votes were essentially the difference is ensuring DeWine would be on the ballot in November.

“If you would have removed the Democrats and Independents, these votes would have all changed,” he said.

Renacci said he expects a bill seeking to close the state’s primaries to be introduced for Ohio’s 2023 legislative session.

“We are starting to talk with legislators,” he said.

Renacci also expects resistance from “establishment Republicans” and “moderate Democrats,” who “like the way” the state’s primary system is now.

When asked if he includes DeWine among those “moderate Democrats” who like the state’s primary system the way it is, he chucked, “You said that. I didn’t.”

Renacci’s campaign website has posted a poll that asks: “In Ohio’s primaries, should pre-registered Republicans vote on Republican Candidates and should pre-registered Democrats vote on Democrat Candidates in a closed primary system, similar to Florida and other states?”

“When you ask Republicans, should only Republicans be voting in Republican primaries, 96 percent say Republicans should be voting for Republicans, Democrats for Democrats, and Independents should be registered prior to primary with either party if they want to vote in the party election,” he said.

That poll will be cited when 2023 bills seeking to close primaries are introduced, Renacci said. “Conservative legislators believe it should be done. We are going to continue to push this,” he said.

Cheney in Wyoming
Similar proposals to close primaries are being discussed in open-primary states like Georgia, such as Alabama, Montana, Missouri, Texas, and New Hampshire, as well as in states with partially open primaries like Ohio’s, such as Tennessee and Wyoming.

The potential impact of cross-over voting in Wyoming’s Aug. 16 Republican primary, where Trump-backed attorney Harriet Hageman is challenging Trump-critic and incumbent three-term U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), is of particular concern.

“Don’t let the Democrats do what they did in another state last week,” Trump told Hageman supporters in Casper, Wyo., on May 28, days after the Georgia primary, calling on Republicans to not “allow Democrats to vote in a Republican primary.”

How much influence Wyoming’s Democrats can have in a deep red state where they are outnumbered four-to-one is debatable but some analyses suggest cross-over voters benefited Gov. Mark Gordon in his 2018 GOP Primary victory over field of Republican rivals that included Hageman.

Cheney, who trails Hageman by as much as 28 to 30 percent in various polls, had claimed in interviews through winter and spring with various media that she would not solicit Democrats to cross party lines and vote for her on Aug. 16.

That ended in June when registered Democrats across the state began receiving direct mail from Cheney’s campaign with instructions on how to switch parties to vote in the GOP primary for her.

Cheney’s campaign website, which touts her as the best candidate to “represent all Wyomingites,” also includes “Learn how to vote for Liz” and instructions for Democrats and Independents to cast ballots in the Republican primary.

Title: Why would they ever think that?
Post by: G M on July 07, 2022, 08:28:27 PM

https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/07/07/poll-majority-of-americans-believe-midterm-elections-will-be-tainted-by-fraud/

Title: Cleaning up 2020 election fraud so it never happens again
Post by: DougMacG on July 10, 2022, 05:11:52 AM

One state (WI) at a time, with no help from the J6 committee.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/08/wisconsin-supreme-court-drops-hammer-on-2020-election-shenanigans-ballot-drop-boxes-are-illegal-under-wisconsin-law/

Title: Re: Cleaning up 2020 election fraud so it never happens again
Post by: G M on July 10, 2022, 08:17:52 AM

Who went to jail?

Quote from: DougMacG on July 10, 2022, 05:11:52 AM

One state (WI) at a time, with no help from the J6 committee.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/08/wisconsin-supreme-court-drops-hammer-on-2020-election-shenanigans-ballot-drop-boxes-are-illegal-under-wisconsin-law/

Title: Re: Cleaning up 2020 election fraud so it never happens again
Post by: DougMacG on July 11, 2022, 05:29:29 AM

We probably aren't going to undo past slavery or past cheating, but wouldn't it be a good thing if we could stop it going forward?

Quote from: G M on July 10, 2022, 08:17:52 AM

Who went to jail?

Quote from: DougMacG on July 10, 2022, 05:11:52 AM

One state (WI) at a time, with no help from the J6 committee.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/08/wisconsin-supreme-court-drops-hammer-on-2020-election-shenanigans-ballot-drop-boxes-are-illegal-under-wisconsin-law/

Title: Re: Cleaning up 2020 election fraud so it never happens again
Post by: G M on July 11, 2022, 07:35:38 AM

Unless/until tangible penalties are paid, the cheating will continue.

Quote from: DougMacG on July 11, 2022, 05:29:29 AM

We probably aren't going to undo past slavery or past cheating, but wouldn't it be a good thing if we could stop it going forward?

Quote from: G M on July 10, 2022, 08:17:52 AM

Who went to jail?

Quote from: DougMacG on July 10, 2022, 05:11:52 AM

One state (WI) at a time, with no help from the J6 committee.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/07/08/wisconsin-supreme-court-drops-hammer-on-2020-election-shenanigans-ballot-drop-boxes-are-illegal-under-wisconsin-law/

Title: More excrement from PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 14, 2022, 01:35:07 PM

2022 MIDTERM ELECTIONS
Pennsylvania Counties Refuse to Count Undated Mail-in Ballots; State Sues
By Gary Bai July 12, 2022 Updated: July 14, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
5:00



1

Pennsylvania state is suing officials from three counties to force their local governments to count undated mail-in ballots from a recent primary election.

The Pennsylvania Department of State (DOS) and Acting Secretary Leigh Chapman filed a lawsuit on July 12 against the boards of elections of three counties in the commonwealth—Lancaster, Berks, and Fayette—to seek a court injunction forcing the counties to count undated mail-in ballots cast in Pennsylvania’s 2022 primary elections.

Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, said in the filing that election officials in the three Republican-controlled counties refused to count absentee and mail-in ballots that were “lawfully cast by qualified voters,” but lack a date on the return envelope.

“This Court should order the three county boards that are delaying resolution of the 2022 primary election to send to the Acting Secretary certifications reflecting all lawfully cast ballots,” the plaintiffs wrote.

In a July 12 statement, the Lancaster County Board of Elections wrote that the plaintiffs’ demand “is contrary to the law or any existing court order.”

“To be absolutely clear, the Lancaster County Board of Elections properly certified the 2022 primary election results in accordance with the PA Election Code at 25 P.S. 2642(k) and any court order regarding undated mail-in ballots and submitted that certification to the Department of State on June 6, 2022,” the statement reads.

“The County received confirmation of receipt from the DOS on June 7, 2022. The Commonwealth’s demand is contrary to the law or any existing court order. The County will vigorously defend its position to follow the law to ensure the integrity of elections in Lancaster County.”

Pennsylvania state law requires ballots that are received on time and cast by a qualified voter but are missing a handwritten date on the envelope to be rejected.

Undated Ballots
The state’s lawsuit piled onto a series of legal battles focused on whether absentee and mail-in ballots that are cast by qualified voters but are undated should be counted in elections in Pennsylvania.

The legal contention on the undated ballots this year arose from an election for a seat on the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas, when Republican judicial candidate David Ritter tried to prevent the counting of such disputed ballots.

After a series of court appeals, the case went to the Supreme Court, which vacated an injunction by Justice Samuel Alito and ruled on June 9 to allow the Lehigh County election administrators to resume counting ballots that omitted a handwritten date on their envelope—a decision that would later apply to all elections in the state.

The 6–3 ruling from the high court affirmed a decision by a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which cited the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 in saying that government officials shouldn’t deny citizens the right to vote “because of an error or omission” that is “not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under state law to vote.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined Alito’s dissenting opinion.

Judicial ‘Activists’
“The Third Circuit’s interpretation broke new ground, and at this juncture, it appears to me that that interpretation is very likely wrong,” Alito wrote in the dissent. “If left undisturbed, it could well affect the outcome of the fall elections, and it would be far better for us to address that interpretation before, rather than after, it has that effect.”

He noted that the Third Circuit court’s ruling “seems plainly contrary to the statutory language.”

Jenna Ellis, former senior counsel to President Donald Trump, told The Epoch Times in an interview in June that the dissent from Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch was “absolutely correct.”

“This is another example of the judicial branch actually violating the law and becoming activists. They are violating state law because the judicial branch is supposed to simply hold everyone to the law,” Ellis said, referring to the Supreme Court’s majority opinion. “When the state has established these voting regulations, it is not for the Supreme Court to determine policy, but to make sure that they are holding the administrators of elections … to state law.

“They may not have liked it. But that’s not their job. Their job is not to set policy; their job is to arbitrate, according to the U.S. Constitution of the supreme rule of law, and every law that they are required to enforce.”

The commissioners’ offices at Lancaster, Berks, and Fayette counties didn’t respond to requests for comment by press time.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 14, 2022, 02:06:01 PM

".Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, said in the filing that election officials in the three Republican-controlled counties refused to count absentee and mail-in ballots that were “lawfully cast by qualified voters,” but lack a date on the return envelope."

so kavanaugh Barrett and Roberts voted with the Crats?

" The 6–3 ruling from the high court affirmed a decision by a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which cited the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 in saying that government officials shouldn’t deny citizens the right to vote “because of an error or omission” that is “not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under state law to vote.”

what a second , how can anyone know the person is qualified under the law if there is no date on the envelope that is required?

anyone can bring in sacks of votes after an election and dump them off

how do we know the votes are lawfully cast?

perhaps I am missing something ....... :-o

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 14, 2022, 02:46:40 PM

I'm thinking they were intimidated by the court packing threats of that moment in time.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on July 14, 2022, 10:21:31 PM

If you think the courts are going to save us, keep dreaming.

Quote from: ccp on July 14, 2022, 02:06:01 PM

".Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, said in the filing that election officials in the three Republican-controlled counties refused to count absentee and mail-in ballots that were “lawfully cast by qualified voters,” but lack a date on the return envelope."

so kavanaugh Barrett and Roberts voted with the Crats?

" The 6–3 ruling from the high court affirmed a decision by a three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which cited the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 in saying that government officials shouldn’t deny citizens the right to vote “because of an error or omission” that is “not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under state law to vote.”

what a second , how can anyone know the person is qualified under the law if there is no date on the envelope that is required?

anyone can bring in sacks of votes after an election and dump them off

how do we know the votes are lawfully cast?

perhaps I am missing something ....... :-o

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 15, 2022, 05:09:05 AM

"If you think the courts are going to save us, keep dreaming."

The Left uses intimidation tactics to make it unbearable to function

The Left wants to add more justices to the court while they have the Presidency and Senate

The Left wants to rid the US of the Constitution by claiming it was made by racist white men
    with racist ideology

The Left says the Right wing Court (and all Republicans) are a THREAT TO DEMOCRACY

 :x

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on July 15, 2022, 07:11:54 AM

Exactly.

Quote from: ccp on July 15, 2022, 05:09:05 AM

"If you think the courts are going to save us, keep dreaming."

The Left uses intimidation tactics to make it unbearable to function

The Left wants to add more justices to the court while they have the Presidency and Senate

The Left wants to rid the US of the Constitution by claiming it was made by racist white men
    with racist ideology

The Left says the Right wing Court (and all Republicans) are a THREAT TO DEMOCRACY

 :x

Title: 2000 mules
Post by: DougMacG on July 15, 2022, 11:26:29 AM

Quote from: ccp on June 21, 2022, 06:03:10 AM

well we know what they will do in PA and GA and MI

we need surveillance at all these centers that collect the phony ballots
and later follow mules.

we don't have the manpower

Yes.We.Do.   )

Yes, I saw it.  Could be called 2000 felons; those are your insurrectionists.  But that just counts the most prolific of the mules, not the organizations producing or gathering the ballots or the people and organizations that paid for it.  It is clearly organized crime you are watching in the film, in a perfect sense.  The people you see don't know anything about the rest of the operation, except who gives them the ballots and how much they got paid.

Amazing how quickly the topic got dropped.

The debunk focused on a Biden quote, built the biggest vote fraud operation in history, clearly a mis-speak or Freudian slip, not an admission.  That has nothing to do with the validity of what is shown and calculated.

We needed to know HOW they cheated in order to stop the cheat. 

The movie is not the hard evidence needed to prosecute or change an election.  It exposes the blueprint of what may have happened and points to where you could find evidence.  If 10 prosecutions came out of this it would send a message.  As far as I know, no one is working on that.

We have to stop the cheat.

Title: speaking of 2000 Mules
Post by: ccp on July 15, 2022, 11:31:27 AM

Coulter who originally as I posted called Dinesh's movie stupid

changes her tune on it today

and points out that till we stop the crazy mail in ballot vote we cannot stop the cheat

https://anncoulter.com/2022/07/13/breaking-trump-was-listening-to-people-as-crazy-as-democrats/

our lawyers are not as good as the Democrat shysters it appears

(and I would add )

and of course they are outgunned since most Lawyers are crats

if they are as good
they get doxxed alienated thrown out of firms forced to lose business or otherwise shamed.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 15, 2022, 01:13:17 PM

Coulter can be wildly uneven, but on the whole that was a good piece.   I will be using the citations she makes regarding Dem accusation about elections integrity in the past.

Title: 2020 election fraud, 21 Illegalities and irregularities
Post by: DougMacG on July 16, 2022, 07:45:54 PM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/bombshells-belie-big-lie-21-confirmed-illegalities-irregularities-2020

See no. 6, 2000 Mules investigated in Georgia.

Title: Doug Post on election fraud
Post by: ccp on July 17, 2022, 08:34:14 AM

great post the summarizes the clear and obvious fraud we all know occurred

despite having the MASS PROPAGANDA (woops I mean media) complex with red faces ,supremely angry tones in their faces, visible steam coming out of the noses and ears, and while screaming call all  of it , "THE BIG LIE!!!!!!!!!"

https://www.shutterstock.com/search/lying-emoji

Title: Re: Doug Post on election fraud
Post by: G M on July 17, 2022, 08:54:46 AM

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/111/288/412/original/4d9c795890cdfc75.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/111/288/412/original/4d9c795890cdfc75.jpg)

Quote from: ccp on July 17, 2022, 08:34:14 AM

great post the summarizes the clear and obvious fraud we all know occurred

despite having the MASS PROPAGANDA (woops I mean media) complex with red faces ,supremely angry tones in their faces, visible steam coming out of the noses and ears, and while screaming call all  of it , "THE BIG LIE!!!!!!!!!"

https://www.shutterstock.com/search/lying-emoji

Title: Texas
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 21, 2022, 04:13:23 PM

Texas GOP Training 5,000 Election Workers, Poll Watchers to Improve Election Integrity: Spokesman
By Gary Bai July 20, 2022 Updated: July 20, 2022 biggersmaller Print

0:00
4:01



1

The Texas GOP says it is stepping up election integrity efforts in the state by training and recruiting election personnel watching the polls, according to a party spokesperson.

“Texas should be the standard bearer for all things Republican, with a Republican-dominated legislature and state office for going on 20 years now,” Wesolek said, noting that the issue of election integrity is “absolutely” a part of this axiom.

Since former U.S. President Donald Trump left office in 2021, the Lone Star State’s Republican Party has trained over 5,000 election workers and poll watchers in the state, as part of an effort to “set the goalpost” for improving election integrity statewide and beyond, party spokesperson James Wesolek told The Epoch Times in an interview in July.

“When it comes to good Republican policy, Texas should be leading the way and showing what that means … what good Republican policy looks like,” the spokesperson added.

The Texas GOP’s in-house staff and contractors, in partnership with the Republican National Committee, county-level Republican parties, and other grassroots groups, conduct training and recruitment of election personnel in the state.

The poll watchers would observe the conduct of the election and report irregularities and violations of the Election Code, if any, to election officials. All political parties are allowed to hire election workers to observe all parts of election administration.

“It’s a team effort, and in the end, it’s all a responsibility we feel to be accountable to the voters of Texas,” Wesolek said.

Texas’s Republicans, in conjunction with former U.S. President Donald Trump and other conservative figures, have been voicing their concerns about how the 2020 election was administered.

More than 5,000 delegates at the biennial Texas GOP Convention last month voted and passed a resolution that stated President Joe Biden “was not legitimately elected” and that “substantial” election fraud in key metropolitan areas influenced the results of the 2020 presidential election in favor of Biden. This resolution makes the Lone Star state the first to reject the 2020 election results. Democrats and legacy media have vociferously denied such allegations, claiming them to be unfounded.

At the convention, the delegates voted for eight out of 15 topics they deemed important, which then became the official legislative priorities for the Texas GOP during the 88th session (2023-2024) of the Texas legislature.

Out of these eight selected priorities, the “Protect our Elections” legislative priority would guide the Texas legislature in passing measures that Republican delegates believe would improve election security in the state.

These measures include restoring felony penalties and enacting civil penalties for Election Code violations, requiring voter citizenship verification, restricting mail-in ballots to only the disabled, military personnel, and citizens that are out of state, reducing the time allowed for early voting, eliminating the three-day gap between early voting and election day, and establishing closed primaries in Texas.

“Despite the legislative priorities that we have, we’re still out in the field training poll watchers and election workers every day so that we can trust and verify, make sure that our election integrity laws that are already on the book are followed, that the law is followed, that there are repercussions for [election fraud] when it happens,” Wesolek said.

“And some of what we had seen in our legislative priorities stems from those efforts where [the poll watchers] noticed that there was lack of enforcement for some of [the election integrity laws] and wanted to get that addressed,” the spokesperson added.

Bill filing for Texas’s 88th legislative session begins on Nov. 14.

Gary Bai
Gary Bai

Title: democrats waiting for illegals
Post by: ccp on July 22, 2022, 08:51:25 AM

@ the border

to convert them all to Dem voters

https://www.breitbart.com/economy/2022/07/22/progressives-boast-5-million-new-immigrant-voters-for-2022/

anyone see "Gangs of New York" wherein the fictitious Boss Tweed is waiting for the Irish immigrants at the boat dock to bring them into the Dem Party ?

(of course at that time they were LEGAL immigrants)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lp5P6nQSwCs

Title: Karl Rove as of 2 am '20 election night
Post by: ccp on July 27, 2022, 04:38:10 PM

thought there is no way Trump could lose

I guess he did not understand the extant that dems rigged the election and cheated:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/karl-rove-incorrectly-claimed-statistically-203249193.html

that IS WHAT THIS STORY TELLS ME.

Title: Trump sues CNN
Post by: ccp on July 28, 2022, 09:13:43 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-threatens-to-sue-cnn-for-defamation-fraud_4626305.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=BonginoReport

any bets how far this will go?   :roll:

Title: They can't, and won't let him back in
Post by: G M on July 29, 2022, 08:06:22 AM

https://compactmag.com/article/they-can-t-let-him-back-in

Must read.

Title: DNC shysters hard at work rigging '22, '24, and beyond elections
Post by: ccp on July 29, 2022, 10:10:42 AM

hey are already using the federal government to thumb the scale in favor of Democrats. Biden’s Executive Order 14019, “Promoting Access to Voting,” requires “every federal agency to submit a plan to register voters and encourage voter participation. It also required agencies to form strategies to invite nongovernmental third parties to register voters.” That is to say, a federal takeover of state elections by the Biden administration. This is a replay, with federal power, of the $400 million in “Zuckerbucks”

 :x

Title: Re: DNC shysters hard at work rigging '22, '24, and beyond elections
Post by: G M on July 29, 2022, 10:28:30 AM

Quote from: ccp on July 29, 2022, 10:10:42 AM

hey are already using the federal government to thumb the scale in favor of Democrats. Biden’s Executive Order 14019, “Promoting Access to Voting,” requires “every federal agency to submit a plan to register voters and encourage voter participation. It also required agencies to form strategies to invite nongovernmental third parties to register voters.” That is to say, a federal takeover of state elections by the Biden administration. This is a replay, with federal power, of the $400 million in “Zuckerbucks”

 :x

Our whole system is faker than Bruce Jenner’s vagina.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 29, 2022, 09:29:30 PM

"Our whole system is faker than Bruce Jenner’s vagina."

just saw BRUCE on an old Johnny Carson show circa 1979 or 1980 still talking about the upcoming
1980 Olympics that Bruce would be a commentator on. (must have been just before James Earl Carter pulled us out of the Russian Olympics)

Johnny and Ed would be doing summersaults in their graves knowing Bruce is now Caitlyn

The image of him running around the track after 1,500 meter run and win for the victory lap waving that American flag is something I cannot forget

seeing him on Gutfield dressed in drag......... :-o

Title: PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2022, 12:49:03 PM

https://www.mcall.com/news/elections/mc-nws-state-martin-request-20220506-rfiavrwadvc3jnqmyugnm6fq5e-story.html

Title: PA; shysters
Post by: ccp on July 31, 2022, 04:23:50 PM

PA

"  Pennsylvania’s top election official on Thursday asked Lehigh County District Attorney Jim Martin in writing to not put detectives near ballot drop boxes — a strategy Martin hopes will catch and deter illegal multi-ballot drops "

PA election official:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_M._Chapman

states:

 “Law enforcement officers, whether they be in uniform or in civilian clothes, positioned near a ballot drop box may very well dissuade eligible voters as well as authorized designated agents from legally casting ballots,” Chapman said in the letter."

" The American Civil Liberties Union led a group of organizations that told Martin in a letter his plan amounts to illegal voter intimidation. A group of Democratic elected leaders joined with other entities to put out an April 28 news release that called the plan “a criminalization of democracy.”


the logic is

do not place law enforcement inside a bank to deter crime
because it may intimidate normal honest citizens from using the back services.

AND THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO PASSED BAR EXAMS?
NOT A NATION OF  LAWS - JUST LAWYERS .

Title: 2nd post RNC election integrity drive
Post by: ccp on July 31, 2022, 04:46:51 PM

https://www.breitbart.com/midterm-election/2022/07/31/exclusive-rnc-hits-election-integrity-milestones-100-days-before-midterm-elections/

Title: Biden/Mallorca planning to give IDs to illegals
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 31, 2022, 08:07:11 PM

Biden Administration Confirms Plan to Give IDs to Illegal Immigrants
By Zachary Stieber July 30, 2022 Updated: July 30, 2022biggersmaller Print


President Joe Biden’s administration has confirmed a plan that would give identification cards to illegal immigrants.

The pilot program from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is aimed at modernizing “documentation provided to some noncitizens,” an ICE spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email on July 29.

“Currently, noncitizens receive paper documents from the federal government about their immigration status. Paper documents pose a security risk, are easily lost, and degrade rapidly in real-world use, creating inefficiencies for the government and noncitizens. Moving to a secure card will save the agency millions, free up resources, and ensure information is quickly accessible to DHS officials while reducing the agency’s FOIA backlog,” the spokesperson said.

“For provisionally released noncitizens, the digital modernization will provide ongoing access to important immigration documents through the secure card and connected portal.”

DHS is the Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency. FOIA refers to the Freedom of Information Act.

The program is being described as a concept, with specifics still being decided.

Illegal immigrants who cross the border are supposed to be deported or detained until they appear in court, but that’s increasingly not the case.

A recent ICE program, called Alternatives to Detention, colloquially known as “catch and release,” sees many immigrants released before having a hearing. Many, but not all, are given a Notice to Appear, or a notice to show up at court on a certain date.

The Biden administration said in April it was going to release up to 600,000 illegal immigrants in the coming months amid the unprecedented surge in illegal immigration while a watchdog report released in June showed that the government is utilizing the program more as time goes on.

Concerns
Some Republicans are expressing worries about the program, saying that the Biden administration should work on cracking down on illegal immigration instead of making it easier for illegal immigrants to obtain identification.

“We are concerned that this pilot program is yet another Biden Administration move encouraging illegal immigration by rewarding illegal immigrants for breaking our laws,” Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, and Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.) wrote to acting ICE Director on July 29.

Under President Joe Biden, the United States has relaxed or reversed a number of Trump-era immigration policies.

The congressmen cited reports that said the card could let illegal immigrants travel by plane and receive benefits through certain aid programs, writing that the issuance of the cards “raises the possibility that illegal aliens will use these identification cards to improperly access benefits such as housing, healthcare, and transportation.”

Comer and Grothman asked for a briefing on the program as soon as possible and for documents and communications concerning the pilot by Aug. 12.

The ICE spokesperson said that the card “will not be an official form of federal identification” and “would be provided only after national security background checks have been performed.”

Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) is also worried about the program.

He said on Newsmax on Friday that he is working on a bill that would block the Biden administration from issuing the cards.

“They’re illegal, undocumented. The only thing they should be able to access is a trip back across the border,” Van Drew said.

“So I’m doing legislation that is saying not one American tax dollar, or for that matter, any American dollar, can be spent for these cards,” he added.

Title: US Post Office to the rescue
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 01, 2022, 06:47:30 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-postal-service-makes-announcement-on-mail-in-ballots-ahead-of-midterm-elections_4633936.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-08-01&utm_medium=email&est=VpD4QbdSe2lpAgBkRRkCwZd4lhux9QZ2B5SteecNK%2B285XZalc535BzeO%2FVURd5SKLr9

Title: CO
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 01, 2022, 06:53:07 AM

https://www.oann.com/colo-sos-candidate-tina-peters-claims-over-half-of-test/

Title: Thoughts Doug?
Post by: G M on August 01, 2022, 11:42:12 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/update-elections-operative-deleted-maricopa-database-machines-turned-auditors-not-proper-access-room-knew-exactly-delete/

Title: Re: Thoughts Doug?
Post by: DougMacG on August 02, 2022, 04:51:43 AM

Quote from: G M on August 01, 2022, 11:42:12 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/update-elections-operative-deleted-maricopa-database-machines-turned-auditors-not-proper-access-room-knew-exactly-delete/

Me?  (strange title) 
I think my argument all along has been
We can find the fraud and stop it.
Fix what's wrong.
This is a good example.
If only two should go into a room and someone else tries
Shoot them. AZ jury will understand.
My other thoughts are
Index capital gains to inflation, and
Build nuclear power plants.
If Democrats would do that
We wouldn't need Trump.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 02, 2022, 06:51:35 AM

Brian Ramirez
deleted Maricopa County election data base prior to turning over to government audit

any punishment ?

MSM : this is not proof of fraud !!

MSM : Trump continues to push the "big lie"
         

I thinks a sentence of 25 yrs would be adequate .......

Title: Re: Thoughts Doug?
Post by: G M on August 02, 2022, 01:51:59 PM

You'll note the lack of prosecution from both the RINO AG and the local DA.

Meanwhile, grassroots activists are being targeted.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/anyone-questioning-challenging-photographing-recording-polling-places-may-violate-federal-voting-rights-law-undercover-sheriffs-deputies-federal-thugs-watch-arizona-prima/

Quote from: DougMacG on August 02, 2022, 04:51:43 AM

Quote from: G M on August 01, 2022, 11:42:12 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/update-elections-operative-deleted-maricopa-database-machines-turned-auditors-not-proper-access-room-knew-exactly-delete/

Me?  (strange title) 
I think my argument all along has been
We can find the fraud and stop it.
Fix what's wrong.
This is a good example.
If only two should go into a room and someone else tries
Shoot them. AZ jury will understand.
My other thoughts are
Index capital gains to inflation, and
Build nuclear power plants.
If Democrats would do that
We wouldn't need Trump.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 02, 2022, 02:08:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/anyone-questioning-challenging-photographing-recording-polling-places-may-violate-federal-voting-rights-law-undercover-sheriffs-deputies-federal-thugs-watch-arizona-prima/

this appears to be DIRECT DEM LAWshyster attack on this:

https://www.breitbart.com/midterm-election/2022/07/31/exclusive-rnc-hits-election-integrity-milestones-100-days-before-midterm-elections/

The Republicans plan to have all important precincts covered by poll watchers

so if poll watchers note irregularities they are to be prevented from harder evidence (photo or video images )

Gee if there was no cheating what does anyone care if they are seen at a poll.

It is not like ancient days when your boss would have his thugs stand at the ballot boxes watching witch  box the employee put the vote into.

THAT. IS VOTER INTIMIDATION

Today it is more like cheater intimidation is not allowed say the Dem shysters
who are they kidding?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on August 02, 2022, 02:26:53 PM

They don't want Dinesh making another movie. I'm surprised he hasn't been arrested by the FBI or Arkansided yet.

Quote from: ccp on August 02, 2022, 02:08:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/anyone-questioning-challenging-photographing-recording-polling-places-may-violate-federal-voting-rights-law-undercover-sheriffs-deputies-federal-thugs-watch-arizona-prima/

this appears to be DIRECT DEM LAWshyster attack on this:

https://www.breitbart.com/midterm-election/2022/07/31/exclusive-rnc-hits-election-integrity-milestones-100-days-before-midterm-elections/

The Republicans plan to have all important precincts covered by poll watchers

so if poll watchers note irregularities they are to be prevented from harder evidence (photo or video images )

Gee if there was no cheating what does anyone care if they are seen at a poll.

It is not like ancient days when your boss would have his thugs stand at the ballot boxes watching witch  box the employee put the vote into.

THAT. IS VOTER INTIMIDATION

Today it is more like cheater intimidation is not allowed say the Dem shysters
who are they kidding?

Title: The voting antics never end
Post by: G M on August 02, 2022, 06:11:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/breaking-reports-pinal-pima-county-not-enough-gop-ballots-polling-places-az-primary-voters-election-integrity-issues-arizonas-3-largest-counties/

Title: Re: The voting antics never end
Post by: G M on August 02, 2022, 06:14:10 PM

Quote from: G M on August 02, 2022, 06:11:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/breaking-reports-pinal-pima-county-not-enough-gop-ballots-polling-places-az-primary-voters-election-integrity-issues-arizonas-3-largest-counties/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/watch-trump-endorsed-kari-lake-details-mail-ballot-irregularity-checked-four-times-not-early-voting-list-guess-showed-mailbox/

Title: AZ: The voting antics never end
Post by: G M on August 03, 2022, 02:56:34 PM

Quote from: G M on August 02, 2022, 06:14:10 PM

Quote from: G M on August 02, 2022, 06:11:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/breaking-reports-pinal-pima-county-not-enough-gop-ballots-polling-places-az-primary-voters-election-integrity-issues-arizonas-3-largest-counties/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/watch-trump-endorsed-kari-lake-details-mail-ballot-irregularity-checked-four-times-not-early-voting-list-guess-showed-mailbox/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/update-still-havent-started-counting-az-since-shutting-last-night-lawless-katie-hobbs-not-updated-primary-results-since-7/

Title: Unsupervised voting in DE
Post by: G M on August 04, 2022, 07:56:40 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2022/08/03/delawares-plan-to-allow-widespread-unsupervised-voting-violates-its-constitution-lawsuit-says/

Title: Re: AZ: The voting antics never end
Post by: G M on August 04, 2022, 08:38:53 PM

https://twitter.com/tylerbowyer/status/1555200708013588480

Quote from: G M on August 03, 2022, 02:56:34 PM

Quote from: G M on August 02, 2022, 06:14:10 PM

Quote from: G M on August 02, 2022, 06:11:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/breaking-reports-pinal-pima-county-not-enough-gop-ballots-polling-places-az-primary-voters-election-integrity-issues-arizonas-3-largest-counties/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/watch-trump-endorsed-kari-lake-details-mail-ballot-irregularity-checked-four-times-not-early-voting-list-guess-showed-mailbox/

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/update-still-havent-started-counting-az-since-shutting-last-night-lawless-katie-hobbs-not-updated-primary-results-since-7/

Title: WA State voting antics
Post by: G M on August 06, 2022, 07:30:51 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/counting-votes-washington-state-never-trumper-rep-beutler-way-ahead-now-trump-endorsed-candidate-joe-kemp-within-striking-distance-20k-ballots-go/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 06, 2022, 08:14:52 AM

who is counting the votes in Wa.?

state *all mail in ballots*.  :x

hahahahahahaha

shysters already rigged it
for the mules

hahahahaha

game over !

Doug want to wager on this ?

Title: Just wait for the midterms!
Post by: G M on August 09, 2022, 07:13:24 PM

https://i.imgur.com/s1JpenB.png

(https://i.imgur.com/s1JpenB.png)

Title: KS: Voting machine "Flipped" votes
Post by: G M on August 10, 2022, 07:20:21 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/08/happened-cherokee-county-kansas-election-results-reversed-vote-flip-discovered/

Title: Patriot Post
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 11, 2022, 02:08:47 AM

https://patriotpost.us/alexander/90467?mailing_id=6879&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.6879&utm_campaign=alexander&utm_content=body

Title: WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 11, 2022, 02:21:56 AM

second post

https://www.theepochtimes.com/conservative-group-says-wisconsin-voting-van-violates-neutrality-rules_4657018.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-08-11&utm_medium=email&est=gZZb5GfqOSl%2FGmEe4MSeq4vMzdRSKBt17xQKCxwnos1HUPl%2FjKhODiDDsqW8%2Fr4VAFsX

Title: Starbacks : EVERY VOTE COUNTS !!!
Post by: ccp on August 16, 2022, 05:32:43 AM

Except when they don't:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/08/15/starbucks-calls-wants-to-halt-vote-by-mail-for-unions-while-pushing-it-in-u-s-elections/

Title: Gascon recall rejected
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 16, 2022, 12:49:05 PM

Invalidated Signatures Derail LA DA Recall
George Gascón survived because Democrats finally found election signatures they don't trust.

Nate Jackson


And here we thought no one was allowed to complain about signatures at election time. After Californians collected 715,833 signatures to recall Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón, the county clerk tossed out 195,783 of them. That, observed commentator Michael Knowles, is "a number that brought the petition just slightly below the threshold requirement" to officially hold a recall election. He sarcastically asked, "What are the odds?"

Given that California is a one-party state and that Gascón is funded by billionaire leftist do-badder George Soros, we'd say the odds were pretty doggone high.

Naturally, a patina of legitimacy was all Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorded/County Clerk Dean Logan could offer. "Based on the examination and verification," his office said, "520,050 signatures were found to be valid and 195,783 were found to be invalid." Logan's press release concluded, "Therefore, the petition has failed to meet the sufficiency requirements and no further action shall be taken on the petition."

Recall organizers insisted that more than 500,000 signatures still represented "a wholesale rejection of Gascon's dangerous polices," and they vowed to continue their effort over the next few weeks.

Now, it could well be that Logan's office conducted a serious and professional review and that nearly 200,000 signatures were not registered voters, were duplicate signatures, or were otherwise illegitimate. But this sure does stink to high heaven.

Why? Because California is one of a handful of states that proactively bulk-mails ballots come election time — 21 million of them in 2020. In theory, everyone who receives a ballot is alive, a citizen who's registered to vote, and still lives at the address to which the ballot was sent. In theory, every signature is validated by competent officials. In practice ... well, just don't question it because shut up, the Leftmedia censors exclaim.

So a county clerk can invalidate hundreds of thousands of signatures to initiate a recall of a soft-on-crime DA in one county (the most populous county in the nation), but don't you worry at all about all those signatures on millions of mail ballots for the president of the United States. Signatures that we don't even begin to believe are all sufficiently validated. As the Associated Press reported last year, "Roughly a quarter of all voters used a mailed ballot during the 2016 and 2018 elections, but that jumped to more than 43% in 2020." To put it mildly, millions of Americans simply don't trust that the verification system for mailed ballots is adequate.

With the attempted recall of Gascón, roughly 27% of signatures were invalidated. In 2020, California rejected just 0.6% of mail-in ballots for any reason. In 2016, when the number of mail ballots was far fewer, the rejection rate was slightly higher — 0.7%. (Nationwide, the 2020 mail-ballot rejection rate was just 0.8%.) We'll grant that a citizen-led recall petition and state-mailed ballots are different animals, but these numbers ought to raise a few eyebrows.

Meanwhile, it's the people of Los Angeles who are suffering. Gascón won election in LA in 2020 after serving in the same role in San Francisco. He's part of George Soros's self-described effort to elect DAs nationwide who will rectify "injustices that make us all less safe." He and his cadre of DAs are the ones making us all less safe by going soft on crime, releasing criminals quickly, and doing little to sufficiently punish the ones they do hold.

No sooner had Gascón won election than he promised to overlook a slew of crimes. The result has been exactly what we and others predicted: more crime.

As for the recall, Gascón says he's "grateful to move forward from this attempted political power grab," and that means continuing to strive for "a more equitable justice system for all." Citizens of LA beware.

Title: 3rd world, at the minimum
Post by: G M on August 16, 2022, 03:53:54 PM

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/113/599/229/original/70cbab60cb3ecfeb.png

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/113/599/229/original/70cbab60cb3ecfeb.png)

Title: "JUNTA"
Post by: ccp on August 16, 2022, 04:27:29 PM

for those of us more language challenged then Dinesh:


jun·ta
/ˈho͝on(t)ə/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a military or political group that rules a country after taking power by force.
"the country's ruling military junta"
Similar:
faction
group
cabal
clique
party
set
ring
gang
league
confederacy
junto
camarilla
2.
HISTORICAL
a deliberative or administrative council in Spain or Portugal.

Title: Census errors will distort elections for the next decade
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 21, 2022, 02:50:10 PM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/08/18/census-errors-will-distort-elections-funding-for-next-decade/

Title: Re: Census errors will distort elections for the next decade
Post by: G M on August 21, 2022, 09:44:15 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 21, 2022, 02:50:10 PM

https://www.dailysignal.com/2022/08/18/census-errors-will-distort-elections-funding-for-next-decade/

Not an accident.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 22, 2022, 05:23:33 AM

as ALWAYS:

in the favor of the DNC !   :x

Title: election fraud traces right back to Obama
Post by: ccp on August 22, 2022, 11:11:35 AM

"by the book" Brock :

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/08/22/barack-obama-hosting-marthas-vineyard-fundraiser-eric-holders-army-election-workers/

nothing to see here
all legal

all legit

we need PIs on all these people to really record what they are doing
if only I was billionaire  :evil:

Title: MI Sec.ofState fights getting dead people's names off voter rolls
Post by: ccp on August 26, 2022, 06:32:25 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/08/25/court-rejects-democrat-officials-attempt-keep-26k-dead-people-michigan-voter-rolls/

this will not be reported by MSM

that is 26 K less votes in November for the D side !
but that is as Dems will say not the reason they do not want to update voter rolls
nothing to see here folks
just some shysters claiming some legal BS argument that it is too soon to do or some other weasel explanation


from Dems and MSM and big tech :
election cheating and corruption is EXCEEDINGLY RARE
and anything that points to the contrary is just part of ***THE BIG LIE!!!***

a phrase
added to EVERY single mention of voter fraud by Republicans

Title: Last minute change in PA voter registration form
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 27, 2022, 03:36:38 AM

Pennsylvania Abruptly Changes Voter Registration Form, Combines With Mail-In Ballot Application
By Beth Brelje August 26, 2022 Updated: August 26, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
3:52



1

In the middle of the election cycle, the Pennsylvania Department of State has suddenly changed its voter registration application form to include a mail-in ballot application.

The applications used to be on separate forms, but this seemingly small clerical change is creating logistical headaches for county election directors and causing voter confusion.

Registering to vote and seeking a mail-in ballot are two different actions requiring different responses in the county election offices.

“We use the voter registration application for one thing, we use a mail-in ballot application for something different,” Christa Miller, Lancaster County’s election director, told The Epoch Times. “One has to be done before the other. Obviously, you have to be a voter in order to get a detailed ballot, so that has to be processed first. And then your mail-in ballot application can be processed. We also file them all completely different.”

All voter registration applications are filed together, and mail-in ballot applications are filed separately. That is because, as per state law, county election offices must mail an application each year to everyone who asked to be on the permanent mail-in ballot list.

“In February, we have to send them an application for that calendar year,” Miller said. Then the voter must send it back, confirming they want to participate in mail-in voting for the year. The office files the mail-in applications alphabetically.

Procedure Changed in Middle of Election Cycle
Between the May primary and the November general election, the county elections office fields a lot of calls from voters who want to verify they checked the mail-in ballot box or to check the address where the ballot will be sent.

Instead of going though something like 400,000 voter registration forms, it’s easier to go through 30,000 specific mail-in ballot forms.

The Department of State combined the documents and implemented the new form on Aug. 19, which was 13 weeks after the primary and just 11 weeks before the general election.

Now the county is processing the first half of the form—getting a person registered to vote—and then making a copy of the form to process the mail-in ballot portion and file that copy separately.

Voters have questions about the new form, too, Miller said. They are not sure if they are registering to vote or registering for mail-in voting, so it has taken some education.

“As election officials, we asked [the state] to wait until December. This is going to take voter education and explaining how the new form works,” Miller said. “There’s a big election coming up in November. I think everybody in Pennsylvania knows that. And all we wanted to do was wait until December to let us keep our offices going the way that they’re going. Not having to teach our staff new ways of doing things, and voters new ways of doing things. You know, keep things the same at least through November.”

Jonathan Marks, deputy secretary at the Pennsylvania Department of State, told The Philadelphia Inquirer the goal of the change is to simplify the process, so voters don’t have to fill out two forms.

The Epoch Times asked the Department of State why it didn’t wait until after the election cycle to change the form. The department did not respond by press time.

In addition to combining the voter registration and mail-in ballot applications, the state also changed the gender identification options on the forms.

Voters may now choose male, female, or nonbinary/other.

Title: Pa abruptly changes voter form
Post by: ccp on August 27, 2022, 09:47:39 AM

In addition to combining the voter registration and mail-in ballot applications, the state also changed the gender identification options on the forms.

Voters may now choose male, female, or nonbinary/other.

 :x

Title: America was a better place before the FBI rigged elections
Post by: DougMacG on August 28, 2022, 07:54:09 AM

FBI,  held back the Hunter laptop investigation,
planted the disinformation story,  worked with fascist social media to block dissemination of the story and failed to monitor and investigate election fraud.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2022/08/26/the-morning-briefing-america-was-a-better-place-when-the-fbi-didnt-rig-elections-n1624217

Title: Re: America was a better place before the FBI rigged elections
Post by: G M on August 28, 2022, 07:58:33 AM

Who was in charge of the DOJ when the election fraud wasn't being investigated/prosecuted?

Quote from: DougMacG on August 28, 2022, 07:54:09 AM

FBI,  held back the Hunter laptop investigation,
planted the disinformation story,  worked with fascist social media to block dissemination of the story and failed to monitor and investigate election fraud.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stephen-kruiser/2022/08/26/the-morning-briefing-america-was-a-better-place-when-the-fbi-didnt-rig-elections-n1624217

Title: Re: America was a better place before the FBI rigged elections
Post by: DougMacG on August 28, 2022, 09:16:19 AM

Quote from: G M on August 28, 2022, 07:58:33 AM

Who was in charge of the DOJ when the election fraud wasn't being investigated/prosecuted?

Bill Barr at DOJ (or did he resign?) and same Christopher Wray at FBI.   I might phrase it differently,  who did not take charge of the DOJ and FBI when the election fraud wasn't being investigated/prosecuted?

The lack of investigation after inauguration counts too. A non-partisan agency would be intensely interested in the charges made and getting to the bottom of it.

Instead what we see is a deplorable lack of curiosity.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 28, 2022, 09:51:27 AM

The lack of investigation after inauguration counts too. A non-partisan agency would be intensely interested in the charges made and getting to the bottom of it.

Instead what we see is a deplorable lack of curiosity.

from what I can tell is Barr's interest/investigation consisted of calling up Governors for their opinions

response of course , was nothing to see here .  NO PROOF

and then Barr would publicly reiterate NO evidence of election fraud

claims to the contrary are BS

Everything we saw that pointed to fraud and "shyterism"  was just a mirage , a delusion , or worse a hallucination of imbecile MAGA heads who are so naive to believe Trump's LIES!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on August 28, 2022, 11:24:46 AM

 ... "and then Barr would publicly reiterate NO evidence of election fraud"


Reminds me, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Regarding "The Big Lie" and outlets like AP calling it in a news story, "...Trump's lie that the election was stolen.

Does anyone know anyone who really knows?  (No.)  Dinesh D'Souza and the people behind 2000 mules gave a glimpse of how it could have happened, but did anyone investigate further?  Dems, media and RINOs say it didn't happen, the election was not stolen, but they didn't look into it either.

We can see a hundred or a thousand data points showing something unexplainable happened. We can see that rules were changed especially in key areas loosening up ballots and the methods.  Of course there was fraud there already were arrests - on both sides.  Why doesn't anyone (other than the perps and the beneficiaries) want to know? 

Title: Trump wants redo
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 30, 2022, 02:38:41 AM

Obviously, a non-starter , , , but does it serve to make a certain point?

Trump Wants Redo of 2020 Election ‘Immediately’ Over New FBI Revelations
By Jack Phillips August 29, 2022

Former President Donald Trump said the 2020 election needs to be redone following recent disclosures about how the FBI influenced reporting about Hunter Biden’s laptop.

“So now it comes out, conclusively, that the FBI buried the Hunter Biden laptop story before the election knowing that, if they didn’t, ‘Trump would have easily won the 2020 Presidential Election,'” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social on Aug. 29.

“This is massive fraud & Election interference at a level never seen before in our Country. REMEDY: Declare the rightful winner or, and this would be the minimal solution, declare the 2020 Election irreparably compromised and have a new Election, immediately!” Trump also wrote.

A poll conducted last week that found nearly 80 percent of Americans who were surveyed said that “truthful” coverage of the laptop story would have changed the outcome of the 2020 election.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg also told podcast host Joe Rogan that FBI officials communicated with Facebook staff ahead of the election and the social media giant moved to restrict the reach of reporting about Hunter Biden’s laptop. Last week, meanwhile, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) revealed an FBI whistleblower told his office that the bureau slow-walked its investigation into the younger Biden’s laptop.

Just weeks before the 2020 general election, the New York Post published a bombshell report detailing messages regarding alleged business dealings between Hunter Biden and foreign companies, including a firm that has ties with the Chinese Communist Party. A former associate, Tony Bobulinski, told news outlets days later that emails and other messages sourced from the laptop were authentic, including one email referencing “10 held by H for the big guy” when describing percent equity allocations of a project with CEFC, a Chinese firm.

Bobulinski, a business partner of Hunter Biden, told outlets on the record that President Joe Biden was “the big guy.” Those emails and other details from the laptop were included in a presidential debate between Trump and Biden in late 2020.

But after the article was published on Twitter, the social media firm locked the New York Post out of its account for more than two weeks and blocked the article from being shared.

Months later, in March 2021, then-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey told a congressional panel that blocking the NY Post’s article was a “total mistake” and described it as a “process error.”

“It was literally just a process error. This was not against them in any particular way,” Dorsey told the House Energy and Commerce Committee at the time. He didn’t say who made the decision to block the NY Post’s story.

Title: Re: Trump wants redo
Post by: G M on August 30, 2022, 08:00:08 AM

Notice how the left reacts. It's never with confidence that the 2020 election was fair and everything should be audited because then they will be vindicated.

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 30, 2022, 02:38:41 AM

Obviously, a non-starter , , , but does it serve to make a certain point?

Trump Wants Redo of 2020 Election ‘Immediately’ Over New FBI Revelations
By Jack Phillips August 29, 2022

Former President Donald Trump said the 2020 election needs to be redone following recent disclosures about how the FBI influenced reporting about Hunter Biden’s laptop.

“So now it comes out, conclusively, that the FBI buried the Hunter Biden laptop story before the election knowing that, if they didn’t, ‘Trump would have easily won the 2020 Presidential Election,'” Trump wrote on his social media platform Truth Social on Aug. 29.

“This is massive fraud & Election interference at a level never seen before in our Country. REMEDY: Declare the rightful winner or, and this would be the minimal solution, declare the 2020 Election irreparably compromised and have a new Election, immediately!” Trump also wrote.

A poll conducted last week that found nearly 80 percent of Americans who were surveyed said that “truthful” coverage of the laptop story would have changed the outcome of the 2020 election.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg also told podcast host Joe Rogan that FBI officials communicated with Facebook staff ahead of the election and the social media giant moved to restrict the reach of reporting about Hunter Biden’s laptop. Last week, meanwhile, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) revealed an FBI whistleblower told his office that the bureau slow-walked its investigation into the younger Biden’s laptop.

Just weeks before the 2020 general election, the New York Post published a bombshell report detailing messages regarding alleged business dealings between Hunter Biden and foreign companies, including a firm that has ties with the Chinese Communist Party. A former associate, Tony Bobulinski, told news outlets days later that emails and other messages sourced from the laptop were authentic, including one email referencing “10 held by H for the big guy” when describing percent equity allocations of a project with CEFC, a Chinese firm.

Bobulinski, a business partner of Hunter Biden, told outlets on the record that President Joe Biden was “the big guy.” Those emails and other details from the laptop were included in a presidential debate between Trump and Biden in late 2020.

But after the article was published on Twitter, the social media firm locked the New York Post out of its account for more than two weeks and blocked the article from being shared.

Months later, in March 2021, then-Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey told a congressional panel that blocking the NY Post’s article was a “total mistake” and described it as a “process error.”

“It was literally just a process error. This was not against them in any particular way,” Dorsey told the House Energy and Commerce Committee at the time. He didn’t say who made the decision to block the NY Post’s story.

Title: Time: The Secret History of the 2020 Election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 31, 2022, 11:44:09 AM

This has been posted before, but here I have improved the formatting:
========================================================

https://archive.is/CRSYG



The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election
Molly Ball @mollyesque Feb. 4, 2021    

Illustration by Ryan Olbrysh for TIME
The secret history of the shadow campaign that saved the election

A weird thing happened right after the Nov. 3 election: nothing.

The nation was braced for chaos. Liberal groups had vowed to take to the streets, planning hundreds of protests across the country. Right-wing militias were girding for battle. In a poll before Election Day, 75% of Americans voiced concern about violence.

Instead, an eerie quiet descended. As President Trump refused to concede, the response was not mass action but crickets. When media organizations called the race for Joe Biden on Nov. 7, jubilation broke out instead, as people thronged cities across the U.S. to celebrate the democratic process that resulted in Trump’s ouster.

A second odd thing happened amid Trump’s attempts to reverse the result: corporate America turned on him. Hundreds of major business leaders, many of whom had backed Trump’s candidacy and supported his policies, called on him to concede. To the President, something felt amiss. “It was all very, very strange,” Trump said on Dec. 2. “Within days after the election, we witnessed an orchestrated effort to anoint the winner, even while many key states were still being counted.”

In a way, Trump was right.

There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy.

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President. Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding.

Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears. They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction. After Election Day, they monitored every pressure point to ensure that Trump could not overturn the result. “The untold story of the election is the thousands of people of both parties who accomplished the triumph of American democracy at its very foundation,” says Norm Eisen, a prominent lawyer and former Obama Administration official who recruited Republicans and Democrats to the board of the Voter Protection Program.

For Trump and his allies were running their own campaign to spoil the election. The President spent months insisting that mail ballots were a Democratic plot and the election would be “rigged.” His henchmen at the state level sought to block their use, while his lawyers brought dozens of spurious suits to make it more difficult to vote–an intensification of the GOP’s legacy of suppressive tactics. Before the election, Trump plotted to block a legitimate vote count. And he spent the months following Nov. 3 trying to steal the election he’d lost–with lawsuits and conspiracy theories, pressure on state and local officials, and finally summoning his army of supporters to the Jan. 6 rally that ended in deadly violence at the Capitol.
The democracy campaigners watched with alarm. “Every week, we felt like we were in a struggle to try to pull off this election without the country going through a real dangerous moment of unraveling,” says former GOP Representative Zach Wamp, a Trump supporter who helped coordinate a bipartisan election-protection council. “We can look back and say this thing went pretty well, but it was not at all clear in September and October that that was going to be the case.”

This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster. “Every attempt to interfere with the proper outcome of the election was defeated,” says Ian Bassin, co-founder of Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan rule-of-law advocacy group. “But it’s massively important for the country to understand that it didn’t happen accidentally. The system didn’t work magically. Democracy is not self-executing.”

That’s why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it. And they believe the public needs to understand the system’s fragility in order to ensure that democracy in America endures.

THE ARCHITECT

Sometime in the fall of 2019, Mike Podhorzer became convinced the election was headed for disaster–and determined to protect it.

This was not his usual purview. For nearly a quarter-century, Podhorzer, senior adviser to the president of the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest union federation, has marshaled the latest tactics and data to help its favored candidates win elections. Unassuming and professorial, he isn’t the sort of hair-gelled “political strategist” who shows up on cable news. Among Democratic insiders, he’s known as the wizard behind some of the biggest advances in political technology in recent decades. A group of liberal strategists he brought together in the early 2000s led to the creation of the Analyst Institute, a secretive firm that applies scientific methods to political campaigns. He was also involved in the founding of Catalist, the flagship progressive data company.

The endless chatter in Washington about “political strategy,” Podhorzer believes, has little to do with how change really gets made. “My basic take on politics is that it’s all pretty obvious if you don’t overthink it or swallow the prevailing frameworks whole,” he once wrote. “After that, just relentlessly identify your assumptions and challenge them.” Podhorzer applies that approach to everything: when he coached his now adult son’s Little League team in the D.C. suburbs, he trained the boys not to swing at most pitches–a tactic that infuriated both their and their opponents’ parents, but won the team a series of championships.

Trump’s election in 2016–credited in part to his unusual strength among the sort of blue collar white voters who once dominated the AFL-CIO–prompted Podhorzer to question his assumptions about voter behavior. He began circulating weekly number-crunching memos to a small circle of allies and hosting strategy sessions in D.C. But when he began to worry about the election itself, he didn’t want to seem paranoid. It was only after months of research that he introduced his concerns in his newsletter in October 2019. The usual tools of data, analytics and polling would not be sufficient in a situation where the President himself was trying to disrupt the election, he wrote. “Most of our planning takes us through Election Day,” he noted. “But, we are not prepared for the two most likely outcomes”–Trump losing and refusing to concede, and Trump winning the Electoral College (despite losing the popular vote) by corrupting the voting process in key states. “We desperately need to systematically ‘red-team’ this election so that we can anticipate and plan for the worst we know will be coming our way.”

It turned out Podhorzer wasn’t the only one thinking in these terms. He began to hear from others eager to join forces. The Fight Back Table, a coalition of “resistance” organizations, had begun scenario-planning around the potential for a contested election, gathering liberal activists at the local and national level into what they called the Democracy Defense Coalition. Voting-rights and civil rights organizations were raising alarms. A group of former elected officials was researching emergency powers they feared Trump might exploit. Protect Democracy was assembling a bipartisan election-crisis task force. “It turned out that once you said it out loud, people agreed,” Podhorzer says, “and it started building momentum.”

He spent months pondering scenarios and talking to experts. It wasn’t hard to find liberals who saw Trump as a dangerous dictator, but Podhorzer was careful to steer clear of hysteria. What he wanted to know was not how American democracy was dying but how it might be kept alive. The chief difference between the U.S. and countries that lost their grip on democracy, he concluded, was that America’s decentralized election system couldn’t be rigged in one fell swoop. That presented an opportunity to shore it up.

THE ALLIANCE

On March 3, Podhorzer drafted a three-page confidential memo titled “Threats to the 2020 Election.” “Trump has made it clear that this will not be a fair election, and that he will reject anything but his own re-election as ‘fake’ and rigged,” he wrote. “On Nov. 3, should the media report otherwise, he will use the right-wing information system to establish his narrative and incite his supporters to protest.” The memo laid out four categories of challenges: attacks on voters, attacks on election administration, attacks on Trump’s political opponents and “efforts to reverse the results of the election.”

Then COVID-19 erupted at the height of the primary-election season. Normal methods of voting were no longer safe for voters or the mostly elderly volunteers who normally staff polling places. But political disagreements, intensified by Trump’s crusade against mail voting, prevented some states from making it easier to vote absentee and for jurisdictions to count those votes in a timely manner. Chaos ensued. Ohio shut down in-person voting for its primary, leading to minuscule turnout. A poll-worker shortage in Milwaukee–where Wisconsin’s heavily Democratic Black population is concentrated–left just five open polling places, down from 182. In New York, vote counting took more than a month.

Suddenly, the potential for a November meltdown was obvious. In his apartment in the D.C. suburbs, Podhorzer began working from his laptop at his kitchen table, holding back-to-back Zoom meetings for hours a day with his network of contacts across the progressive universe: the labor movement; the institutional left, like Planned Parenthood and Greenpeace; resistance groups like Indivisible and MoveOn; progressive data geeks and strategists, representatives of donors and foundations, state-level grassroots organizers, racial-justice activists and others.

In April, Podhorzer began hosting a weekly 2½-hour Zoom. It was structured around a series of rapid-fire five-minute presentations on everything from which ads were working to messaging to legal strategy. The invitation-only gatherings soon attracted hundreds, creating a rare shared base of knowledge for the fractious progressive movement. “At the risk of talking trash about the left, there’s not a lot of good information sharing,” says Anat Shenker-Osorio, a close Podhorzer friend whose poll-tested messaging guidance shaped the group’s approach. “There’s a lot of not-invented-here syndrome, where people won’t consider a good idea if they didn’t come up with it.”

The meetings became the galactic center for a constellation of operatives across the left who shared overlapping goals but didn’t usually work in concert. The group had no name, no leaders and no hierarchy, but it kept the disparate actors in sync. “Pod played a critical behind-the-scenes role in keeping different pieces of the movement infrastructure in communication and aligned,” says Maurice Mitchell, national director of the Working Families Party. “You have the litigation space, the organizing space, the political people just focused on the W, and their strategies aren’t always aligned. He allowed this ecosystem to work together.”

Protecting the election would require an effort of unprecedented scale. As 2020 progressed, it stretched to Congress, Silicon Valley and the nation’s statehouses. It drew energy from the summer’s racial-justice protests, many of whose leaders were a key part of the liberal alliance. And eventually it reached across the aisle, into the world of Trump-skeptical Republicans appalled by his attacks on democracy.

SECURING THE VOTE

The first task was overhauling America’s balky election infrastructure–in the middle of a pandemic. For the thousands of local, mostly nonpartisan officials who administer elections, the most urgent need was money. They needed protective equipment like masks, gloves and hand sanitizer. They needed to pay for postcards letting people know they could vote absentee–or, in some states, to mail ballots to every voter. They needed additional staff and scanners to process ballots.

In March, activists appealed to Congress to steer COVID relief money to election administration. Led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, more than 150 organizations signed a letter to every member of Congress seeking $2 billion in election funding. It was somewhat successful: the CARES Act, passed later that month, contained $400 million in grants to state election administrators. But the next tranche of relief funding didn’t add to that number. It wasn’t going to be enough.

Private philanthropy stepped into the breach. An assortment of foundations contributed tens of millions in election-administration funding. The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative chipped in $300 million. “It was a failure at the federal level that 2,500 local election officials were forced to apply for philanthropic grants to fill their needs,” says Amber McReynolds, a former Denver election official who heads the nonpartisan National Vote at Home Institute.

McReynolds’ two-year-old organization became a clearinghouse for a nation struggling to adapt. The institute gave secretaries of state from both parties technical advice on everything from which vendors to use to how to locate drop boxes. Local officials are the most trusted sources of election information, but few can afford a press secretary, so the institute distributed communications tool kits. In a presentation to Podhorzer’s group, McReynolds detailed the importance of absentee ballots for shortening lines at polling places and preventing an election crisis.

The institute’s work helped 37 states and D.C. bolster mail voting. But it wouldn’t be worth much if people didn’t take advantage. Part of the challenge was logistical: each state has different rules for when and how ballots should be requested and returned. The Voter Participation Center, which in a normal year would have deployed canvassers door-to-door to get out the vote, instead conducted focus groups in April and May to find out what would get people to vote by mail. In August and September, it sent ballot applications to 15 million people in key states, 4.6 million of whom returned them. In mailings and digital ads, the group urged people not to wait for Election Day. “All the work we have done for 17 years was built for this moment of bringing democracy to people’s doorsteps,” says Tom Lopach, the center’s CEO.

The effort had to overcome heightened skepticism in some communities. Many Black voters preferred to exercise their franchise in person or didn’t trust the mail. National civil rights groups worked with local organizations to get the word out that this was the best way to ensure one’s vote was counted. In Philadelphia, for example, advocates distributed “voting safety kits” containing masks, hand sanitizer and informational brochures. “We had to get the message out that this is safe, reliable, and you can trust it,” says Hannah Fried of All Voting Is Local.

At the same time, Democratic lawyers battled a historic tide of pre-election litigation. The pandemic intensified the parties’ usual tangling in the courts. But the lawyers noticed something else as well. “The litigation brought by the Trump campaign, of a piece with the broader campaign to sow doubt about mail voting, was making novel claims and using theories no court has ever accepted,” says Wendy Weiser, a voting-rights expert at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU. “They read more like lawsuits designed to send a message rather than achieve a legal outcome.”

In the end, nearly half the electorate cast ballots by mail in 2020, practically a revolution in how people vote. About a quarter voted early in person. Only a quarter of voters cast their ballots the traditional way: in person on Election Day.

THE DISINFORMATION DEFENSE

Bad actors spreading false information is nothing new. For decades, campaigns have grappled with everything from anonymous calls claiming the election has been rescheduled to fliers spreading nasty smears about candidates’ families. But Trump’s lies and conspiracy theories, the viral force of social media and the involvement of foreign meddlers made disinformation a broader, deeper threat to the 2020 vote.

Laura Quinn, a veteran progressive operative who co-founded Catalist, began studying this problem a few years ago. She piloted a nameless, secret project, which she has never before publicly discussed, that tracked disinformation online and tried to figure out how to combat it. One component was tracking dangerous lies that might otherwise spread unnoticed. Researchers then provided information to campaigners or the media to track down the sources and expose them.

The most important takeaway from Quinn’s research, however, was that engaging with toxic content only made it worse. “When you get attacked, the instinct is to push back, call it out, say, ‘This isn’t true,'” Quinn says. “But the more engagement something gets, the more the platforms boost it. The algorithm reads that as, ‘Oh, this is popular; people want more of it.'”

The solution, she concluded, was to pressure platforms to enforce their rules, both by removing content or accounts that spread disinformation and by more aggressively policing it in the first place. “The platforms have policies against certain types of malign behavior, but they haven’t been enforcing them,” she says.

Quinn’s research gave ammunition to advocates pushing social media platforms to take a harder line. In November 2019, Mark Zuckerberg invited nine civil rights leaders to dinner at his home, where they warned him about the danger of the election-related falsehoods that were already spreading unchecked. “It took pushing, urging, conversations, brainstorming, all of that to get to a place where we ended up with more rigorous rules and enforcement,” says Vanita Gupta, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, who attended the dinner and also met with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and others. (Gupta has been nominated for Associate Attorney General by President Biden.) “It was a struggle, but we got to the point where they understood the problem. Was it enough? Probably not. Was it later than we wanted? Yes. But it was really important, given the level of official disinformation, that they had those rules in place and were tagging things and taking them down.”

SPREADING THE WORD

Beyond battling bad information, there was a need to explain a rapidly changing election process. It was crucial for voters to understand that despite what Trump was saying, mail-in votes weren’t susceptible to fraud and that it would be normal if some states weren’t finished counting votes on election night.

Dick Gephardt, the Democratic former House leader turned high-powered lobbyist, spearheaded one coalition. “We wanted to get a really bipartisan group of former elected officials, Cabinet secretaries, military leaders and so on, aimed mainly at messaging to the public but also speaking to local officials–the secretaries of state, attorneys general, governors who would be in the eye of the storm–to let them know we wanted to help,” says Gephardt, who worked his contacts in the private sector to put $20 million behind the effort.

Wamp, the former GOP Congressman, worked through the nonpartisan reform group Issue One to rally Republicans. “We thought we should bring some bipartisan element of unity around what constitutes a free and fair election,” Wamp says. The 22 Democrats and 22 Republicans on the National Council on Election Integrity met on Zoom at least once a week. They ran ads in six states, made statements, wrote articles and alerted local officials to potential problems. “We had rabid Trump supporters who agreed to serve on the council based on the idea that this is honest,” Wamp says. This is going to be just as important, he told them, to convince the liberals when Trump wins. “Whichever way it cuts, we’re going to stick together.”

The Voting Rights Lab and IntoAction created state-specific memes and graphics, spread by email, text, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, urging that every vote be counted. Together, they were viewed more than 1 billion times. Protect Democracy’s election task force issued reports and held media briefings with high-profile experts across the political spectrum, resulting in widespread coverage of potential election issues and fact-checking of Trump’s false claims. The organization’s tracking polls found the message was being heard: the percentage of the public that didn’t expect to know the winner on election night gradually rose until by late October, it was over 70%. A majority also believed that a prolonged count wasn’t a sign of problems. “We knew exactly what Trump was going to do: he was going to try to use the fact that Democrats voted by mail and Republicans voted in person to make it look like he was ahead, claim victory, say the mail-in votes were fraudulent and try to get them thrown out,” says Protect Democracy’s Bassin. Setting public expectations ahead of time helped undercut those lies.


The alliance took a common set of themes from the research Shenker-Osorio presented at Podhorzer’s Zooms. Studies have shown that when people don’t think their vote will count or fear casting it will be a hassle, they’re far less likely to participate. Throughout election season, members of Podhorzer’s group minimized incidents of voter intimidation and tamped down rising liberal hysteria about Trump’s expected refusal to concede. They didn’t want to amplify false claims by engaging them, or put people off voting by suggesting a rigged game. “When you say, ‘These claims of fraud are spurious,’ what people hear is ‘fraud,'” Shenker-Osorio says. “What we saw in our pre-election research was that anything that reaffirmed Trump’s power or cast him as an authoritarian diminished people’s desire to vote.”

Podhorzer, meanwhile, was warning everyone he knew that polls were underestimating Trump’s support. The data he shared with media organizations who would be calling the election was “tremendously useful” to understand what was happening as the votes rolled in, according to a member of a major network’s political unit who spoke with Podhorzer before Election Day. Most analysts had recognized there would be a “blue shift” in key battlegrounds– the surge of votes breaking toward Democrats, driven by tallies of mail-in ballots– but they hadn’t comprehended how much better Trump was likely to do on Election Day. “Being able to document how big the absentee wave would be and the variance by state was essential,” the analyst says.

PEOPLE POWER

The racial-justice uprising sparked by George Floyd’s killing in May was not primarily a political movement. The organizers who helped lead it wanted to harness its momentum for the election without allowing it to be co-opted by politicians. Many of those organizers were part of Podhorzer’s network, from the activists in battleground states who partnered with the Democracy Defense Coalition to organizations with leading roles in the Movement for Black Lives.

The best way to ensure people’s voices were heard, they decided, was to protect their ability to vote. “We started thinking about a program that would complement the traditional election-protection area but also didn’t rely on calling the police,” says Nelini Stamp, the Working Families Party’s national organizing director. They created a force of “election defenders” who, unlike traditional poll watchers, were trained in de-escalation techniques. During early voting and on Election Day, they surrounded lines of voters in urban areas with a “joy to the polls” effort that turned the act of casting a ballot into a street party. Black organizers also recruited thousands of poll workers to ensure polling places would stay open in their communities.

The summer uprising had shown that people power could have a massive impact. Activists began preparing to reprise the demonstrations if Trump tried to steal the election. “Americans plan widespread protests if Trump interferes with election,” Reuters reported in October, one of many such stories. More than 150 liberal groups, from the Women’s March to the Sierra Club to Color of Change, from Democrats.com to the Democratic Socialists of America, joined the “Protect the Results” coalition. The group’s now defunct website had a map listing 400 planned postelection demonstrations, to be activated via text message as soon as Nov. 4. To stop the coup they feared, the left was ready to flood the streets.

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS

About a week before Election Day, Podhorzer received an unexpected message: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wanted to talk.

The AFL-CIO and the Chamber have a long history of antagonism. Though neither organization is explicitly partisan, the influential business lobby has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into Republican campaigns, just as the nation’s unions funnel hundreds of millions to Democrats. On one side is labor, on the other management, locked in an eternal struggle for power and resources.

But behind the scenes, the business community was engaged in its own anxious discussions about how the election and its aftermath might unfold. The summer’s racial-justice protests had sent a signal to business owners too: the potential for economy-disrupting civil disorder. “With tensions running high, there was a lot of concern about unrest around the election, or a breakdown in our normal way we handle contentious elections,” says Neil Bradley, the Chamber’s executive vice president and chief policy officer. These worries had led the Chamber to release a pre-election statement with the Business Roundtable, a Washington-based CEOs’ group, as well as associations of manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers, calling for patience and confidence as votes were counted.

But Bradley wanted to send a broader, more bipartisan message. He reached out to Podhorzer, through an intermediary both men declined to name. Agreeing that their unlikely alliance would be powerful, they began to discuss a joint statement pledging their organizations’ shared commitment to a fair and peaceful election. They chose their words carefully and scheduled the statement’s release for maximum impact. As it was being finalized, Christian leaders signaled their interest in joining, further broadening its reach.

The statement was released on Election Day, under the names of Chamber CEO Thomas Donohue, AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka, and the heads of the National Association of Evangelicals and the National African American Clergy Network. “It is imperative that election officials be given the space and time to count every vote in accordance with applicable laws,” it stated. “We call on the media, the candidates and the American people to exercise patience with the process and trust in our system, even if it requires more time than usual.” The groups added, “Although we may not always agree on desired outcomes up and down the ballot, we are united in our call for the American democratic process to proceed without violence, intimidation or any other tactic that makes us weaker as a nation.”

SHOWING UP, STANDING DOWN

Election night began with many Democrats despairing. Trump was running ahead of pre-election polling, winning Florida, Ohio and Texas easily and keeping Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania too close to call. But Podhorzer was unperturbed when I spoke to him that night: the returns were exactly in line with his modeling. He had been warning for weeks that Trump voters’ turnout was surging. As the numbers dribbled out, he could tell that as long as all the votes were counted, Trump would lose.

The liberal alliance gathered for an 11 p.m. Zoom call. Hundreds joined; many were freaking out. “It was really important for me and the team in that moment to help ground people in what we had already known was true,” says Angela Peoples, director for the Democracy Defense Coalition. Podhorzer presented data to show the group that victory was in hand.

While he was talking, Fox News surprised everyone by calling Arizona for Biden. The public-awareness campaign had worked: TV anchors were bending over backward to counsel caution and frame the vote count accurately. The question then became what to do next.

The conversation that followed was a difficult one, led by the activists charged with the protest strategy. “We wanted to be mindful of when was the right time to call for moving masses of people into the street,” Peoples says. As much as they were eager to mount a show of strength, mobilizing immediately could backfire and put people at risk. Protests that devolved into violent clashes would give Trump a pretext to send in federal agents or troops as he had over the summer. And rather than elevate Trump’s complaints by continuing to fight him, the alliance wanted to send the message that the people had spoken.

So the word went out: stand down. Protect the Results announced that it would “not be activating the entire national mobilization network today, but remains ready to activate if necessary.” On Twitter, outraged progressives wondered what was going on. Why wasn’t anyone trying to stop Trump’s coup? Where were all the protests?

Podhorzer credits the activists for their restraint. “They had spent so much time getting ready to hit the streets on Wednesday. But they did it,” he says. “Wednesday through Friday, there was not a single Antifa vs. Proud Boys incident like everyone was expecting. And when that didn’t materialize, I don’t think the Trump campaign had a backup plan.”

Activists reoriented the Protect the Results protests toward a weekend of celebration. “Counter their disinfo with our confidence & get ready to celebrate,” read the messaging guidance Shenker-Osorio presented to the liberal alliance on Friday, Nov. 6. “Declare and fortify our win. Vibe: confident, forward-looking, unified–NOT passive, anxious.” The voters, not the candidates, would be the protagonists of the story.

The planned day of celebration happened to coincide with the election being called on Nov. 7. Activists dancing in the streets of Philadelphia blasted Beyoncé over an attempted Trump campaign press conference; the Trumpers’ next confab was scheduled for Four Seasons Total Landscaping outside the city center, which activists believe was not a coincidence. “The people of Philadelphia owned the streets of Philadelphia,” crows the Working Families Party’s Mitchell. “We made them look ridiculous by contrasting our joyous celebration of democracy with their clown show.”

The votes had been counted. Trump had lost. But the battle wasn’t over.

THE FIVE STEPS TO VICTORY

In Podhorzer’s presentations, winning the vote was only the first step to winning the election. After that came winning the count, winning the certification, winning the Electoral College and winning the transition–steps that are normally formalities but that he knew Trump would see as opportunities for disruption. Nowhere would that be more evident than in Michigan, where Trump’s pressure on local Republicans came perilously close to working–and where liberal and conservative pro-democracy forces joined to counter it.

It was around 10 p.m. on election night in Detroit when a flurry of texts lit up the phone of Art Reyes III. A busload of Republican election observers had arrived at the TCF Center, where votes were being tallied. They were crowding the vote-counting tables, refusing to wear masks, heckling the mostly Black workers. Reyes, a Flint native who leads We the People Michigan, was expecting this. For months, conservative groups had been sowing suspicion about urban vote fraud. “The language was, ‘They’re going to steal the election; there will be fraud in Detroit,’ long before any vote was cast,” Reyes says.


He made his way to the arena and sent word to his network. Within 45 minutes, dozens of reinforcements had arrived. As they entered the arena to provide a counterweight to the GOP observers inside, Reyes took down their cell-phone numbers and added them to a massive text chain. Racial-justice activists from Detroit Will Breathe worked alongside suburban women from Fems for Dems and local elected officials. Reyes left at 3 a.m., handing the text chain over to a disability activist.

As they mapped out the steps in the election-certification process, activists settled on a strategy of foregrounding the people’s right to decide, demanding their voices be heard and calling attention to the racial implications of disenfranchising Black Detroiters. They flooded the Wayne County canvassing board’s Nov. 17 certification meeting with on-message testimony; despite a Trump tweet, the Republican board members certified Detroit’s votes.

Election boards were one pressure point; another was GOP-controlled legislatures, who Trump believed could declare the election void and appoint their own electors. And so the President invited the GOP leaders of the Michigan legislature, House Speaker Lee Chatfield and Senate majority leader Mike Shirkey, to Washington on Nov. 20.

It was a perilous moment. If Chatfield and Shirkey agreed to do Trump’s bidding, Republicans in other states might be similarly bullied. “I was concerned things were going to get weird,” says Jeff Timmer, a former Michigan GOP executive director turned anti-Trump activist. Norm Eisen describes it as “the scariest moment” of the entire election.

The democracy defenders launched a full-court press. Protect Democracy’s local contacts researched the lawmakers’ personal and political motives. Issue One ran television ads in Lansing. The Chamber’s Bradley kept close tabs on the process. Wamp, the former Republican Congressman, called his former colleague Mike Rogers, who wrote an op-ed for the Detroit newspapers urging officials to honor the will of the voters. Three former Michigan governors–Republicans John Engler and Rick Snyder and Democrat Jennifer Granholm–jointly called for Michigan’s electoral votes to be cast free of pressure from the White House. Engler, a former head of the Business Roundtable, made phone calls to influential donors and fellow GOP elder statesmen who could press the lawmakers privately.

The pro-democracy forces were up against a Trumpified Michigan GOP controlled by allies of Ronna McDaniel, the Republican National Committee chair, and Betsy DeVos, the former Education Secretary and a member of a billionaire family of GOP donors. On a call with his team on Nov. 18, Bassin vented that his side’s pressure was no match for what Trump could offer. “Of course he’s going to try to offer them something,” Bassin recalls thinking. “Head of the Space Force! Ambassador to wherever! We can’t compete with that by offering carrots. We need a stick.”

If Trump were to offer something in exchange for a personal favor, that would likely constitute bribery, Bassin reasoned. He phoned Richard Primus, a law professor at the University of Michigan, to see if Primus agreed and would make the argument publicly. Primus said he thought the meeting itself was inappropriate, and got to work on an op-ed for Politico warning that the state attorney general–a Democrat–would have no choice but to investigate. When the piece posted on Nov. 19, the attorney general’s communications director tweeted it. Protect Democracy soon got word that the lawmakers planned to bring lawyers to the meeting with Trump the next day.

Reyes’ activists scanned flight schedules and flocked to the airports on both ends of Shirkey’s journey to D.C., to underscore that the lawmakers were being scrutinized. After the meeting, the pair announced they’d pressed the President to deliver COVID relief for their constituents and informed him they saw no role in the election process. Then they went for a drink at the Trump hotel on Pennsylvania Avenue. A street artist projected their images onto the outside of the building along with the words THE WORLD IS WATCHING.

That left one last step: the state canvassing board, made up of two Democrats and two Republicans. One Republican, a Trumper employed by the DeVos family’s political nonprofit, was not expected to vote for certification. The other Republican on the board was a little-known lawyer named Aaron Van Langevelde. He sent no signals about what he planned to do, leaving everyone on edge.

When the meeting began, Reyes’s activists flooded the livestream and filled Twitter with their hashtag, #alleyesonmi. A board accustomed to attendance in the single digits suddenly faced an audience of thousands. In hours of testimony, the activists emphasized their message of respecting voters’ wishes and affirming democracy rather than scolding the officials. Van Langevelde quickly signaled he would follow precedent. The vote was 3-0 to certify; the other Republican abstained.

After that, the dominoes fell. Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and the rest of the states certified their electors. Republican officials in Arizona and Georgia stood up to Trump’s bullying. And the Electoral College voted on schedule on Dec. 14.

HOW CLOSE WE CAME

There was one last milestone on Podhorzer’s mind: Jan. 6. On the day Congress would meet to tally the electoral count, Trump summoned his supporters to D.C. for a rally.

Much to their surprise, the thousands who answered his call were met by virtually no counterdemonstrators. To preserve safety and ensure they couldn’t be blamed for any mayhem, the activist left was “strenuously discouraging counter activity,” Podhorzer texted me the morning of Jan. 6, with a crossed-fingers emoji.

Trump addressed the crowd that afternoon, peddling the lie that lawmakers or Vice President Mike Pence could reject states’ electoral votes. He told them to go to the Capitol and “fight like hell.” Then he returned to the White House as they sacked the building. As lawmakers fled for their lives and his own supporters were shot and trampled, Trump praised the rioters as “very special.”

It was his final attack on democracy, and once again, it failed. By standing down, the democracy campaigners outfoxed their foes. “We won by the skin of our teeth, honestly, and that’s an important point for folks to sit with,” says the Democracy Defense Coalition’s Peoples. “There’s an impulse for some to say voters decided and democracy won. But it’s a mistake to think that this election cycle was a show of strength for democracy. It shows how vulnerable democracy is.”

The members of the alliance to protect the election have gone their separate ways. The Democracy Defense Coalition has been disbanded, though the Fight Back Table lives on. Protect Democracy and the good-government advocates have turned their attention to pressing reforms in Congress. Left-wing activists are pressuring the newly empowered Democrats to remember the voters who put them there, while civil rights groups are on guard against further attacks on voting. Business leaders denounced the Jan. 6 attack, and some say they will no longer donate to lawmakers who refused to certify Biden’s victory. Podhorzer and his allies are still holding their Zoom strategy sessions, gauging voters’ views and developing new messages. And Trump is in Florida, facing his second impeachment, deprived of the Twitter and Facebook accounts he used to push the nation to its breaking point.

As I was reporting this article in November and December, I heard different claims about who should get the credit for thwarting Trump’s plot. Liberals argued the role of bottom-up people power shouldn’t be overlooked, particularly the contributions of people of color and local grassroots activists. Others stressed the heroism of GOP officials like Van Langevelde and Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, who stood up to Trump at considerable cost. The truth is that neither likely could have succeeded without the other. “It’s astounding how close we came, how fragile all this really is,” says Timmer, the former Michigan GOP executive director. “It’s like when Wile E. Coyote runs off the cliff–if you don’t look down, you don’t fall. Our democracy only survives if we all believe and don’t look down.”

Democracy won in the end. The will of the people prevailed. But it’s crazy, in retrospect, that this is what it took to put on an election in the United States of America.

–With reporting by LESLIE DICKSTEIN, MARIAH ESPADA and SIMMONE SHAH

Correction appended, Feb. 5: The original version of this story misstated the name of Norm Eisen’s organization. It is the Voter Protection Program, not the Voter Protection Project. The original version of this story also misstated Jeff Timmer’s former position with the Michigan Republican Party. He was the executive director, not the chairman.
Modify message

Title: "The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election"
Post by: ccp on August 31, 2022, 02:34:38 PM

" In a way, Trump was right."


".The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding."

what !

" This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster. “Every attempt to interfere with the proper outcome of the election was defeated,” says Ian Bassin, co-founder of Protect Democracy, "

who are they kidding !

" The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. "

is this a joke?

this is the MOST OBNOXIOUS lying stinking bunch of horseshit

Author :

Molly Ball another lying Democrat Yale graduate Jewish
  make me ashamed Jewish power hungry commie
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molly_Ball

for those on the board who have not read parts of it like I did -
don't bother

Title: Re: "The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election"
Post by: G M on August 31, 2022, 03:54:13 PM

" In a way, Trump was right."

Fixed it.

Quote from: ccp on August 31, 2022, 02:34:38 PM

" In a way, Trump was right."


".The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding."

what !

" This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster. “Every attempt to interfere with the proper outcome of the election was defeated,” says Ian Bassin, co-founder of Protect Democracy, "

who are they kidding !

" The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election–an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. "

is this a joke?

this is the MOST OBNOXIOUS lying stinking bunch of horseshit

Author :

Molly Ball another lying Democrat Yale graduate Jewish
  make me ashamed Jewish power hungry commie
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molly_Ball

for those on the board who have not read parts of it like I did -
don't bother

Title: Eelectoral process, Ranked choice voting sucks
Post by: DougMacG on September 01, 2022, 02:34:40 AM

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrat-mary-peltola-defeats-sarah-palin-special-election/story?id=88455630

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 01, 2022, 05:49:03 AM

yeah

 I was pissed when Murkowski Tammany Hall(ed) her way with this scam too.

probably rigged by the well monied  , connected murkowski crowd

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 01, 2022, 05:59:43 AM

Not clearly stated in the article but what I got was the Rep vote was divided among several candidates, that this win is good only for the remainder of the term, and that there will be only three candidates in November and that Palin will be one of them.

Title: Ranked choice Alaska
Post by: DougMacG on September 01, 2022, 06:14:10 AM

One commentator said, the two main R sides hated each other, didn't put the other as second choice.

My point, who cares who your second choice is, and you shouldn't need to have a second choice strategy to vote.  Have a runoff if you don't have party primaries.
------
Adding this:
https://hotair.com/ed-morrissey/2022/09/01/baked-alaskan-60-of-voters-cast-ballots-for-republicans-a-democrat-won-n493760

Title: Your Constitutional Right!
Post by: G M on September 01, 2022, 09:13:28 PM

Jesse Kelly:

PRO TIP: You’re a free American. You have every right to say anything you want about an election. Anything you want.

Anyone telling you otherwise is someone who cheated in an election and plans to cheat in the next one.

It’s critical for a free society. So if an election is disputed, the people in power should open the books and show everyone how fair it was.

If the people in power don’t do this and instead try to silence opposition, the country is almost finished. Trust is their job. Not mine.

Title: Election Deniers
Post by: G M on September 02, 2022, 08:14:42 AM

https://twitter.com/i/status/1565493427357323264

https://twitter.com/SteveGuest/status/1565493427357323264?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1565493427357323264%7Ctwgr%5E511ea08c4a3d193fcc169673bcbf5fd2604ab8eb%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Finstapundit.com%2F

Title: Ten minutes of Dem aspersions on election results
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 05, 2022, 12:14:19 PM

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1566463210957455364?fbclid=IwAR08wijDAiBgNY1XxNaI6LXfCmYTIiASLZ_bh-8qr-KAFWi1VcZJPeHxnFY

Title: Just wait for the midterms!
Post by: G M on September 05, 2022, 01:23:32 PM

https://kanekoa.substack.com/p/the-curious-case-of-jinhua-konnech

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 05, 2022, 03:46:58 PM

"Furthermore, many of the company’s software engineers and employees graduated from Chinese universities such as Zhejiang University, Nanjing University, University of Science and Technology of China, Beijing Language and Culture University, China Agricultural University, and HuaZhong University of Science and Technology."

AND THIS IS THE PROBLEM!
HOW DO YOU KNOW WHICH ONES ARE SPIES?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 05, 2022, 04:02:04 PM

Quote from: ccp on September 05, 2022, 03:46:58 PM

"Furthermore, many of the company’s software engineers and employees graduated from Chinese universities such as Zhejiang University, Nanjing University, University of Science and Technology of China, Beijing Language and Culture University, China Agricultural University, and HuaZhong University of Science and Technology."

AND THIS IS THE PROBLEM!
HOW DO YOU KNOW WHICH ONES ARE SPIES?

Just the ones from China

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 05, 2022, 04:40:49 PM

Plus their quislings , , ,

Title: More fraud in MI
Post by: G M on September 07, 2022, 09:09:24 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/09/2020-voter-fraud-hotbed-east-lansing-mi-276-ballots-cast-closed-msu-dorms-11-middle-aged-women-registered-vote-male-fraternity-houses-47-ballots-cast-addresses-dont/

Title: Dem election denials
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2022, 04:20:17 AM

https://patriotpost.us/alexander/91152?mailing_id=6930&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.6930&utm_campaign=alexander&utm_content=body

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 08, 2022, 06:46:51 AM

"More fraud in MI"

Left unsaid is who did these ineligible or dead "voters " vote for?

since nothing about it in the MSM we know

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 08, 2022, 06:48:40 AM

Quote from: ccp on September 08, 2022, 06:46:51 AM

"More fraud in MI"

Left unsaid is who did these ineligible or dead "voters " vote for?

since nothing about it in the MSM we know

If it was republicans, they'd mention it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 08, 2022, 07:02:47 AM

"If it was republicans, they'd mention it."

precisely

Title: Looks like Manchurian Joe is going to keep his job , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2022, 03:12:58 PM

https://kanekoa.substack.com/p/fbi-conceals-chinese-infiltration?utm_medium=email&fbclid=IwAR0bB8brkbQibOQEVm4lJcffEr2FuM7iHuAX3T5fmbRuEuF3TBfu-y-seEY

Title: 33 votes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2022, 03:32:20 PM

1) A Useful Reminder That Every Vote Counts

If you think your vote doesn’t matter, take a look at the tragic results in the Montgomery County Democratic primary for County Executive after the third and final recount last week:

David Blair: 55,472

Marc Elrich: 55,504.

A 32 vote difference out of 100,000 votes.

If the name Marc Elrich, by the way, sounds familiar, it may be because he is the county executive who refused to give police protection to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh when he and his family received death threats from abortion protesters gathered outside his home. Here was the WSJ headline:
 
Why Marc Elrich Won’t Protect Supreme Court Justices
Second post:


https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-man-who-wont-protect-the-justices-supreme-court-marshal-gail-curley-mark-elrich-montgomery-county-11657143465?mod=article_inline

Elrich also was one of the nation’s leading lockdown artists during Covid. He even infamously wanted to shut down PRIVATE schools in 2020.

In other words: He’s one of the nation’s leading fools and tyrants.

If only 33 Marylanders had turned out to vote against him, he would no longer be a menace to society. 

So vote!

Title: Re: Dem election denials
Post by: DougMacG on September 09, 2022, 08:41:26 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 08, 2022, 04:20:17 AM

https://patriotpost.us/alexander/91152?mailing_id=6930&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.6930&utm_campaign=alexander&utm_content=body

From the article:

“election deniers.”

On the 2000 Presidential Election

On Al Gore’s defeat by George W. Bush, in 2013 Biden asserted, “[Gore] was elected president of the United States of America.”
Biden’s Chief of Staff Ron Klain said: “People frequently tell me that I should ‘get over’ the 2000 election and recount. I haven’t, and I don’t think I ever will.”
Joe Biden, 2016: “I think [Gore] won.”
Hillary Clinton, 2016: The Supreme Court “took away a presidency.”
Barack Obama, 2005: “Not every vote” was counted.
Bill Clinton, 2001: “The only way they could win the election was to stop the voting in Florida.”
Jimmy Carter, 2005: “There’s no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president.”
Jamie Raskin, 2003: George W. Bush was the “first court-appointed president.”
Terry McAuliffe, 2004: “We won that election!”
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, 2016: “The Supreme Court elected the president. Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000.”
Al Gore, 2017: “Actually I think I carried Florida.”

On the 2004 Presidential Election

Howard Dean, 2006: “I’m not confident” the election “was fairly decided” because “the machines were not reliable.”
Hillary Clinton, 2005: “It’s fair to say that there are many legitimate questions about” the “accuracy” and “integrity” of America’s election system.
Jerry Nadler, 2005: “The right to vote has been stolen from qualified voters.”
Sheila Jackson Lee, 2004: “We cannot declare that the election of November 2, 2004 was free and clear and transparent and real.”
Maxine Waters, 2005: “Problems in the Ohio election” could have been “outcome determinative.”

On the 2016 Presidential Election

Joe Biden, 2019: “I absolutely” agree that Trump is an “illegitimate president.”
Hillary Clinton, 2019: The election was “stolen.”
Jimmy Carter, 2019: “Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election and was put into office because of the Russians’ interference on his behalf.”
Kamala Harris, 2019: “Absolutely right” that Trump “didn’t really win.”
Jerry Nadler, 2017: It was a “tainted” and “illegitimate” election.
Karine Jean-Pierre, 2016: “Stolen emails, stolen drone, stolen election. Welcome to the world of #unpresidented Trump.”

On the High-Profile 2018 Georgia Gubernatorial Election

Stacey Abrams, 2019: “We won!”
Cory Booker, 2018: “Stacey Abrams’ election is being stolen from her.”
Sherrod Brown, 2018: “They stole it. It’s clear.”
Hillary Clinton, 2018: “If she had a fair election, she already would have won.”
Kamala Harris, 2019: “Without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia; Andrew Gillum is the governor of Florida.”
Karine Jean-Pierre, 2020: “Reminder: Brian Kemp stole the gubernatorial election from Georgians and Stacey Abrams.”
Terry McAuliffe, 2021: Abrams would have been governor “had the governor of Georgia not disenfranchised 1.4 million Georgia voters.”

Title: ABSENTEE BALLOTS by STATE
Post by: ccp on September 10, 2022, 09:36:53 AM

STATES WITH ALL MAIL IN BALLOTING:

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vopp-table-18-states-with-all-mail-elections.aspx

EARLY ELECTION DAY:

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/early-voting-in-state-elections.aspx

POST ELECTION DAY :

https://www.vote.org/absentee-ballot-deadlines/

 I am surprised most swing states are not excepting mail ins after election day except for Ohio could be a problem.
The states that do are primarily the usual suspects :
California, NY, NJ, Maryland, DC (does it matter?), Mass, Alaska (makes sense here ), WV
 

Title: FL- 2022 primary shenanigans
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 11, 2022, 04:50:51 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/florida-watchdog-groups-allege-mail-in-ballot-and-voter-roll-violations-in-2022-primary-and-2020-general-election_4715972.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-09-11&utm_medium=email&est=hcZf4n7pNg2KQM3WcgKD0n%2BKpDcJU%2FfpY09y6zv5Kfu16W%2B%2FEpyhaoNy9F7h1QBol1u%2F

Title: The next election WILL be stolen
Post by: G M on September 11, 2022, 07:26:07 AM

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/115/549/446/original/7b59f0c69b0998c6.png

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/115/549/446/original/7b59f0c69b0998c6.png)

Title: Re: The next election WILL be stolen
Post by: DougMacG on September 11, 2022, 12:31:19 PM

Unless.we.stop.them.

Title: Re: The next election WILL be stolen
Post by: G M on September 12, 2022, 07:31:44 AM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 11, 2022, 12:31:19 PM

Unless.we.stop.them.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/doj-has-warning-arizona-s-audit-state-attacks-voting-rights-n1275349

Careful, Garland's Gulag has more room available.

Title: Maricopa County AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 14, 2022, 03:46:04 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/09/13/maricopa-county-under-fire-for-appointing-more-democrat-than-republican-poll-workers/

Title: Tarrant County Texas
Post by: G M on September 14, 2022, 10:43:57 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/09/2000mules-texas-style-newly-discovered-police-body-cam-footage-implicates-tarrant-co-texas-democrat-officials-ballot-harvesting/

Title: WSJ: Ranked Choice Voting in Alaska
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 15, 2022, 08:04:44 AM

How Republicans Might Lose Alaska Again
New ranked-choice data say Begich beats Peltola, but Palin won’t quit.
By The Editorial Board
Sept. 14, 2022 6:31 pm ET


Mary Peltola was sworn in Tuesday as Alaska’s Democratic Congresswoman, and given her state’s Republican tilt, that phrase still hits the ear like the Cat representative from Dogtown. When Ms. Peltola won last month’s special election, many in the GOP blamed Alaska’s new ranked-choice voting system. The case for ditching it is now being bolstered by fresh data.

Recall how Ms. Peltola’s improbable victory went down: She was the only Democrat on the ballot, with 40.2% of first-choice votes. Two Republicans split the rest, Sarah Palin with 31.3% and Nick Begich with 28.5%. Under the ranked-choice system, Mr. Begich was eliminated and his voters were shuffled to their second choices. Half migrated to Ms. Palin. A quarter went to Ms. Peltola, giving her a 51.5% majority.

A quirk of ranked-choice voting is that the final winner might flip depending on the rankings further down the ballot. What if instead Ms. Palin had been eliminated? That’s the question we asked when the result was announced, but it was impossible to know, because the state hadn’t released data on the second choices of her voters. Here’s the answer: Mr. Begich would have won the seat with about 52.5% of the vote, a point higher than Ms. Peltola’s victory.

That’s according to an analysis of Alaska election data byFairVote, a group that favors ranked choice. If Ms. Palin had been eliminated, 59% of her voters would have gone to Mr. Begich and only 6% to Ms. Peltola. Interestingly, among voters who ranked the Democrat first, the effective second pick (skipping some write-ins) for 63% was also Mr. Begich. Only 5% chose Ms. Palin. Advocates say ranked choice is better at producing consensus winners, but in Alaska that would have been Mr. Begich.

The state’s new voting system isn’t responsible for the GOP split or Ms. Palin’s controversial history. In a traditional Republican primary, she might have beat Mr. Begich anyway and then lost to Ms. Peltola. But at least that would have given Mr. Begich a chance to make a direct case to Republicans that Ms. Palin is too polarizing to win. Ranked-choice voting discourages people from dwelling on the vital question of electability. The theory is that voters can simply number their favorites, and it will all come out in the wash.


Alaska will more or less re-run this election in November, and the strategies could get exotic. Ms. Palin has refused to drop out, arguing that she beat Mr. Begich. But why would Mr. Begich quit, since the data say he’s the only Republican who can win? His unenviable job now is to convince Palin superfans to think tactically and pick him first in a general election, while the ranked-choice crowd urges them to follow their hearts and trust the reallocation.

Democrats have an obvious incentive to ensure Mr. Begich is eliminated. What if the final pre-election polls show him edging out Ms. Palin among the GOP? Some Democrats might decide that the best use of their ballots is to vote for Ms. Palin, so she can survive to lose to Ms. Peltola in the last round. Ranked choice encourages this kind of thinking to game the system.

A final word about transparency: We’re relying on the FairVote analysis because Alaska still hasn’t released this data set in an easily readable format. Instead the state posted “a JSON file, used by the ranked-choice software.” The Division of Elections adds that it “cannot help voters access or analyze the data.”

Sorry, but this is moose baloney. Ranked-choice tabulation gets complicated, but a democratic government is supposed to let citizens see with their own eyes how the votes break down. That’s part of maintaining trust in elections.

The question for November is whether Republicans can coordinate better to prevent Ms. Peltola from getting a full two-year term. The longer debate is whether Alaskans want to stick with an opaque ranked-choice system that produces perverse results.

Title: Re: WSJ: Ranked Choice Voting in Alaska
Post by: DougMacG on September 15, 2022, 09:09:30 AM

Interesting take, NYers opining on Alaska (moose baloney?),  "but Palin won't quit"

Palin took second place but third place guy would have won ranked choice second count by a hair.

A quarter of each's support would rather lose to Dem than have the other win, and 40% chose the Dem in the first place.

1.  Get rid of ranked choice voting at the first opportunity.

2. Both should drop out if the other choice is neither.

3.  Aren't we about to lose the Senate seat the same way, Murkowski has 45% support.
https://www.cnn.com/election/2022/results/alaska/primaries/senate

I liked Sarah Palin at one point, She was a good or great Governor at the point where McCain picked her for the national stage.  Aside from personal stuff, she disqualified herself from statewide election when she resigned her term later as Governor.  Alaskans can decide that, but her 30% primary total indicates she is not the statewide hero she once was.

I guess the WSJ has it right.  Given ranked choice voting, Palin should drop out.  She took third.

Nick Begich looks okay to me.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on September 15, 2022, 11:18:03 AM

I received three different voter registration form mailers from the City of Minneapolis today, even though I don't live in the city of Minneapolis and they know that by the address they sent these to, and you don't need to pre-register to vote in Minnesota.

What could go wrong.  But nothing does go wrong.  I'm lucky to live in a Democrat run state that has zero prosecutions for vote fraud.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on September 15, 2022, 09:09:50 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on September 15, 2022, 11:18:03 AM

I received three different voter registration form mailers from the City of Minneapolis today, even though I don't live in the city of Minneapolis and they know that by the address they sent these to, and you don't need to pre-register to vote in Minnesota.

What could go wrong.  But nothing does go wrong.  I'm lucky to live in a Democrat run state that has zero prosecutions for vote fraud.

I have been assured that vote fraud is a right wing myth.

Thankfully the FBI and FaceBook are seeking out election deniers.

https://nypost.com/2022/09/14/facebook-spied-on-private-messages-of-americans-who-questioned-2020-election/

Title: FB, quisling of the Deep State/voter intimidation
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 16, 2022, 05:11:53 AM

https://nypost.com/2022/09/14/facebook-spied-on-private-messages-of-americans-who-questioned-2020-election/

Title: Re: FB, quisling of the Deep State/voter intimidation
Post by: G M on September 16, 2022, 07:37:07 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on September 16, 2022, 05:11:53 AM

https://nypost.com/2022/09/14/facebook-spied-on-private-messages-of-americans-who-questioned-2020-election/

Look up.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 16, 2022, 09:40:40 AM

 :oops:

OTOH I like my subject line better , , ,  :-D

Title: its starting
Post by: ccp on September 20, 2022, 06:13:32 AM

google headline today

"register to vote"

and all the how to register to vote links come up in 'english and some Spanish'

the ballot harvesters are gearing up
getting their organizations ready
and enlisting their soldiers as we speak

I don't understand how we can't covertly bust this open......

Title: Re: its starting
Post by: G M on September 20, 2022, 10:07:00 PM

Quote from: ccp on September 20, 2022, 06:13:32 AM

google headline today

"register to vote"

and all the how to register to vote links come up in 'english and some Spanish'

the ballot harvesters are gearing up
getting their organizations ready
and enlisting their soldiers as we speak

I don't understand how we can't covertly bust this open......

It has been done. And yet, the dems just intensify their vote fraud operations.


https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/opinion-columns/victor-joecks/victor-joecks-project-veritas-videos-reveal-widespread-mail-ballot-fraud-2133070/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 21, 2022, 12:42:19 AM

For the record, that is from two years ago.

Title: Legal complaints against Zuckerberg
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 23, 2022, 03:23:11 AM

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/mark-zuckerberg-hit-legal-complaints-alleged-attempt-influence-2020-election?fbclid=IwAR0WLCdji6XFMeT4wr4PCZwELUQEKhR6J4BoB-wz4AhxhERFBUC_QQ8zCPM

Title: FBI Warning: Do not question our free and fair elections!
Post by: G M on September 23, 2022, 10:50:26 AM

https://2ndsmartestguyintheworld.substack.com/p/americans-can-kiss-free-elections?utm_source=post-email-title&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 23, 2022, 07:56:26 PM

Can't say that does not have emotional power , , ,

Title: Lizard Cheney's bill
Post by: G M on September 24, 2022, 10:14:28 PM

https://thefederalist.com/2022/09/22/house-passes-liz-cheneys-trojan-horse-elections-bill-enabling-democrat-takeover-of-the-ballot-box/

Title: Re: Lizard Cheney's bill
Post by: DougMacG on September 25, 2022, 06:12:25 AM

Quote from: G M on September 24, 2022, 10:14:28 PM

https://thefederalist.com/2022/09/22/house-passes-liz-cheneys-trojan-horse-elections-bill-enabling-democrat-takeover-of-the-ballot-box/

Empty threat. Lizard Cheney threatens to leave the Republican party.  In fact, she left 2-6 years ago.  Now she has left elected office. 

Liz, don't let the door hit your backside on the way out.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on September 25, 2022, 10:19:34 AM

what a hanger on ....

everyone knows her political "career" is over but her.

she should take up painting illegal immigrants on the prairie in Wy
if she doesn't move back to DC to hang with Obama and the DC social circuit as a conversation piece.

Title: PA judge rules for bureaucratic cheating
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2022, 05:56:17 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/pennsylvania-counties-can-help-voters-fix-issues-with-mail-in-ballots-judge_4768535.html?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2022-10-01&src_cmp=gv-2022-10-01&utm_medium=email&est=crUPTktQz85WhwbT7GgAYzEO5TCVMVfUY18O2nG84eZkUXORTBUEOrHZrDowBBZAQmk6

Title: Abrams suit in GA thrown out
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 02, 2022, 03:52:21 AM

ET

Judge Throws Out Lawsuit by Stacey Abrams’s PAC Over 2018 Georgia Governor’s Election
By Caden Pearson October 1, 2022 Updated: October 1, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
2:36



1

A federal judge on Friday threw out a lawsuit filed by Stacey Abrams challenging Georgia’s election system after she lost the 2018 gubernatorial race to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp.

The lawsuit, which sought to change how the state administers elections, was filed around four years ago by Fair Fight Georgia, a political action committee established by Abrams after her election defeat. Earlier this year, the judge pared down the lawsuit by dismissing many of its original complaints.

Abrams alleged “misconduct, fraud or irregularities” in the voting process. She took legal action to stop counties from throwing out some rejected provisional and absentee ballots when updated vote totals affirmed Kemp was the likely winner.

When she eventually conceded on Nov. 16, 2018, Abrams vowed to take legal action to continue fighting the outcome.

“Although Georgia’s election system is not perfect, the challenged practices violate neither the constitution nor the [Voting Rights Amendment],” U.S. District Judge Steven Jones said in his ruling.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who was the lead defendant in the case, hailed the ruling.

“This ruling allows local officials to focus on the task at hand this year—running a safe, secure, and accessible election,” he said on Twitter. “Stolen election and voter suppression claims by Stacey Abrams were nothing but poll-tested rhetoric not supported by facts and evidence.”

Response
In a statement on Friday, Abrams said despite the loss, the case “had measurable results,” including “the reinstatement of over 22,000 ballots, substantive changes to voting laws, and a platform for voters of color to demand greater equity in our state.”

“During this suit, more than 3,000 voters shared their stories, creating an unprecedented and lasting record of voter testimony, which highlighted the suppressive effects of the Secretary of State’s actions on vulnerable voters,” she said on Twitter.

Abrams vowed to “expand the right to vote” for minorities if she wins the gubernatorial election.

After losing in 2018, lawyers for Abrams’s campaign and the Democrat Party of Georgia asked the court to order that provisional ballots that were rejected due to missing or incorrect information be restored. Her lawsuit also demanded that counties that had already certified vote returns correct their totals and re-certify the results.

The complaint specifically demanded to restore the votes of 1,095 Gwinnett County voters whose absentee ballots were rejected.

Abrams’s campaign contacted voters in Georgia asking if they experienced issues casting a vote.

Kemp’s campaign accused Abrams of trying to steal the election by filing legal challenges and “desperately trying to create more votes for Stacey Abrams.”

Title: ET: PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 02, 2022, 01:29:49 PM

Former Congressman Sentenced to Prison for Stuffing Pennsylvania Ballot Boxes
By Beth Brelje September 29, 2022 Updated: September 29, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
6:47



1

Despite declarations of safe and secure elections, history shows that past Pennsylvania elections were host to corruption.

For example, former U.S. Rep. Michael “Ozzie” Myers, a Pennsylvania Democrat, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to deprive voters of civil rights, bribery, obstruction of justice, falsification of voting records, conspiring to illegally vote in a federal election, and orchestrating schemes to fraudulently stuff ballot boxes for specific Democrat candidates in Pennsylvania elections held from 2014 to 2018.

Myers was sentenced Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond to 30 months in prison, three years supervised release, and ordered to pay $100,000 in fines, with $10,000 of that due immediately, according to a statement from U.S. Attorney Jacqueline C. Romero.

Directly after Tuesday’s Philadelphia hearing, Myers, 79, was taken into custody.

Myers served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1979 until 1980 when he was caught taking bribes in an FBI sting operation. That was part of an old, completed investigation.

Tuesday’s sentencing was a new matter in which Myers admitted that he bribed Domenick J. Demuro, a Democrat Judge of Elections for the 39th Ward, 36th Division in South Philadelphia, over several years to add votes for certain Democrat candidates.

Some candidates’ campaigns had hired Myers, and others were candidates that he favored. He admitted that he was paid consulting fees in cash or checks, then used portions of these funds to pay election officials to tamper with election results.

This included judicial seats and various federal, state, and local offices.

Myers also admitted to conspiring to commit election fraud with another former Judge of Elections, Democrat Marie Beren, in the 39th Ward, 2nd Division in South Philadelphia.

“Myers’ accomplice was the de facto Judge of Elections and effectively ran the polling places in her division by installing close associates to serve as members of the Board of Elections,” Romero’s statement said. “Myers admitted that he gave his accomplice directions to add votes to candidates supported by him.”

Beren and Demuro were charged separately and previously pleaded guilty.

How It Worked
Myers told the court that on most Election Days, he drove Beren to the polling station to open the polls. During the drive, Myers told Beren which candidates he supported so she knew which candidates should get fraudulent votes.

While the polls were open, Beren told in-person voters to support Myers’s candidates and cast fraudulent votes in support of Myers’s preferred candidates on behalf of voters she knew would not physically appear at the polls, the Department of Justice (DOJ) reported.

On Election Day, Myers kept in contact with Beren by cellphone, monitoring the number of votes cast for his candidates. Beren told him how many legitimate votes his candidates had. If voter turnout was high, Beren added fewer fraudulent votes. Sometimes Myers told Beren to shift her efforts from one preferred candidate to another if it looked like his top preferred candidate was comfortably ahead.

“Beren and her accomplices from the Board of Elections would then falsify the polling books and the List of Voters and Party Enrollment for the 39th Ward, 2nd Division, by recording the names, party affiliation, and order of appearances for voters who had not physically appeared at the polling station to cast his or her ballot in the election,” a DOJ statement said. “Beren took pains to ensure that the number of ballots cast on the machines was a reflection of the number of voters signed into the polling books and the List of Voters. After the polls closed on Election Day, Beren and her associates would falsely certify the results.”

Demuro was responsible for overseeing the entire election process and all voter activities in the 39th Ward, 36th Division in South Philadelphia.

The voting machines at each polling station, including in the 39th Ward, 36th Division, generate records in the form of a printed receipt documenting the use of each voting machine. This printed receipt, called the “results receipt,” shows the vote totals, and the Judge of Elections and other Election Board officials at each polling place attest to the accuracy of the machine results.

Myers admitted to bribing Demuro to add votes for certain candidates.

After receiving payments ranging between $300 to $5,000 per election from Myers, Demuro added fraudulent votes on the voting machine–also known as “ringing up” votes–for Myers’s clients and preferred candidates, thereby diluting the value of ballots cast by actual voters, according to the DOJ.

At Myers’s direction, Demuro added these fraudulent votes to the totals during Election Day, and later falsely certified that the voting machine results were accurate.

No Stranger to Prison
In a 1980 FBI operation dubbed the ABSCAM Investigation, undercover FBI agents disguised themselves as businessmen and Arab sheiks and ultimately criminally charged seven members of Congress, alleging the politicians had accepted money from the phony sheiks, promising favors in return.

Myers was among those charged and was sentenced to three years in prison.

The FBI had videotapes showing the members accepting cash or stocks. In one, an agent handed Myers an envelope stuffed with hundred-dollar bills amounting to $50,000, saying, “Spend it well.” Myers responded, “Pleasure,” according to a report at the Library of Congress.

In response, the House ethics committee unanimously recommended expelling him.

Convinced of his innocence, Myers took his case to the House floor, where he pleaded, “When you push the ‘yea’ button on the voting machine, it will have the same effect as hitting the button on the electric chair.”

Unmoved, the House voted 376–30 to expel him, the report said.

Myers was the first member to be expelled since the Civil War, and the first ever to be expelled for misconduct other than treason.

After leaving prison, he started a political consulting firm.

Title: WSJ: CJ Roberts and Racial Gerrymandering
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 03, 2022, 05:27:38 AM

Gerrymandering strictly by race is illegal, so how can it be required? According to Alabama, that’s the question Tuesday at the Supreme Court in Merrill v. Milligan, a case involving the state’s recent redrawing of its U.S. House map. The new districts resemble the status quo, with one majority-black seat in the southeast. The state says it used 2020 Census data merely to enact “race-neutral adjustments for small shifts in population.”

But Alabama has seven House seats, so one majority-black district comes out to 14%, while 26% of the state’s voting-age population is black. A federal court said in January that Alabama is required by the Voting Rights Act (VRA) to create a second majority-black district, which would be 29% representation. Is this the law, or is it another misguided effort in what Chief Justice John Roberts once called a “sordid business, this divvying us up by race”?

Section 2 of the VRA bans voting practices that aren’t “equally open” or that give racial minorities “less opportunity” to “elect representatives of their choice.” The High Court has blessed claims of vote dilution, with the operative precedent being Gingles (1986). It sets forth a multipart test: Is the minority group big and compact enough to be its own district? Is it politically cohesive? Is a VRA violation indicated by “the totality of the circumstances”?

On the other hand, Section 2 explicitly says it doesn’t create any sort of “right to have members of a protected class elected in numbers equal to their proportion in the population.” More recent Supreme Court rulings have said gerrymandering by race is “odious,” and so strict scrutiny applies if it’s a “predominant” factor for mapmakers. Scylla, meet Charybdis.

Alabama argues that its critics were able to draw alternatives maps with two majority-black districts “only by starting with a ‘nonnegotiable’ racial target and backfilling with other redistricting criteria after that target had been hit.” These plans split the Gulf Coast region to combine black voters across the state.


In February, when the Justices stayed the lower court’s decision, Chief Justice Roberts dissented, saying it looked like a faithful application of Gingles. But he advocated hearing the case, since “Gingles and its progeny have engendered considerable disagreement and uncertainty.”

One thread in the Chief’s VRA jurisprudence is that it isn’t 1965 anymore. South Carolina has a black GOP Senator. Georgia has a black Democratic Senator, whose Republican challenger is also black. Reps. Steve Cohen and Rashida Tlaib aren’t black but win majority-black seats. The reverse, black Democrats in majority-white seats, happens, too, such as in Georgia’s 6th. What distinguishes a district favoring black voters, who happen to be Democrats, from a district favoring Democrats, who happen to be black?

Further, how much are these dynamics perpetuated if courts read the VRA as mandating racial quotas, more or less? “Few devices could be better designed to exacerbate racial tensions than the consciously segregated districting system currently being constructed in the name of the Voting Rights Act,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in 1994. He predicted it would “deepen racial divisions by destroying any need for voters or candidates to build bridges between racial groups or to form voting coalitions.” How right he has been.

The left hopes to bully the Chief Justice into leaving Gingles alone. Here’s how the Atlantic recently characterized his vote not to stay the lower-court ruling: “To resurrect a pungent phrase, his colleagues out-segged him.” Imagine the warped mentality in which it’s possible in 2022 to get “out-segged” by Clarence Thomas.


The Democratic-media chorus is ready to shout that the Court’s ruling for Alabama in Merrill is the end of the VRA and democracy. It would in fact be a step away from the sordid business of proportional representation by race, which really is anti-democratic.

Title: PA: Bloomberg cheating in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 03, 2022, 08:56:25 AM

second

https://thefederalist.com/2022/10/03/emails-biden-backing-billionaire-michael-bloomberg-tried-to-meddle-in-pennsylvanias-election/?fbclid=IwAR2Huw3gt2tlsZ0yMQuVa_hmclGAJAzfDDW0p21LvOgITgPjCcgXGdDRHlY

Title: PP
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 03, 2022, 02:08:40 PM

Prepare for more bulk-mail ballot fraud: During the 2020 election, mail-in ballots became a much bigger piece of the overall vote picture. The excuse for vastly expanding mail-in balloting at the time was the COVID pandemic, but the end of the pandemic has not stopped the mail-in balloting problem, as states have institutionalized and in some cases expanded the practice. The negative results from this will be twofold. The first will be the obvious problem of increased likelihood of fraudulent votes. The second issue is that of time. Ironically, in a world where technology has allowed for greater efficiency, the opposite seems to be occurring when it comes to multiple states' election processes. Due to the increase of mail-in balloting, it is likely that several states will not know the outcome of elections until days if not weeks after Election Day. So instead of election results being known the night of or day after the election, the trend is going in the opposite direction, with elections being drawn out as mail-in ballots are received and processed. This creates problems for poll workers who will be forced to work for days, straining election resources. As the Bipartisan Policy Center's Rachel Orey observes, "If you're spread thin in terms of your election workers, and you have most people focused on keeping the polling places open and running, there's less resources to put towards processing mail ballots on Election Day." With several Senate races currently polling as tossups, the prospect of knowing who wins on Election Day is less likely, all thanks to mail-in balloting.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 03, 2022, 02:41:34 PM

from my post previously

fits in here with above post about mail in voting fraud which of course will be rampart and for Repubs to be too dumb to find it and scratching their heads as always:

----------------------------------------------------
STATES WITH ALL MAIL IN BALLOTING:

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/vopp-table-18-states-with-all-mail-elections.aspx

EARLY ELECTION DAY:

https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/early-voting-in-state-elections.aspx

POST ELECTION DAY :

https://www.vote.org/absentee-ballot-deadlines/

 I am surprised most swing states are not excepting mail ins after election day except for Ohio could be a problem.
The states that do are primarily the usual suspects :
California, NY, NJ, Maryland, DC (does it matter?), Mass, Alaska (makes sense here ), WV

Title: Our free and fair elections!
Post by: G M on October 04, 2022, 04:20:27 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/caught-video-beto-orourke-campaign-workers-raid-assisted-living-facility-hunting-votes-democrats-stealing-votes-weak-elderly/

Title: CEO of KONNECH arrested. What did CCP know and when did it know it?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 05, 2022, 02:38:44 PM

https://andmagazine.substack.com/p/ceo-of-konnech-arrested-now-the-big?fbclid=IwAR3Hifss5FFvt18Xh7tfNSk99TTwkP94t-z1a9Gtto3LLpQa2tvOfIkBd8A

CEO Of Konnech Arrested - Now The Big Question - Does Konnech Work For Chinese Intelligence?

Weeks ago the election integrity organization True the Vote broke the story that Konnech, a Michigan-based firm that provides software for use by election officials was storing sensitive personal data on servers physically located in China. On cue, all the usual suspects, including the New York Times, branded this yet another “conspiracy theory.” Only madmen who spend their time searching for Bigfoot and the lost city of Atlantis would pay attention to such nonsense.

Unfortunately for the Times and all the rest of the Democratic Party’s propaganda machine, reality intruded yesterday. Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announced that the CEO of Konnech, Eugene Yu, had been arrested as part of an investigation into the possible theft of personal identifying information of election workers.

“I want to thank my prosecutors and investigators for their commitment to eliminating cyber intrusions against government entities and local businesses,” District Attorney Gascón said. “Data breaches are an ongoing threat to our digital way of life. When we entrust a company to hold our confidential data, they must be willing and able to protect our personal identifying information from theft. Otherwise, we are all victims.


“True the Vote is honored to have played a small role in what must have been a wide ranging and complex investigation. The organization is profoundly grateful to the Los Angeles District Attorney's office for their thorough work and rapid action in this matter.

True the Vote was sued last month by Konnech to try to silence our organization, including obtaining an ex-parte TRO, conducted in secret so that True the Vote had no opportunity to contest it. This TRO limited True the Vote's ability to speak on the litigation. Today Konnech CEO Eugene Yu was arrested based on alleged evidence of the very activities he and his organization attempted to suppress. Konnech was assisted by many reporters who unblinkingly accepted their now discredited claims as fact and simply repeated them.

According to True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht, "Election integrity should not be a partisan issue, nor should media try to suppress all conversation about it in a way that benefits one party. We will continue to report evidence of threats to our election process and work with law enforcement to ensure our elections are a secure space for all American voters."

The NYT reported on Oct. 3 that conspiracy theorists bullied Konnech CEO Eugene Yu, whose company develops software to manage election logistics

On Oct. 4, the Times reported Yu was arrested for possible theft of personal information about poll workers

Is The FBI Covering For Chinese Attacks On Our Electoral System?


Los Angeles District Attorney Gascon, a far-left Soros-backed prosecutor is working hard to downplay the significance of the arrest saying that his office’s investigation was “concerned solely with the personal identifying information of election workers.“ Still, the fact that Gascon’s office, which works hard to look the other way whenever crimes are committed, made the arrest tells you something about the strength of the evidence against Yu and Konnech. Obviously the evidence was so overwhelming Gascon had no choice but to act.

Now that we have gotten past the point of pretending that Konnech did nothing wrong, however, it is imperative that we push ahead with a full investigation of the company’s activities. A number of publications, including AND Magazine, have looked into the background of personnel working at Konnech and found what appear to be troubling connections to entities working for the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese intelligence. That information does not in and of itself prove that Konnech’s activities were directed by Beijing. It does suggest that maybe we should do now what should have been done some time ago, fully investigate Konnech and let the facts rather than political ideology drive our conclusions.

At the top of the list of questions to answer? Does Konnech work for Chinese intelligence, and if so what were the Chinese doing with all that data that was put on those Chinese servers?

Title: Re: CEO of KONNECH arrested. What did CCP know and when did it know it?
Post by: G M on October 05, 2022, 02:52:12 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 05, 2022, 02:38:44 PM

https://andmagazine.substack.com/p/ceo-of-konnech-arrested-now-the-big?fbclid=IwAR3Hifss5FFvt18Xh7tfNSk99TTwkP94t-z1a9Gtto3LLpQa2tvOfIkBd8A

CEO Of Konnech Arrested - Now The Big Question - Does Konnech Work For Chinese Intelligence?

Weeks ago the election integrity organization True the Vote broke the story that Konnech, a Michigan-based firm that provides software for use by election officials was storing sensitive personal data on servers physically located in China. On cue, all the usual suspects, including the New York Times, branded this yet another “conspiracy theory.” Only madmen who spend their time searching for Bigfoot and the lost city of Atlantis would pay attention to such nonsense.

Unfortunately for the Times and all the rest of the Democratic Party’s propaganda machine, reality intruded yesterday. Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announced that the CEO of Konnech, Eugene Yu, had been arrested as part of an investigation into the possible theft of personal identifying information of election workers.

“I want to thank my prosecutors and investigators for their commitment to eliminating cyber intrusions against government entities and local businesses,” District Attorney Gascón said. “Data breaches are an ongoing threat to our digital way of life. When we entrust a company to hold our confidential data, they must be willing and able to protect our personal identifying information from theft. Otherwise, we are all victims.


“True the Vote is honored to have played a small role in what must have been a wide ranging and complex investigation. The organization is profoundly grateful to the Los Angeles District Attorney's office for their thorough work and rapid action in this matter.

True the Vote was sued last month by Konnech to try to silence our organization, including obtaining an ex-parte TRO, conducted in secret so that True the Vote had no opportunity to contest it. This TRO limited True the Vote's ability to speak on the litigation. Today Konnech CEO Eugene Yu was arrested based on alleged evidence of the very activities he and his organization attempted to suppress. Konnech was assisted by many reporters who unblinkingly accepted their now discredited claims as fact and simply repeated them.

According to True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht, "Election integrity should not be a partisan issue, nor should media try to suppress all conversation about it in a way that benefits one party. We will continue to report evidence of threats to our election process and work with law enforcement to ensure our elections are a secure space for all American voters."

The NYT reported on Oct. 3 that conspiracy theorists bullied Konnech CEO Eugene Yu, whose company develops software to manage election logistics

On Oct. 4, the Times reported Yu was arrested for possible theft of personal information about poll workers

Is The FBI Covering For Chinese Attacks On Our Electoral System?


Los Angeles District Attorney Gascon, a far-left Soros-backed prosecutor is working hard to downplay the significance of the arrest saying that his office’s investigation was “concerned solely with the personal identifying information of election workers.“ Still, the fact that Gascon’s office, which works hard to look the other way whenever crimes are committed, made the arrest tells you something about the strength of the evidence against Yu and Konnech. Obviously the evidence was so overwhelming Gascon had no choice but to act.

Now that we have gotten past the point of pretending that Konnech did nothing wrong, however, it is imperative that we push ahead with a full investigation of the company’s activities. A number of publications, including AND Magazine, have looked into the background of personnel working at Konnech and found what appear to be troubling connections to entities working for the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese intelligence. That information does not in and of itself prove that Konnech’s activities were directed by Beijing. It does suggest that maybe we should do now what should have been done some time ago, fully investigate Konnech and let the facts rather than political ideology drive our conclusions.

At the top of the list of questions to answer? Does Konnech work for Chinese intelligence, and if so what were the Chinese doing with all that data that was put on those Chinese servers?

Does Konnech work for Chinese intelligence? Does Hunter Biden like crack?

Title: ZH: NYT Right Wing Conspiracy Theory comes true in less than 24 hours.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2022, 06:15:00 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/nyt-right-wing-conspiracy-theory-comes-true-less-24-hours?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=978

Title: Just 23%?
Post by: G M on October 06, 2022, 10:57:10 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/23-new-york-voters-lack-proof-identity

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2022, 11:55:56 AM

So how do we respond when someone uses this data to assert the Vite Integrity standards are too rigorous?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on October 06, 2022, 09:12:33 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2022, 11:55:56 AM

So how do we respond when someone uses this data to assert the Vite Integrity standards are too rigorous?

How much vote fraud is acceptable?

Title: Re: CEO of KONNECH arrested. What did CCP know and when did it know it?
Post by: G M on October 06, 2022, 11:37:38 PM

Quote from: G M on October 05, 2022, 02:52:12 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 05, 2022, 02:38:44 PM

https://andmagazine.substack.com/p/ceo-of-konnech-arrested-now-the-big?fbclid=IwAR3Hifss5FFvt18Xh7tfNSk99TTwkP94t-z1a9Gtto3LLpQa2tvOfIkBd8A

CEO Of Konnech Arrested - Now The Big Question - Does Konnech Work For Chinese Intelligence?

Weeks ago the election integrity organization True the Vote broke the story that Konnech, a Michigan-based firm that provides software for use by election officials was storing sensitive personal data on servers physically located in China. On cue, all the usual suspects, including the New York Times, branded this yet another “conspiracy theory.” Only madmen who spend their time searching for Bigfoot and the lost city of Atlantis would pay attention to such nonsense.

Unfortunately for the Times and all the rest of the Democratic Party’s propaganda machine, reality intruded yesterday. Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announced that the CEO of Konnech, Eugene Yu, had been arrested as part of an investigation into the possible theft of personal identifying information of election workers.

“I want to thank my prosecutors and investigators for their commitment to eliminating cyber intrusions against government entities and local businesses,” District Attorney Gascón said. “Data breaches are an ongoing threat to our digital way of life. When we entrust a company to hold our confidential data, they must be willing and able to protect our personal identifying information from theft. Otherwise, we are all victims.


“True the Vote is honored to have played a small role in what must have been a wide ranging and complex investigation. The organization is profoundly grateful to the Los Angeles District Attorney's office for their thorough work and rapid action in this matter.

True the Vote was sued last month by Konnech to try to silence our organization, including obtaining an ex-parte TRO, conducted in secret so that True the Vote had no opportunity to contest it. This TRO limited True the Vote's ability to speak on the litigation. Today Konnech CEO Eugene Yu was arrested based on alleged evidence of the very activities he and his organization attempted to suppress. Konnech was assisted by many reporters who unblinkingly accepted their now discredited claims as fact and simply repeated them.

According to True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht, "Election integrity should not be a partisan issue, nor should media try to suppress all conversation about it in a way that benefits one party. We will continue to report evidence of threats to our election process and work with law enforcement to ensure our elections are a secure space for all American voters."

The NYT reported on Oct. 3 that conspiracy theorists bullied Konnech CEO Eugene Yu, whose company develops software to manage election logistics

On Oct. 4, the Times reported Yu was arrested for possible theft of personal information about poll workers

Is The FBI Covering For Chinese Attacks On Our Electoral System?


Los Angeles District Attorney Gascon, a far-left Soros-backed prosecutor is working hard to downplay the significance of the arrest saying that his office’s investigation was “concerned solely with the personal identifying information of election workers.“ Still, the fact that Gascon’s office, which works hard to look the other way whenever crimes are committed, made the arrest tells you something about the strength of the evidence against Yu and Konnech. Obviously the evidence was so overwhelming Gascon had no choice but to act.

Now that we have gotten past the point of pretending that Konnech did nothing wrong, however, it is imperative that we push ahead with a full investigation of the company’s activities. A number of publications, including AND Magazine, have looked into the background of personnel working at Konnech and found what appear to be troubling connections to entities working for the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese intelligence. That information does not in and of itself prove that Konnech’s activities were directed by Beijing. It does suggest that maybe we should do now what should have been done some time ago, fully investigate Konnech and let the facts rather than political ideology drive our conclusions.

At the top of the list of questions to answer? Does Konnech work for Chinese intelligence, and if so what were the Chinese doing with all that data that was put on those Chinese servers?

Does Konnech work for Chinese intelligence? Does Hunter Biden like crack?

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/117/390/228/original/c3245328c922f288.jpeg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/117/390/228/original/c3245328c922f288.jpeg)

Title: Re: CEO of KONNECH arrested. What did CCP know and when did it know it?
Post by: G M on October 07, 2022, 10:52:10 PM

Quote from: G M on October 06, 2022, 11:37:38 PM

Quote from: G M on October 05, 2022, 02:52:12 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 05, 2022, 02:38:44 PM

https://andmagazine.substack.com/p/ceo-of-konnech-arrested-now-the-big?fbclid=IwAR3Hifss5FFvt18Xh7tfNSk99TTwkP94t-z1a9Gtto3LLpQa2tvOfIkBd8A

CEO Of Konnech Arrested - Now The Big Question - Does Konnech Work For Chinese Intelligence?

Weeks ago the election integrity organization True the Vote broke the story that Konnech, a Michigan-based firm that provides software for use by election officials was storing sensitive personal data on servers physically located in China. On cue, all the usual suspects, including the New York Times, branded this yet another “conspiracy theory.” Only madmen who spend their time searching for Bigfoot and the lost city of Atlantis would pay attention to such nonsense.

Unfortunately for the Times and all the rest of the Democratic Party’s propaganda machine, reality intruded yesterday. Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón announced that the CEO of Konnech, Eugene Yu, had been arrested as part of an investigation into the possible theft of personal identifying information of election workers.

“I want to thank my prosecutors and investigators for their commitment to eliminating cyber intrusions against government entities and local businesses,” District Attorney Gascón said. “Data breaches are an ongoing threat to our digital way of life. When we entrust a company to hold our confidential data, they must be willing and able to protect our personal identifying information from theft. Otherwise, we are all victims.


“True the Vote is honored to have played a small role in what must have been a wide ranging and complex investigation. The organization is profoundly grateful to the Los Angeles District Attorney's office for their thorough work and rapid action in this matter.

True the Vote was sued last month by Konnech to try to silence our organization, including obtaining an ex-parte TRO, conducted in secret so that True the Vote had no opportunity to contest it. This TRO limited True the Vote's ability to speak on the litigation. Today Konnech CEO Eugene Yu was arrested based on alleged evidence of the very activities he and his organization attempted to suppress. Konnech was assisted by many reporters who unblinkingly accepted their now discredited claims as fact and simply repeated them.

According to True the Vote founder Catherine Engelbrecht, "Election integrity should not be a partisan issue, nor should media try to suppress all conversation about it in a way that benefits one party. We will continue to report evidence of threats to our election process and work with law enforcement to ensure our elections are a secure space for all American voters."

The NYT reported on Oct. 3 that conspiracy theorists bullied Konnech CEO Eugene Yu, whose company develops software to manage election logistics

On Oct. 4, the Times reported Yu was arrested for possible theft of personal information about poll workers

Is The FBI Covering For Chinese Attacks On Our Electoral System?


Los Angeles District Attorney Gascon, a far-left Soros-backed prosecutor is working hard to downplay the significance of the arrest saying that his office’s investigation was “concerned solely with the personal identifying information of election workers.“ Still, the fact that Gascon’s office, which works hard to look the other way whenever crimes are committed, made the arrest tells you something about the strength of the evidence against Yu and Konnech. Obviously the evidence was so overwhelming Gascon had no choice but to act.

Now that we have gotten past the point of pretending that Konnech did nothing wrong, however, it is imperative that we push ahead with a full investigation of the company’s activities. A number of publications, including AND Magazine, have looked into the background of personnel working at Konnech and found what appear to be troubling connections to entities working for the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese intelligence. That information does not in and of itself prove that Konnech’s activities were directed by Beijing. It does suggest that maybe we should do now what should have been done some time ago, fully investigate Konnech and let the facts rather than political ideology drive our conclusions.

At the top of the list of questions to answer? Does Konnech work for Chinese intelligence, and if so what were the Chinese doing with all that data that was put on those Chinese servers?

Does Konnech work for Chinese intelligence? Does Hunter Biden like crack?

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/117/390/228/original/c3245328c922f288.jpeg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/117/390/228/original/c3245328c922f288.jpeg)

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/breaking-konnech-election-software-ceo-arrested-earlier-ties-china-labeled-significant-flight-risk-caught-luggage-way-mi-airport-left-cell-phone-behi/

Title: ET: VA County stops using Konnech election software
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 08, 2022, 06:34:52 AM

EXCLUSIVE: Virginia County Stops Using Konnech Election Software Following CEO’s Arrest
By Terri Wu October 6, 2022 Updated: October 7, 2022biggersmaller Print


FAIRFAX COUNTY, Va.—A county in northern Virginia has ceased the use of election software by Konnech Corp. after the arrest of the company’s executive earlier this week.

Konnech CEO Eugene Yu, 51, was arrested in Michigan on Oct. 4 as part of an investigation into the suspected “theft of personal identifying information” of Los Angeles County election workers, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s (DA) Office.

Michigan-based Konnech won a five-year contract with Los Angeles county in 2020, and stored election workers’ data on servers in China, the DA’s Office said. The office is now seeking Yu’s extradition to Los Angeles.

PollChief, Konnech’s election worker management system product, was designed to assist with poll worker assignments, communications, and payroll, according to the statement.

After learning about the arrest on Tuesday, the Fairfax County Office of Elections has stopped using Konnech’s PollChief election officer management software, said director and general registrar of the county’s Office of Elections, Eric Spicer, in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times on Oct. 6.

The county is also ending its contract with Konnech, Spicer added. Fairfax County election officials declined to comment on whether the county was securing a replacement software given the fast-approaching midterm election day.

“It is important to note that Fairfax County has never used software from this company to collect or store sensitive personal information such as social security numbers or banking information,” Spicer said in the statement.

“Furthermore, this software is not connected to the county’s voting systems or the state voter registration system. It cannot be used to tabulate votes or election results,” he added.

The county’s election officer portal, which runs on the PollChief software, currently says it’s unavailable: “We expect to resume service in approximately one week. We will email all existing officers when the Portal is available again.”

Among the PollChief products purchased by the county was the PollChief Worker Management System, PollChief Worker Self-service Portal, PollChief Asset Management System, and the PollChief Help-Desk Management System, according to a May invoice issued by Konnech obtained by The Epoch Times.

The 2016 contract between Konnech and the county, also obtained by The Epoch Times, states that the company’s servers are located in Lansing, Michigan, and that it also has a back-up server located nearby in Okemos.

Christine Brim, a coordinator of the Fairfax County GOP election integrity working group that recruits and trains poll watchers to observe voting on behalf of the Republican Party, confirmed she was notified yesterday about the county’s decision in a phone call from Christopher Henzel, chairman of the county electoral board and a Republican.

Brim praised the county’s election officials for taking swift action.

“They did not wait to find an alternative vendor. They simply got out of the risky situation, to their credit,” she told The Epoch Times. “They just turned on a dime, said ‘no more,’ and got out.”

Brim said she was informed that Fairfax County didn’t use PollChief for payrolls, and only stored workers’ names and contact information on the platform. This doesn’t eliminate the risk but it limits it, Brim said.

According to Brim, the county used PollChief to manage election officers’ training, scheduling, and communication. Spicer told Brim that the county never used the PollChief Asset Management System, which logs election equipment and poll location data, because it didn’t work, she said.

With 264 precincts in the county, and between five to 10 election officers needed per precinct for election day on Nov. 8, switching software now could be “extremely challenging,” Brim said.

Another use of PollChief by the county was to accept applications for election officer positions via the election officer portal, which is now unavailable, Brim said. But people interested in becoming election officers can still apply through the Virginia Department of Election, which will distribute the application to the corresponding counties.

Virginia started early in-person voting on Sept. 23. Fairfax County began with three locations and would add another 13 on Oct. 27.

The Epoch Times has reached out to Konnech for comment.

Title: Michael Moore predicting big win for dems in '22
Post by: G M on October 11, 2022, 07:52:37 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/michael-moore-predicts-democrats-will-win-big-in-the-midterms-could-he-be-right-again/ar-AA12MEcP

He knows the fix is in.

Title: Yet Another Whoops-- this time in CO
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 12, 2022, 12:38:42 PM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/92008-co-dems-mistakenly-sent-30000-voting-mailers-to-noncitizens-2022-10-12?mailing_id=6998&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.6998&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: SCOTUS rules for election integrity in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 12, 2022, 02:17:17 PM

Supreme Court Backs Republican in Pennsylvania Mail-In Ballots Case
By Jack Phillips October 11, 2022 Updated: October 12, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
3:40



1

The Supreme Court on Tuesday vacated an appeals court decision that required Pennsylvania to count mail-in ballots even if there is no date on the envelope.

“The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit with instructions to dismiss the case as moot,” wrote Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson (pdf), siding with David Ritter, an unsuccessful Republican candidate for a judgeship.

They also threw out a U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling that allowed the counting of mail-in ballots in the race that Ritter had sought to remove because voters did not write the date on the ballots. Ritter lost his 2021 bid to serve on the Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas after 257 mail-in ballots that didn’t have dates were counted.

Pennsylvania Republican legislators and conservatives filed amicus briefs saying the 3rd Circuit’s ruling threatened the integrity of the 2022 midterm elections.

But the Supreme Court’s action on Tuesday means that the 3rd Circuit ruling cannot be used as a precedent in the three states covered by this regional federal appellate court—Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware—to allow the counting of ballots with minor flaws such as the voter failing to fill in the date. Vacating the ruling does not change Ritter’s loss in his race.

Previous Ruling
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court denied Ritter’s attempt to block the counting of ballots that lacked dates. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch dissented. Days before that (pdf), a panel on the 3rd Circuit ordered the counting of the undated ballots.

Alito had written that the lower court’s ruling “could well affect the outcome” of the elections this year as voters go to the polls on Nov. 8 in midterms in which Republicans are seeking to seize control of Congress from the Democrats.

And he cited concerns that an “individual’s vote is not counted because he or she did not follow the rules for casting a ballot,” adding that the appeals court interpretation is “very likely wrong.”

Epoch Times Photo
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito poses in Washington on April 23, 2021. (Erin Schaff/Pool via Reuters)
Law
The 3rd Circuit had ruled that invalidating the undated ballots would violate a provision of a landmark 1964 federal law called the Civil Rights Act aimed at ensuring that minor ballot errors do not deny someone the right to vote.

The May ruling by the 3rd Circuit came in a lawsuit by several elderly voters upset that their votes would not be counted for neglecting to write the date on the mail-in ballot envelope, and what they called a “meaningless technicality.” The 3rd Circuit’s rulings also apply to the U.S. Virgin Islands territory.

However, Pennsylvania law stipulates that voters are mandated to write the date on the outer envelope on their mail-in ballot.

Before the Supreme Court’s Tuesday ruling, Republican state Sen. David Argall told The Morning Call that “there are likely to be many issues that come up during the November election” and noted other provisions, including the controversial Act 77 overhaul that was enacted in 2019 that made widespread vote-by-mail possible in Pennsylvania.

Several Republican-led states have enacted tougher voting rules, including for mail-in ballots, following the 2020 election. In Pennsylvania, there is a closely watched U.S. Senate race between Republican Mehmet Oz and Democrat John Fetterman that could help determine which party controls that chamber.

Reuters contributed to this report.

Title: VA County Election Chief Resigns Over Dispute
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 15, 2022, 06:34:52 AM

Virginia County Election Chief Resigns Over Dispute
By Terri Wu October 14, 2022

 

PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY, Va.—An election officer dispute between political parties and the electoral board in a large Virginia county has led to the resignation of the county’s election chief.

Eric Olsen, director of elections of Prince William County, resigned on Oct. 7. He said he would stay through the current election.

The issues at heart are party designations and party parity. The Democrat and Republican parties believe it’s the parties’ decision, not the electoral board’s. As for party parity, the local Republican party chair wants equal representation in precinct leadership—chiefs and assistant chiefs—on Election Day.

In an emailed statement to The Epoch Times, Olsen wrote: “The deciding factor in my decision is serious health concerns that I need to focus on at present. They have been exacerbated by the highly partisan environment in which we currently find ourselves and a lack of support for people who do this work.”

Prince William County has over 300,000 registered voters and is an important battleground for both parties. Most of the voters are in the Seventh Congressional District, where the race of Democrat incumbent Abigail Spanberger and Republican challenger Yesli Vega is highly competitive. Some voters belong to the 10th Congressional District, where Republican candidate Hung Cao takes on Democrat incumbent Jennifer Wexton.

Bipartisan Letter on Party Designation

On Sept. 22, Denny Daugherty, Republican chair, and Tonya James, Democrat chair of the county, jointly requested an emergency meeting to address party designation issues. Per the board’s decision on Sept. 9, the two parties vetted the election officers who applied after February. And they also wanted to review the list approved on Feb. 3, a proposal rejected by Olsen.

“We submit that the law contemplates the determination of party affiliation … is committed to the parties,” the joint letter said.

Instead of granting the meeting request, the board responded that they would discuss the issue at the next board meeting on Oct. 7, and Olsen announced his resignation during that meeting.

A day before the meeting, Gary Lawkowski, an attorney representing the Prince William County Republican Committee, issued a letter to the electoral board expressing concern over precinct chiefs and assistant chiefs.

“It is a fundamental principle of freedom of association that political parties themselves, not government bureaucrats, get to decide who represents them,” he told The Epoch Times in an email.

“State law calls for the chief and assistant chief election officers to be representatives of the two major political parties whenever feasible,” he added. “The Registrar should follow the law rather than asking citizens to rely on the assurances of government officials that people who repeatedly voted in Democratic primaries are actually Republicans.”

On Oct. 5, the Virginia Department of Election (ELECT) resent a 2019 guidance and advised local election offices to ensure that they disallow individuals to self-designate party affiliations. “Also keep in mind that neither an individual nor electoral board can designate a party affiliation, even if an individual has historically represented a specific party or indicated a willingness to represent either party,” the advisory wrote.

Daugherty proposed replacing assist chiefs in 29 precincts with Republicans so that no precincts would have both leaders from the same political party, a non-affiliated (assistant) chief when a Republican was available, or self-identified Republicans whose affiliation he wouldn’t endorse. The county has 103 precincts in total.

“I’m not trying to get an advantage for Republicans or Democrats. I am trying to make sure that the election is an honest one,” Daugherty told The Epoch Times.

Party Parity on Election Officers

Daugherty said he appreciated that Olsen recruited more Republican election officers by inviting those who voted in the Republican primaries in May and June to apply.

According to Olsen, the county had, in 2020, 466 Democrat election officers and 201 Republicans. This year, the numbers are 399 for Democrats and 402 for Republicans. He said, “I think we are meeting the standards of the law better than any time in decades because of targeted recruitment efforts to equalize our partisan representation, despite little support from the party.”

Daugherty agreed with the overall parity achievement but wanted to see parity among precinct leaders. To respect Olsen’s consideration over experience, Daugherty proposed that Republicans replace assistant chiefs and not chiefs, who run the election at each polling place.

Given that all election officers only work one day a year on Election Day, Daugherty was comfortable with training his nominated election officers to take the responsibility of assistant chiefs.

This election is the first time Virginia allows same-day voter registration and the second year that no ID is required to vote. In Daugherty’s view, these new rules make the parity issue more important for securing a fair election.

Clara Belle Wheeler, a senior fellow with the Virginia Institute for Public Policy, a conservative advocacy group, told The Epoch Times that the local bipartisan agreement was “amazing,” “What happened in Prince William is that they got more chiefs as Democrats than Republicans, and they had polling places where the chief and the assistant chief election officers were both from the same party. And the Democrat and the Republican chairs agree that’s not right, and they need to change it.”

Wheeler has decades of election experience and was on the Virginia State Board of Elections (SBE) from 2015 to 2018. According to her, the regular operation for getting precinct chiefs and assistant chiefs ready is to start with mandatory training for these leadership positions only. It’s normal to shift assignments during the training period, she added.

Then, the leaders are encouraged to join the following election officer training sessions to meet with the poll workers in their precincts. The minimum number of election officers at each precinct required by Virginia code is three, Wheeler said. In a large precinct, a chief may manage a dozen election officers.

The Prince William County Office of Elections confirmed with The Epoch Times that this year’s chief and assistant chief training would span over six sessions between Oct. 17 and 29.


Next Steps

County Democrat chair James told Virginia Mercury that she felt the concerns were valid but didn’t see the urgency to address them in the current election cycle, just a few weeks from Election Day.

As for the next steps, Olsen said in an email, “I’m awaiting instruction from my Board regarding any changes to our staffing.”

In Wheeler’s view, the county has sufficient time to change chief and assistant chief assignments as these election officers only work on Election Day on Nov. 8. She said SBE should put the issues on the agenda for discussion in a public meeting. Still, she didn’t expect the current SBE to take any action.

Daugherty said he had encouraged the county electoral board chair London Steverson, also a Republican, to seek an opinion from the Virginia Attorney General’s office. In early September, Attorney General Jason Miyares announced the establishment of a new election integrity unit of 20 attorneys, investigators, and paralegals from his office.

Wheeler said the current SBE wouldn’t provide any guidance. She thought the new election integrity unit in the AG’s office was a “wonderful idea.”

“I know that many election law questions need to be answered by the AG’s Office. They need an official opinion,” she added.

Steverson, SBE, and the AG’s office didn’t respond to The Epoch Times’ inquiries by press time.

Title: Oh! We were told this wasn't possible!
Post by: G M on October 15, 2022, 07:58:05 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/huge-far-left-politico-admits-election-machines-vulnerable-hacks/

Title: Re: Michael Moore predicting big win for dems in '22-Pelosi as well
Post by: G M on October 16, 2022, 09:19:27 AM

Quote from: G M on October 11, 2022, 07:52:37 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/michael-moore-predicts-democrats-will-win-big-in-the-midterms-could-he-be-right-again/ar-AA12MEcP

He knows the fix is in.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/nancy-pelosi-claims-dems-will-win-big-apologizes-saying-trumps-name-out-loud-colbert-show

Title: Dems voting "rights" "scam" 22 districts gerrymandered for blacks
Post by: ccp on October 18, 2022, 05:19:22 AM

https://www.creators.com/read/betsy-mccaughey/10/22/dems-voting-rights-scam

Title: Coming Desinfo for 2022 Midterms
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 19, 2022, 11:50:14 AM

What to Expect From Disinformation Campaigns During the 2022 U.S. Midterms, Part 2
11 MIN READOct 18, 2022 | 21:22 GMT

Editor's Note: As the November 2022 U.S. midterm elections approach, state-sponsored cyber threat groups, hacktivists and cybercriminals will ramp up new or capitalize upon existing disinformation campaigns for various malign ends. Although social media platforms are preparing for the onslaught of disinformation, their efforts will likely fail to mitigate the full extent of cyberthreats, heightening societal and physical security risks. In the second part of this series, we explore the risk of external meddling in next month's vote from actors like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. The first part can be found here.

Russia is the foreign state most likely and capable of spreading influential disinformation targeting the November 2022 U.S. midterm elections. As has been widely reported, for the last few decades, Russia has greatly advanced its cyber capabilities, including information warfare, and has a strong motivation to undermine U.S. interests. Relations between Russia and the United States are at their worst since the Cold War, and Russia has long utilized asymmetric tools like cyber to achieve its foreign policy objectives. In 2020, for example, Russia engaged in a number of covert and overt influence operations in an attempt to weaken voter support for then-candidate U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden and bolster support for then-President Donald Trump. To this end, Russian attempts to influence the upcoming midterm elections were noted as early as August 2021, when President Biden claimed that classified intelligence showed that Russia was already trying to undermine the elections through disinformation campaigns. While some observers posit that Russia may be less able or interested in conducting disinformation campaigns targeting the 2022 midterm elections, as Russia is investing significant resources in its ongoing war in Ukraine, others reject this belief. For instance, when asked in July if the ongoing war would dampen Russian election meddling, FBI Director Christopher Wray stated, ''I am quite confident the Russians can walk and chew gum.''

In September 2022, Meta announced that it had disrupted the largest and most complex Russian disinformation operation seen since Russia invaded Ukraine. The operation involved more than 60 websites attempting to impersonate legitimate European news organizations, including the United Kingdom's The Guardian and Daily Mail, Germany's Der Spiegel and Bild, and Italian news agency Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata. The fake sites contained articles in multiple languages promoting pro-Russian narratives, including accusations that the Ukrainian government and military were corrupt and warnings that European sanctions on Russia would result in severe consequences. According to Ben Nimmo, Meta's global threat intelligence lead, the websites were built with extensive care, indicating the sophistication of the operation; for instance, Russian hackers carefully copied the layout of media outlets' legitimate sites and imitated their web addresses, at times even using photos of real journalists to obfuscate the operation.

The operation also included a number of fake social media profiles on Western platforms, including 1,633 Facebook accounts, 703 Facebook pages and 29 group Instagram accounts. Meta reported that approximately 4,000 accounts followed one or more of the Facebook pages within the disinformation network, while around 1,500 Instagram accounts followed one or more of the Instagram accounts.

As Russia faces setbacks on the battleground in Ukraine, its motivations to retaliate against the United States and the West more broadly will grow even higher, which will incentivize some level of disinformation campaigns and drive hacktivist operations that could further promote disinformation. According to a senior FBI official who spoke to AP on Oct. 3 under the condition of anonymity, Russia has already been amplifying divisive topics on the internet to exacerbate doubts about the integrity of the U.S. election process. Aside from the Russian state-backed threat, several Russian-aligned hacktivist groups — including Conti, Cuba and Killnet — have been highly active in recent months in carrying out a number of operations against Western targets. In May, U.S. cybersecurity company Mandiant published a report detailing how Russian-aligned threat actors, including hacktivists, were conducting multiple disinformation operations in an attempt to undermine the Ukrainian war effort and Western cohesion. Specifically, Mandiant's report detailed how these actors were using false social media accounts to post on various platforms and forums to spread disinformation. In one example, threat actors claimed that a Polish criminal ring was harvesting organs from Ukrainian refugees to illegally traffic in the European Union.

Killnet has repeatedly conducted distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, which seek to overwhelm the target's servers by flooding them with internet traffic, against Western governments and private sector targets, including those in Japan, Lithuania, Poland and Estonia. Killnet has also targeted several U.S. institutions in the past few weeks, including a DDoS campaign launched on Oct. 5 against a number of U.S. state government websites (including the Colorado, Kentucky and Mississippi state websites), rendering them inaccessible. The attack also took down Kentucky's board of elections website, which contains information on how to register to vote. While the websites were quickly brought back online and although the campaign did not appear to be specifically targeting the U.S. midterm elections, the attack demonstrates how hacktivist activities can affect citizens' access to important resources that may pertain to the election.

Killnet has also warned of additional attacks in the coming weeks targeting various U.S. state government websites, including Alabama, Alaska, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky and Mississippi. On Oct. 10, Killnet targeted a number of U.S. airport websites in a DDoS campaign, affecting the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), Chicago O'Hare International Airport and the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, among others. While these attacks attracted a fair amount of media attention, they did not disrupt any flights or airport operations.

Alternatively, while China has long engaged in cyber espionage, Beijing has historically avoided election meddling through large-scale social media disinformation campaigns, though there are small signs it may slowly be changing its strategy. Although China possesses significant cyber capabilities, compared with Russia it has struggled to overcome cultural, linguistic and other tradecraft barriers to effectively and widely spread disinformation. China has also been much more risk-averse than Russia and has generally tended to focus on spreading pro-Beijing narratives throughout Asia rather than seeking to directly target U.S. elections, which would bring even greater scrutiny and risk blowback. For instance, a March 2021 declassified U.S. intelligence report outlining foreign actors' attempts to influence the 2020 U.S. presidential election found that China considered engaging in influence campaigns but ultimately decided against doing so. That being said, since the outbreak of the global COVID-19 pandemic, China has begun to adopt more aggressive tactics to proliferate pandemic disinformation, driving the narrative that the virus was manufactured and weaponized by the U.S. military. Its disinformation campaigns have also attempted to undermine the U.S. pandemic response by highlighting the shortcomings of its efforts compared with China's supposedly more successful lockdowns. Moreover, as tensions between Beijing and Washington continue to deteriorate, China's motivation to proliferate disinformation during the midterm elections may be increasing, and recent reports suggest that China is already engaging in some disinformation efforts, though with questionable effectiveness.

At an Oct. 3 media briefing, FBI officials stated that Russian and Chinese government-affiliated operatives and organizations are promoting disinformation about the integrity of U.S. elections. At the briefing, one FBI official specifically claimed that Chinese operatives are engaging in more ''Russian-style influence activities'' to exacerbate American divisions, citing Meta's recent takedown of an influence operation originating from China that ran across multiple social media platforms and reportedly targeted U.S. domestic politics.

Meta's takedown occurred in tandem with its larger takedown of the Russian-aligned operation and, in comparison, the Chinese operation was much smaller and less sophisticated. The Chinese operation consisted of four smaller campaigns that ran intermittently between fall 2021 and September 2022 on social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and Twitter and targeted a U.S. audience on both sides of the political spectrum; the campaign also targeted the Czech Republic with anti-government rhetoric, criticizing the government's support of Ukraine and warning against antagonizing China. The campaign was largely ineffective, given its smaller scale and the fact that most fabricated accounts associated with the campaign would post during Chinese working hours rather than when target audiences were awake, limiting user engagement.

A third actor, Iran, has also previously targeted U.S. elections with disinformation campaigns, but ongoing civil unrest within the country may undermine its ability to do so this year. Iran has engaged in myriad disinformation campaigns targeting the U.S. populace, including during the 2020 presidential election, when Iranian hackers aimed to heighten political polarization. Specifically, two Iranian nationals were indicted in November 2021 for engaging in various attempts to undermine the 2020 election; the individuals pretended to be Proud Boy members and sent Facebook messages to Republican lawmakers claiming that the Democratic Party was planning to exploit security vulnerabilities in state voter registration websites to edit mail-in ballots and register nonexistent voters. While the operation was not considered to be particularly sophisticated, it nevertheless demonstrated Iran's interest in exploiting partisanship. Since then, Iran has sponsored a number of other disinformation campaigns, including after several major events such as U.S. President Joe Biden's announcement that the United States would resume nuclear talks with Iran and the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Broadly, Tehran has numerous motivations to spread false narratives, especially as U.S.-Iran nuclear talks flounder and Washington ramps up sanctions pressure. However, its ability to do so effectively — specifically during the upcoming elections — may be constrained by the continuation of nationwide protests in Iran following the suspicious death of a 22-year-old named Mahsa Amini, who died on Sept. 16 while in the custody of Iran's morality police after they detained her for improperly wearing her headscarf. As the Iranian government struggles to maintain domestic order through internet blackouts and widespread police crackdowns, Iranian officials will likely be preoccupied with managing the narratives on domestic platforms.

Since the protests began, hacktivists have pledged their support to Iranian citizens; among other groups, Anonymous declared on Sept. 20 the start of ''Operation Iran'' (#OpIran) and later that day hacked a number of Iranian government websites, including those of the Iranian president, the government-affiliated Fars News Agency and various other public service websites. Anonymous also targeted Iran's central bank on Sept. 26 and launched a data theft and leak operation against the Iranian parliament, releasing the phone numbers and addresses of all lawmakers on Sept. 25.

As of Oct. 18, nationwide protests across Iran are now in their second month, despite lethal crackdowns by law enforcement officials. Although they initially began with a focus on women's rights, they have since broadened to encompass general anti-government anger. While anti-government protests in Iran are relatively common, the current demonstrations are larger, deadlier and more geographically spread, challenging government efforts to stymie protests.

Finally, while North Korea continues to be a capable cyber actor, Pyongyang has largely avoided disinformation campaigns, a trend that is likely to continue in the U.S. midterm elections. The bulk of North Korean-aligned cyber activity is financially-motivated, as North Korean cybercriminals are seeking payouts and the government is looking to bolster its weak economy through illicit means. Although recent North Korean missile tests have put many people on edge, these tensions are unlikely to translate into effective or extensive disinformation campaigns targeting the U.S. midterm elections. North Korea has not shown serious intent or ability to conduct such campaigns during prior elections — nor is there any evidence so far of it spreading disinformation on Western social media platforms this year — and, should Pyongyang choose to do so, there would be significant tradecraft barriers it would need to overcome. That said, while North Korean threat actors may not engage in disinformation campaigns, they will likely still look to exploit the election through targeted scams or other fraudulent online activity for financial gain.

This year, North Korean-aligned threat actors, such as Lazarus, have engaged in a number of financially-motivated cryptocurrency theft operations, including stealing approximately $615 million from online game Axie Infinity in March and another $100 million from blockchain startup Harmony in June. As these operations indicate, North Korea's primary objectives in cyberspace continue to be financially motivated.

Title: Coming Desinfo in 2022 Part 1
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 19, 2022, 11:55:24 AM

What to Expect From Disinformation Campaigns During the 2022 U.S. Midterms, Part 1
6 MIN READOct 17, 2022 | 16:41 GMT





Editor's Note: In the first part of this three-part series, we explore how a string of divisive political events in the United States have set the stage for the spread of false or misleading information ahead of next month's vote, and what social media companies are doing to prepare. The next part — which examines the risk of external meddling from actors like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea — can be found here.

As the November 2022 U.S. midterm elections approach, state-sponsored cyber threat groups, hacktivists and cybercriminals will ramp up new or capitalize upon existing disinformation campaigns for various malign ends. Although social media platforms are preparing for the onslaught of disinformation, their efforts will likely fail to mitigate the full extent of cyberthreats, heightening societal and physical security risks. Since the 2016 presidential election, disinformation has attracted significant attention from politicians, media outlets, researchers and commentators, who have drawn attention to how inaccurate information can undermine democratic processes and sow political polarization. It is true that midterm elections are generally less high-profile and have less impact on U.S. government policy than presidential elections and, therefore, may not attract the same intensity of state-sponsored disinformation campaigns. However, they will nevertheless attract foreign actors seeking to undermine U.S. domestic stability. Additionally, social media platforms will face challenges in mitigating the extensive spread of misinformation that may exacerbate the impact of foreign-backed disinformation campaigns. While commonly grouped together, misinformation and disinformation differ in their communicators' intent.

Misinformation refers to inaccurate information in general, which may circulate as a result of a misunderstanding, poor research or rumors that drive a false narrative. For example, especially during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, a lack of knowledge about the virus and the science behind the vaccines drove many users on social media platforms to spread misinformation about the ways in which COVID-19 could spread or be treated.

Alternatively, disinformation is created and proliferated with malicious intent, typically to sow division or drive political polarization. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous studies have detailed Russia's efforts to deliberately spread false information about Western vaccines to undermine public trust in Western governments, sow political divisions and stymie the West's response to the pandemic.

As the midterm elections approach, social media platforms are preparing for a barrage of misinformation and disinformation, but they are largely sticking to strategies from the last election. In August, Meta announced its election plans for Facebook and Instagram, which are largely consistent with the policies implemented during the 2020 presidential election. According to Meta's blog post, posts rated false by one of the company's fact-checking partners will get a warning label that will force users to click past a banner reading ''false information'' before they can see the content. Facebook will also continue its ban on political advertisements during the week leading up to the election. TikTok also announced its midterm plans in August, which similarly continue its fact-checking program from 2020 to prevent some videos from being recommended until outside fact-checkers verify them. In addition, TikTok is rolling out an ''Elections Center'' on its platform, where users can access verified information on the election, including information on how to vote in more than 45 languages. Posts containing election content and posts created by government accounts, politicians and political parties will be labeled to promote transparency. Similarly, in August, Twitter announced plans in line with its regulations developed for the 2020 presidential election, including labeling misleading information about elections and civic events and including links to credible sources. Moreover, Twitter announced that the platform will not recommend or amplify tweets it labels ''misleading'' and that users will be shown a warning prompt before they can like or share such tweets. Twitter will also bring back its 2020 ''prebunks,'' or messages that appear at the top of users' feeds to debunk misinformation.

Social media firms are taking these steps as recent research suggests that the midterm elections are facing elevated threats to their legitimacy due to posts about voter fraud. Former President Donald Trump's claims that the 2020 election was ''stolen'' have had reverberating effects on social media platforms. According to research from media firm Zignal Labs, the phrase ''stolen election'' was mentioned 325,589 times on Twitter from June 19 to July 19, a total that had been fairly consistent throughout 2022 but is up nearly 900% from the same time period in 2020. This trend was supported by research from digital analytics firm Similarweb, which studied Rumble, a video-sharing platform popular among Trump supporters, and found that videos with the term ''stop the steal'' or ''stolen election'' were among the most popular in May, with such posts attracting 2.5 million viewers during that month alone. Similarweb's research also found that in May, posts pertaining to election fraud attracted 2.5 million viewers on the platform, more than triple the total from a year prior. Other narratives of election fraud have inspired new terms such as ''ballot trafficking'' and ''ballot mules,'' popularized by the May release of ''2000 Mules,'' a discredited documentary asserting the claim of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election. In the aforementioned Zignal research, the company also found that the term ''ballot mules'' was mentioned 17,592 times in the same June 19 to July 19 time period, a term that was not mentioned at all prior to the 2020 election. High-profile political events in recent months have only worsened political divisions and opened the door for foreign states to spread misinformation and disinformation on social media platforms.

The overturning of the landmark Roe v. Wade decision in June has amplified political polarization and catalyzed the spread of false information online, both inadvertently and deliberately.

Moreover, the FBI's August search of Trump's Florida Mar-a-Lago residence immediately drove polarizing narratives on social media platforms. According to The New York Times, posts on Twitter mentioning ''civil war'' soared by nearly 3,000% in just a few hours following the raid.

Title: WT: Non Citizens to vote in DC?!?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2022, 02:28:52 AM

Noncitizen voting rights in Bowser’s hands

D.C. aims to be among leaders

BY RAMSEY TOUCHBERRY THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The nation’s capital is on track to become the next Democratic led city to allow noncitizens to vote in municipal elections, an endeavor that local leaders are racing to implement before a potential Republican takeover of Congress.

The D.C. Council sent a bill to Mayor Muriel Bowser this week that would pave the way for illegal immigrants who have lived in the city for at least 30 days to cast ballots in local elections.

Federal law bars noncitizens from voting in national elections, but states and municipalities can extend the right for local and school board races. If the bill becomes law, the District would join San Francisco, 11 cities in Maryland and two cities in Vermont.

A judge blocked New York City’s attempt this year to allow legally documented noncitizens to vote for local officials.

To become law, the D.C. bill needs Ms. Bowser’s signature and a standard 30-day congressional review period. If that time window bleeds into the next Congress, which convenes on Jan. 3, Republicans will try to block it.

“Washington D.C. just moved to let illegal aliens vote. I’ll be introducing a resolution to block this,” Sen. Tom Cotton, Arkansas Republican, tweeted Wednesday. “Let’s get every Democrat on the record on whether illegal immigrants should vote.” Some Republicans, including former President Donald Trump, have suggested that large tranches of noncitizens have voted illegally

in past elections, but recent studies have found only a few dozen potential cases out of millions of ballots cast.

Ms. Bowser has long supported similar initiatives and introduced a related bill when she was a council member. She has expressed concern recently that the current bill is something the council “moved on without much input.”

Her office did not respond to a request for comment.

“This is something we’ve been fighting for for many years,” said Arturo Griffiths, a longtime advocate for immigrant voting rights who became a citizen after moving to the U.S. from Panama decades ago. “She proposed it when she came into office. If she’s really for the people of the District of Columbia, if she wants everybody to vote … she has to make sure she signs it.”

If Ms. Bowser signs the bill, it is expected to breeze through the Democratic- controlled Congress without opposition.

The lone council member to oppose the bill was Mary M. Cheh, Ward 3 Democrat, who did not seek reelection.

She cited concerns that those living within the city or country for a short time lacked a “cultural” connection. She noted that the undocumented migrants relocated to D.C. from the southern border by Republican governors could vote for local officials after just 30 days.

“My concern has nothing to do with citizenship. Fine, noncitizens should be able to vote in local elections. Whether you’re documented or undocumented. Fine. You should be treated the same. My concern is also not with strangers per se, who have lived in this country, have some connection on a cultural level, some connection of experience in our community,” she said at a meeting about the legislation this month, according to DCist. “I find it unacceptable to say that somebody who has had no connection at all with the United States, with its culture, its democracy, can be dropped off here, reside for 30 days, and vote in a local election. What is wrong with asking they stay a little bit longer?”

Among those publicly opposed to the move is The Washington Post, whose editorial board published an editorial this week calling it a “radical” move akin to a political power grab that would push the city further to the left. It would also present “logistical nightmares,” cost millions of dollars, invite potential participation by foreign adversaries and arm Republicans with evidence that Democrats support open border policies for political gain, the board wrote.

Title: What to expect from Disinfo campaigns during the midterms
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 20, 2022, 02:52:26 AM

second

What to Expect From Disinformation Campaigns During the 2022 U.S. Midterms, Part 3
8 MIN READOct 19, 2022 | 21:00 GMT





In this photo illustration taken on April 21, 2022, the icon of the video-sharing app TikTok is pictured on a mobile phone.
In this photo illustration taken on April 21, 2022, the icon of the video-sharing app TikTok is pictured on a mobile phone.

(WAKIL KOHSAR/Afghanistan/AFP via Getty Images)

Editor's Note: As the November 2022 U.S. midterm elections approach, state-sponsored cyber threat groups, hacktivists and cybercriminals will ramp up new or capitalize upon existing disinformation campaigns for various malign ends. Although social media platforms are preparing for the onslaught of disinformation, their efforts will likely fail to mitigate the full extent of cyberthreats, heightening societal and physical security risks. In the final part of this series, we look at how the rise of both video-based platforms like TikTok and synthetic content like deepfakes is making more people vulnerable to being misinformed — especially during election periods — and the potential secondary risks for U.S. businesses. The first part of this series can be found here, and the second part can be found here.

Despite the efforts of social media firms to mitigate foreign disinformation threats, the rise of video-based platforms and synthetic content will complicate these measures and may exacerbate the impact of disinformation surrounding the U.S. election next month. The increasing popularity of video-oriented platforms such as TikTok and an overall increase in video content generally will complicate the detection of false information that otherwise can be countered with programs like machine learning technologies. The social media platform Twitter, for example, uses a machine learning algorithm called Botometer that it relies on to evaluate the legitimacy of accounts and flag those that are inauthentic or bots. Technologies like this have become crucial for social media platforms to combat the immense scope of fake accounts and bots on their platforms. While extraordinarily effective for monitoring account activity or scanning written text for anomalies or false information, identifying false information in videos is much more difficult. Meanwhile, the rise of deepfake technology — which refers to synthetic media that attempts to distort a person's audio or visual appearance to deceive the viewer — will also complicate disinformation mitigation efforts, as threat actors increasingly may be able to proliferate highly believable imitations of various high-profile individuals to distort their narratives. Although the technology still needs time to mature, deepfakes during an election period could have multiple aims, including manipulating different candidates' rhetoric to either embarrass them or confuse target audiences about their positions.

As of September, TikTok had over 138 million active U.S. users. According to a July report by app analytics firm Sensor Tower, the average American TikTok user spends 82 minutes a day on the platform — three times longer than the average user spends on Snapchat or Twitter, and twice as long as on Instagram or Facebook. In a report published in September, U.S. media company NewsGuard found that nearly one in five videos automatically suggested by TikTok contained misinformation.

The potential power of deepfakes was highlighted by a video that circulated in May depicting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky purportedly telling Ukrainian soldiers to lay down their arms and surrender to the Russian army. While the video was quickly debunked due to multiple signs of its inauthenticity, deepfake technology is constantly being advanced by developments in artificial intelligence and will likely become more commonplace on social media platforms in future election cycles.

Another deepfake video that went viral in May 2019 falsely depicted U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi as intoxicated, slowing the speed of her speaking to imitate the sound of slurred speech. While the video was also quickly debunked, it garnered more than 2.5 million views on Facebook within a week and continued to circulate on other social media platforms for several weeks despite being shown to be inaccurate.

Disinformation campaigns may also become more persuasive as social media users shift to video-based platforms, which are much more powerful in eliciting emotional reactions, heightening the potential for radicalization and physical violence during an election period. These risks will be even greater in future elections as technologies develop, but there are threats to consider in the coming month ahead of the U.S. midterms. More advanced disinformation campaigns will be better able to exploit human emotion, especially because video-based campaigns are more relatable for many users and generally generate stronger reactions than written-based social media. This fact, in tandem with algorithmic feedback loops that continue to show users what they want to see, will likely increase some users' vulnerability to radicalization. While it is always hard (if not impossible) to conclusively prove causation between propaganda and violent action, significant social science research shows there is at least a correlation that can be more meaningful during times of deep polarization — like an election period. As such, deep grievances on both aisles of the political divide raise the risk of increasing the potential for physical violence by lone actors or small groups seeking retaliation or attempting to forward a political message. As seen previously, such violence may be aimed at specific political candidates, government personnel such as election and ballot employees, or private organizations that may endorse a specific candidate or party.

In a study published in August 2021, a team of researchers at the University of Pennsylvania found that people were more likely to share a video online than audio or text-based versions of the same content. According to the research, 78% of study participants who saw the case study video said they would share the video with others in their network, compared with the 63% of participants who heard the story and the 67% who read the story. Broadly, the study outlined the risks of ''believe what you see'' cognitive biases and highlighted the psychological appeal of video content.

In August, an armed gunman attempted to enter the FBI's office in Cincinnati, Ohio, where he fired shots at law enforcement officials before fleeing and later dying in a shootout. Research into the suspect's social media accounts showed that he posted messages on former U.S. President Donald Trump's social media platform, Truth Social, in which he recommended that ''patriots'' should go to Florida and kill federal agents, referencing the FBI's recent search of Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence. Although no law enforcement officials were harmed in the incident, it nevertheless demonstrated the power of online rhetoric and its ability to translate into physical threats.
Although disinformation campaigns may not impact U.S. companies directly, they will likely create secondary threats for businesses, while hacktivism and cybercrime more broadly will exacerbate direct operational, financial and reputational risks during the election period. While disinformation on social media platforms may not directly harm corporate operations, the rise of polarization and risks of political violence or disruptive protests may create personal safety or business continuity risks. For example, if mass protests or rallies emerge in U.S. city centers (an existing concern that disinformation could help drive), it could result in some civil disturbances that interfere with business operations by generating personnel safety concerns, causing property damage or disrupting employees' commute. Moreover, other cyber threat actors like hacktivist groups could raise operational or reputational risks to companies that may become the next targets of their operations. For instance, hacktivist groups may target high-profile Western companies with DDoS attacks, website defacement operations or data theft and leak operations. Such attacks may be aimed at not only harming those businesses but also embarrassing Western nations or retaliating against Western sanctions – especially if they're conducted by pro-Russian hacktivists. While these attacks are most likely to center on either public institutions or companies directly related to the Ukrainian war effort (like when Killnet targeted U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin in August), other companies may be impacted, especially if hacktivist campaigns become more significant. Research by U.S. cybersecurity company Mandiant published in a Sept. 23 blog post has already highlighted likely collaboration between several hacktivist groups and Russia's military intelligence agency (GRU), suggesting that these groups may be capable of more sophisticated cyber operations in the future. Lastly, as cybercriminals continue to take advantage of political activities, especially during an election season (by, for example, creating phishing or scam messages based on high-profile political developments), these threat actors may also attempt to capitalize on disinformation on social media. In particular, cybercriminals could embed posts that contain disinformation with malicious links containing malware that gives them access to a victim's computer or smartphone, exploiting the higher likelihood of victim engagement with such posts.

The month before the 2020 presidential election, the FBI issued a warning for Americans to be aware of fake voting websites and spoofed email accounts that were set up by cybercriminals to spread mis- and disinformation in an attempt to steal victims' usernames, passwords and email addresses, as well as to collect personally identifiable information.

The Ukrainian Main Directorate of Intelligence warned on Sept. 26 that Russia is planning ''massive cyberattacks'' targeting critical infrastructure in Ukraine and in allied countries. The warning specifically pertained to energy industry facilities in Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic countries. While the warning did not specify when or which institutions may be targeted, it nevertheless suggests that Russia may be ramping up its use of cyber tools to inflict damage on Western infrastructure. On their own, such attacks against energy facilities or other critical infrastructure institutions could be much more impactful than disinformation operations because they could directly result in widespread disruptions to business operations in affected countries and have a reverberating impact on international supply chains. However, Russia would likely pair stepped-up disruptive cyberattacks with disinformation, making these more escalatory activities an indicator to monitor to assess a likely uptick in disinformation.

Title: The steal is on
Post by: ccp on October 20, 2022, 05:47:39 AM

https://republicbrief.com/its-beginning-arizona-ballot-stuffer-caught-covering-up-license-plate/

lets get them on camera

good job here

If I didn't work I would volunteer for this

Title: Re: The steal is on
Post by: G M on October 20, 2022, 06:57:50 AM

Quote from: ccp on October 20, 2022, 05:47:39 AM

https://republicbrief.com/its-beginning-arizona-ballot-stuffer-caught-covering-up-license-plate/

lets get them on camera

good job here

If I didn't work I would volunteer for this

They learned their lesson from 2020, they'll be harder to catch this time!

Title: Re: The steal is on
Post by: G M on October 20, 2022, 07:15:51 AM

Quote from: G M on October 20, 2022, 06:57:50 AM

Quote from: ccp on October 20, 2022, 05:47:39 AM

https://republicbrief.com/its-beginning-arizona-ballot-stuffer-caught-covering-up-license-plate/

lets get them on camera

good job here

If I didn't work I would volunteer for this

They learned their lesson from 2020, they'll be harder to catch this time!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FffU8i9WQAAI6hv?format=jpg&name=small

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FffU8i9WQAAI6hv?format=jpg&name=small)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 20, 2022, 08:42:29 AM

Found way to see GMs great images without having to scroll right and left

right click on the image then hit "open in new tab"

then click on the new tab and image comes up on single page and easy to see

 :-D

Title: ET: Specially trained Cong staffers to observe closely contested elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2022, 04:17:21 PM

Specially Trained Capitol Hill Staffers to Observe Closely Contested Elections
By Mark Tapscott October 22, 2022 Updated: October 22, 2022biggersmaller Print

An unspecified number of Capitol Hill aides are being deployed as “official House election observers in close, or particularly cumbersome congressional elections, in the coming weeks,” according to House Administration Committee Ranking Member Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.).

The administration panel is responsible for exercising “the House’s constitutional responsibility to serve as the final ‘Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its Members,'” Davis told officials in identical October 20 letters (pdf) sent to all 50 states.

“While the Constitution grants the House of Representatives this responsibility and authority, the Constitution grants the states primary authority over the administration of federal elections. Committee Republicans respect the limited nature of Congress’ role in this space and are committed to safeguarding states’ vital constitutional authority,” Davis wrote.

“As in past elections, the House will use this legal authority to credential and deploy trained congressional staffers to serve as official House election observers in close, or particularly cumbersome congressional elections, in the coming weeks. This allows us to prepare for the possibility that a candidate could later contest the race in the House of Representatives,” Davis continued.

The staffers involved are doing so under the House Election Observer Program. Davis also launched the Republican members of the administration panel’s Faith in Elections Project: “a comprehensive effort to offer educational opportunities on how elections are administered, engage with key stakeholders, and put forth thoughtful conservative reforms on how elections are run in this country, with states maintaining primary control over their elections.”

The Illinois Republican said the panel “takes seriously its responsibility regarding federal elections, and we are committed to making sure all lawful ballots in congressional races are counted fairly, accurately, and according to law. Our credentialed observers have been trained by experts in election observation and instructed that they play no formal or advocacy role in the administration of the election or the vote counting process; they are to function exclusively as observers.”

The congressional observers “must be granted access to view the process even if state law credentialing, partisan quota, or access requirements exist to the contrary,” he added.

It is not known whether Democrats, who control the House, will be sending members of their staff as election observers. A spokesman for Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the administration panel’s chairman, could not be reached for comment.

Davis’s announcement comes as the 2022 midterm election campaign approaches its end, with Republicans holding what appears to be a sizable overall lead and are thus expected to regain the House majority they lost in 2018. The GOP’s prospects for retaking the Senate majority have also been brightening in recent weeks.

“The 2022 midterm elections are now only 18 days away, and Republicans have a four-point lead in their bid to recapture control of Congress. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that, if the elections for Congress were held today, 47 percent of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for the Republican candidate, while 43 percent would vote for the Democrat. Just four percent would vote for some other candidate, but another seven percent are not sure,” according to Rasmussen Reports.

On the Senate side, Politico wrote Oct. 22 that “Republicans are roaring back in the battle to control the 50-50 Senate. Over the past week, polls show GOP candidates closing the gap in states where Democrats have led all summer—and perhaps pulling away in races that had appeared close for months.”

Davis had been favored to succeed Lofgren as chairman of the administration panel, but he lost a GOP primary to Rep. Mary Miller (R-Ill.). The two Illinois Republicans were redistricted into the same district by Democrats who control the Illinois state legislature.

Miller was endorsed by former President Donald Trump.

Title: NY gerrymander
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2022, 08:05:00 PM

https://nypost.com/2022/10/22/dems-illegal-hochulmander-conspiracy-was-slimier-than-we-knew/?fbclid=IwAR3_Lm_mDvHUPbLyWvGauCLrgjNp8Wr4b4TAhwG9UQXNTWb8ZpylXyH07oI

Title: Better VOTE HARDER!
Post by: G M on October 23, 2022, 02:12:02 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/happening-election-drop-box-spotters-catch-man-covering-license-plate-arizona/

Bet most are remembering to leave their cell phones at home this time!

Title: Dick Morris : dems already collecting mail in ballots up the wazooo
Post by: ccp on October 24, 2022, 06:34:13 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/morris/midterms-early-voting-gop/2022/10/23/id/1093069/

the reason I vote in person is because I am not confident my vote will count by not getting to destination if I vote by mail

Title: Re: Dick Morris : dems already collecting mail in ballots up the wazooo
Post by: G M on October 24, 2022, 07:01:36 AM

Quote from: ccp on October 24, 2022, 06:34:13 AM

https://www.newsmax.com/morris/midterms-early-voting-gop/2022/10/23/id/1093069/

the reason I vote in person is because I am not confident my vote will count by not getting to destination if I vote by mail

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/647/311/original/66d75108336649ee.jpeg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/647/311/original/66d75108336649ee.jpeg)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 24, 2022, 09:42:35 AM

(https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2022/10/Screen-Shot-2022-10-20-at-6.39.36-PM.png?resize=1536%2C1491&ssl=1)

https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2022/10/Screen-Shot-2022-10-20-at-6.39.36-PM.png?resize=1536%2C1491&ssl=1


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we know how they did it last time, won't it be harder to cheat this time?

Title: 70 Rep lawsuits
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 24, 2022, 01:22:22 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/oct/24/rnc-files-over-70-lawsuits-to-challenge-states-on-/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=yeaL1vd4QuEJppGtZKq4naEL2LG5cKpf784Qs9WANovd9FFjJWXv6Xk7DowFs3H4&bt_ts=1666615222606

Title: Re: 70 Rep lawsuits
Post by: DougMacG on October 24, 2022, 02:35:45 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 24, 2022, 01:22:22 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/oct/24/rnc-files-over-70-lawsuits-to-challenge-states-on-/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=yeaL1vd4QuEJppGtZKq4naEL2LG5cKpf784Qs9WANovd9FFjJWXv6Xk7DowFs3H4&bt_ts=1666615222606

Good to see somebody do something about this.

Title: CNN on watching drop boxes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 25, 2022, 09:22:53 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/woman-confronts-armed-man-near-ballot-drop-box/vi-AA13l7Hb?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6555e2fef5c9479388c2519a702de8b9&category=foryou

Title: Re: CNN on watching drop boxes
Post by: DougMacG on October 25, 2022, 09:54:13 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 25, 2022, 09:22:53 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/woman-confronts-armed-man-near-ballot-drop-box/vi-AA13l7Hb?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6555e2fef5c9479388c2519a702de8b9&category=foryou

Why, in 2022, do we have unattended, outdoor, 24 hour "dropboxes"?

"DOJ will not allow voters to be intimidated."  Who says the person dropping is a "voter" when no one checks.  Why don't thy say, will not allow droppers to be intimidated.   aka mules.

I thought these dropboxes needed to be watched by citizens or by law enforcement.  But what are you seeing?  How many ballots were in the drop pictured?  Whose?  From where?  No one knows.

What was the lie in the movie?  Who discredited it? 

CNN "reporting"?   Clearly it is CNN opining, maybe CNN slandering.

Interesting irony, it was the poll watchers who were confronted and harassed, not the people dropping ballots.  Will the DOJ step up and protect ballot box watchers who are being intimidated?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 25, 2022, 11:43:32 AM

Well said!

Title: AZ: Ballot Drop Box Monitors sued
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 25, 2022, 04:48:43 PM

Group Monitoring Drop Boxes Sued for Alleged Voter Intimidation
By Zachary Stieber October 25, 2022 

A group that has been observing drop boxes in Arizona was sued on Oct. 24 for allegedly intimidating voters.

Clean Elections USA and its founder, Melody Jennings, were named as defendants in the suit, which was filed by lawyers with Marc Elias’s law firm on behalf of the Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans and Voto Latino.

The drop box observers are violating federal law, including the Voting Rights Act, the lawsuit asserts.

“No person, whether acting under color of law or otherwise, shall intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for voting or attempting to vote, or intimidate, threaten, or coerce, or attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any person for urging or aiding any person to vote or attempt to vote,” the law states in part.

Clean Elections USA members and supporters have gathered outside boxes in Maricopa County in recent weeks to watch as people drop off ballots.

Jennings said on social media that people should go to the boxes to act as a “deterrent” against voter fraud.

“We must legally deter people from committing voter fraud. The only way we can do this is to monitor those drop box locations with a team of volunteers. That is why we’re reaching out to patriots like yourself who have similar concerns. In short, we need your help!” the Clean Elections USA website states.

At least some of the observers have been armed.

Some of the observers told a local reporter that they were with Clean Elections USA.

“The tactics being used by Clean Elections USA aren’t just profoundly dangerous to voters in Arizona, they’re an affront to the fundamental principles of our democracy,” Maria Teresa Kumar, president and CEO of Voto Latino, said in a statement.

The groups are seeking a temporary restraining order prohibiting Clean Elections USA from gathering “within sight of drop boxes” and from following or recording voters or prospective voters at or around drop boxes.

Clean Elections USA would also be barred from “training, organizing, or directing” people to monitor drop boxes if the order is imposed.

The case was filed in federal court in Arizona.

Clean Elections USA and Jennings did not have lawyers listed on the court docket.

Clean Elections USA does not list contact information on its website.

Jennings said on Truth Social, former President Donald Trump’s social media platform, that observers should follow the law.

“Knowing that we the citizens of the United States are protecting the rule of law is very satisfying,” she said.

Several voter intimidation complaints have been lodged in Arizona and referred to the U.S. Department of Justice. Attorney General Merrick Garland said Monday that the agency “will not permit voters to be intimidated.”

Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone said that the department has received two suspicious activity criminal reports but that no charges have been filed and the observers have not committed crimes.

“It doesn’t meet the threshold for a crime. This is a free nation. The Second Amendment is as important as the first. So that in and of itself does not constitute a crime,” he told reporters when asked about people being dressed in tactical gear and carrying guns.

Arizona law bars being armed or trying to persuade voters within 75 feet of a voting location.

The federal government, though, may decide that the people violated federal law, Penzone added. His agency is “working closely” with the Department of Justice.

Title: nearly 1/2 of absentee ballots cast before PA debate last night
Post by: ccp on October 26, 2022, 07:18:35 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/26/report-half-of-pennsylvania-vote-by-mail-ballots-cast-before-fettermans-disastrous-debate/

 :roll: :x

Title: Re: nearly 1/2 of absentee ballots cast before PA debate last night
Post by: DougMacG on October 26, 2022, 07:38:58 AM

Quote from: ccp on October 26, 2022, 07:18:35 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/26/report-half-of-pennsylvania-vote-by-mail-ballots-cast-before-fettermans-disastrous-debate/

 :roll: :x

Obviously, that was the Fetterman debate timing plan.

The 45-46% who support him probably still do.  He would be a Dem vote in the Senate.

We used to have something called "election day", an American tradition, the envy of the world. To vote absentee, you needed a real reason.  Otherwise you headed to your physical polling place, city hall in my small town.  Your vote was private but your coming out to cast it was public, with election judge witnesses.

Title: Re: AZ: Ballot Drop Box Monitors sued
Post by: DougMacG on October 26, 2022, 08:00:21 AM

"Arizona law bars being armed or trying to persuade voters within 75 feet of a voting location."


That seems clear enough.  Their mere presence outside of that limit is presumably a right they have as much as the voter (or mule) has the right to be where they are.  Beyond that, it seems to me, you would need actual intimidating behavior.  Aiming a camera at a public place is not that.

These reports keep saying "armed" but don't say anyone was breaking a gun law.

Title: Josh Shapiro Democrat Pa AG running for governor
Post by: ccp on October 26, 2022, 10:44:52 AM

endorses by Karl Rove PAC

I read

wait was he not the guy who said prior to the '20 election he KNEW Trump would lose Pa?

clearly making it clear that the Dem lawyers including him cleared the way for the ballots to harvested by the many thousands to be sure they got Biden over the top to give him Pa electoral votes

I am pretty sure it was him - he damn well knew of the scam and was part of it
that shit.

Title: More skullduggery in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2022, 08:25:54 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/after-sending-out-240000-unverified-ballots-pennsylvania-now-warns-delays-counting?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1028

After Sending Out 240,000 Unverified Ballots, Pennsylvania Now Warns Of 'Delays' Counting Midterm Votes
Tyler Durden's Photo
BY TYLER DURDEN
THURSDAY, OCT 27, 2022 - 09:01 AM
Here we go again...

Just one day after 15 Pennsylvania House Republicans sent a letter to acting Secretary of State Leigh Chapman demanding to know why 240,000 unverified ballots had been mailed out ("which, according to the law, must be set aside and not counted for the 2022 General Election unless the voter produces lD," the lawmakers wrote), Chapman revealed that there will likely be delays posting the results after the midterm elections.


Acting Secretary of State Leigh Chapman spoke on Monday, Oct. 24 to discuss voting procedures throughout the state.



"It's really important for us to get accurate information about the election process in Pennsylvania," Chapman said during a virtual conference, where she said it would likely take 'several days' to count and certify the votes.

"So voters and the public know that when there are delays in counting, it doesn’t mean that there’s anything nefarious happening. It’s just what the law is in Pennsylvania."

According to Chapman, the delays would be attributed to poll workers not being able to pre-canvas, or count mail-in ballots prior to election day.

She also encouraged voters to go ahead and send in their ballots, contrary to Republican messaging which urged voters to hold onto their mail-in ballots and turn them in to their local board of elections on election day - which Chapman said could (somehow) cause voters to become disenfranchised.

"We have heard that there’s messaging out there in Pennsylvania, as far as instructing voters to hold onto their mail-in ballots," she said, adding "As part of our voter education campaign, we encourage voters to request that mail-in ballot now and return it as soon as possible. We don’t want voters to delay."

Chapman took the opportunity to convey concerns she says stem from 'misinformation' - threats to interrupt voting and calls to delay the sending of mail-in ballots.

While she didn’t detail a specific incident, Chapman said there have been reports of threats aimed at the voting process throughout the state. She promised that her office has worked to investigate any threat made toward a free and fair election.

“Since I’ve been in office in January, we have constantly met with the FBI and Homeland Security just to talk through what the current threat landscape is and tools that we can give our counties to make sure that they have physical security protection as well as cyber security protection,” she said.

“So it’s been great to partner with both the federal and state law enforcement organizations. We are in constant communication with them and it’s a situation that we are monitoring,” Chapman added. -Lehigh Valley News

According to Chapman, over 1.2 million mail-in ballots have been requested across the state, and 43% - or 556,000, have been returned.

So does that mean that nearly 25% of mail-in ballots sent out were unverified?

191,728

Title: WSJ: Alaska's Ranked Choice Scam
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2022, 08:28:13 AM

second

The ‘Ranked Choice’ Scam
Alaskans know the truth about this confusing, coercive voting system.
Kimberley A. Strassel hedcutBy Kimberley A. StrasselFollow
Oct. 27, 2022 6:14 pm ET


Would you prefer halibut or salmon or moose burgers, in what order, and based on what scheming odds? Believe it or not, that’s a real voting guide to Alaskans this election year. And it’s a warning to voters in Nevada and nine cities and counties across the U.S. being asked this election to adopt ranked-choice voting: Walk away. Better yet, sprint.

Take it from someone living through the hell that is Alaska’s election system. Two years ago, left-leaning outside groups quietly funded Alaska liberals (posing under the vanilla title Alaskans for Better Elections) backing a ballot initiative to do away with the state’s perfectly good election system. It was replaced with a “top four” primary and a ranked-choice general election.


Most Alaskans didn’t know what they were voting for, since the initiative was a mind-numbing 25 pages of single type, and its boosters tucked the voting part into the garble. The initiative instead led with a provision claiming it would eliminate “dark money” (doubly offensive given its own cloaked funding). Even with all this subterfuge, it barely passed.

Proponents of this system yammer on about how it expands choice, decreases polarization and forges consensus. Alaskans can confirm the opposite is true. Here’s what the system really produces: mass confusion, lower-quality information, and increased voter bitterness given the system’s coercion.

The state got its unexpected first interaction with this regime when Rep. Don Young died in March. The ensuing special “open” primary featured 48 candidates, running as Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, independents, “nonpartisans,” “undeclared” and (no joke) Santa Claus. All this “choice” served only to deny Alaskans useful information about any one candidate. Choice becomes malevolent when it eliminates meaningful debate, denies voters information, and lards ballots with no-hope candidates that distract from serious ones.

Four candidates advanced, then one withdrew. (Santa Claus finished sixth.) After ensuing chaos as to what to do in such a scenario, a state judge barred the fifth-place winner from advancing. So Alaskans had only three options in the special general election.

The Division of Elections began carpet-bombing residents with “how to” guides that managed the impressive feat of making ranked-choice more bewildering. Alaskans for Better Elections released a video comparing the process to choosing dinner: “Moose burgers are my first choice, but if can’t have those, then I choose grilled salmon as my backup.”


But what if you don’t want a “backup” politician? That gets to the real problem with ranked-choice—it’s coercive. It forces voters to play its complex game or risk not being counted. Alaska is a Republican state, and two of the three candidates who advanced—Sarah Palin and Nick Begich Jr.—are Republicans. They split the vote in the first round of counting, giving Democrat Mary Peltola more votes than Ms. Palin. Mr. Begich was then eliminated. Half his voters went to Ms. Palin. Only about a quarter went to Ms. Peltola, but it was enough to push her over 50% of those who ranked either her or Ms. Palin.

Yet notice the numbers don’t add up. About 20% of Mr. Begich’s supporters didn’t put a second choice—either in confusion or protest. (A full 35% of Palin voters didn’t.) Those voters didn’t want Ms. Peltola—they wouldn’t mark her name—but for refusing to play the game, their punishment was to be stuck with her anyway. Thus does a state that Donald Trump won by 10 points, and in which 60% of the voters chose first a Republican, end up with a Democratic representative. Consensus? Hardly. The word is “rigged.”

The end of polarization? As Alaskans gear up to do all this again, witness the nonstop political attack ads. They are as vicious as they come. Add to this voter fury that this time they are being asked to rate moose burgers against halibut against pizza against salmon in the House race (again), a Senate race, a governor’s race and races for state House and Senate. The sample ballot looks like a deranged SAT. Fold in continued public bitterness that liberal groups targeted Alaska to be a ranked-choice guinea pig, sold the initiative deceptively, and are spinning the results with juked analysis and polls.

Residents snarfed to see Bruce Botelho (a long-ago Democratic state attorney general, now with Alaskans for Better Elections) insist in a piece in the Hill that Alaskans love this hot mess. They roll their eyes to read the mainstream media gloss on the project, quoting the outfits trying to foist the same on other unsuspecting voters. The better gauge comes from pollster Ivan Moore of Alaska Survey Research, who told Alaska Beacon that his numbers show conservative voters dislike ranked-choice voting by a 6-to-1 margin.

As for the lower 48 punditocracy flacking for the system, come on up and stand in voting lines with Alaskans to see how happy they are with this debacle.

Write to kim@wsj.com

Title: Re: WSJ: Alaska's Ranked Choice Scam
Post by: DougMacG on October 28, 2022, 10:11:54 AM

Ranked choice voting was the stupid response to the charge that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the election.  I don't know why Alaska did it, but has to do with people not liking the two party system.

As a matter of record, the Ralph Nader voters did not want Gore (or Bush) to be President.

In 1992, Ross Perot caused Bill Clinton to win with just 43% of the vote IIRC.  For whatever I may think of their personal voting choice, who the hell cares what their second choice was.  They had ONE TRY at voting for President.

Republicans should have picked Jack Kemp to follow Reagan IMHO.  Instead they had a weak incumbent to sell in 1992.  Live and learn.

The two party system may suck but it is better than all the alternatives.

I thought it was liberals who believed we should make voting easier.  Ranked choice makes it a game, not a choice.

Alaska needs to dump this as soon as possible after the election.

Title: Ballot Harvesting in FL
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 28, 2022, 04:16:55 PM

Florida Officials Looking Into Allegations of Widespread Ballot Harvesting Operation
Democrat blows the whistle in a sworn affidavit
By Katabella Roberts October 28, 2022 Updated: October 28, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
3:09



1

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement is considering investigating an alleged long-running and widespread ballot harvesting operation among black communities in the central part of state.

Law enforcement officials are considering probing the matter on the recommendation of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ new election crimes unit, the Office of Election Crimes and Security (OECS), officials confirmed.

DeSantis’ new election crimes body was established this year in an effort to hold individuals in the state accountable for voter fraud.

Law enforcement officials confirmed they are looking into the matter in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times.

“The Florida Department of State has received a complaint regarding alleged ballot harvesting in Orange County, which is currently under review to determine if an investigation is warranted,” the statement read.

In a separate statement to Just the News on Wednesday, the department stated that it was made aware of the issue around Sept. 1, 2022.

“After further inquiry, OECS received additional information related to the allegation on October 17, 2022, and performed a preliminary investigation,” the statement read. “Since OECS is an investigative entity and does not [have] authority to make arrests, the office forwarded the complaint to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement for possible violation of section 104.0616, Florida Statutes,” it added.

Since the 2020 presidential election, Republican lawmakers and experts have repeatedly raised concerns over alleged voter fraud that may have swung votes in favor of President Joe Biden.

The conservative election integrity group True the Vote in late 2020 said it had found “overwhelming evidence of ballot trafficking” across key states in the United States, including Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan.

GOP lawmakers have accused Democrats of ignoring the issue, which they say presents an obvious threat to elections across the country.

Democrat Blows the Whistle
In late August, former Orange County Commissioner candidate Cynthia Harris, a Democrat, filed a sworn affidavit with the office of Florida’s secretary of state alleging the ballot harvesting operation, according to a Just the News report.

In the affidavit, Harris reportedly said voting activists in Orlando were being paid $10 for each third-party ballot they collected.

Harris told Just the News she was concerned about the broken chain of custody with ballots collected by third parties.

“You know, it’s just utterly ridiculous that people don’t understand that once that ballot leaves your hand and it’s not placed in the mailbox, or it’s not directly given to the supervisor of elections, you don’t know where it goes,” she said.

The probe into the alleged ballot harvesting comes shortly after an Arizona Democrat and school board member was sentenced to 30 days in prison after pleading guilty earlier this year to one count of ballot abuse.

Guillermina Fuentes, a 66-year-old former mayor of the town of San Luis, was accused of being involved in a ballot harvesting scheme during an August 2020 municipal election in which she allegedly illegally collected early ballots from four individuals that were not family members.

Under Arizona’s anti-ballot harvesting law, it is a felony to hand in early ballots for individuals who are neither family nor household members unless the person handing in the ballot is the voter’s caregiver.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/florida-officials-looking-into-allegations-of-widespread-ballot-harvesting-operation_4823734.html?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2022-10-28&src_cmp=gv-2022-10-28&utm_medium=email&est=29cSylC4o1OBa%2BuKlOQb1RJtDhffG0T%2FQ1mSXWGkjiAh%2FFCiREr%2FkvzxJmz72CvjdEmO

Title: 2000 Mules book backtracks?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 29, 2022, 09:25:14 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/oct/26/2000-mules-book-hits-shelves-major-changes-amid-le/?cx_testId=16&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=0&cx_experienceId=EX8EVP8I1R8R&utm_source=piano&utm_medium=in-article&utm_campaign=3_item_Pos_0_desktop#cxrecs_s

“2000 Mules,” a book that claims left-wing groups stuffed ballot boxes to swipe the 2020 contest from former President Donald Trump, has undergone major revisions to water down certain claims amid the threat of legal action.

A passage that accused certain nonprofits of engaging in illegal “ballot trafficking” has been rewritten or edited to remove the names of certain groups, while sections that tie election fraud to Antifa or Black Lives Matter have been deleted, according to National Public Radio.

The book is hitting stores after a two-month delay. It is based on a film of the same name that’s influential in Trump circles but has been discredited by fact-checkers and others as lacking evidence and specifics.

Author Dinesh D’Souza tweeted in July that the book would fill in the lines.

“I am going to reveal the names of several of these nonprofit stash houses in my book ‘2000 Mules; that comes out in late August,” Mr. D’Souza wrote.

The book was pulled before its release date when publisher Regnery issued a recall, though NPR says it found some copies on shelves.

Groups that were accused of being fraudsters said they were happy the revisions backtracked, telling the outlet that the claims amounted to “trash,” “lies” and “malarkey.”

• Tom Howell Jr. can be reached at thowell@washingtontimes.com.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 29, 2022, 10:17:08 AM

"“2000 Mules,” a book that claims left-wing groups stuffed ballot boxes to swipe the 2020 contest from former President Donald Trump, has undergone major revisions to water down certain claims amid the threat of legal action."

the publisher probably got cold feet

hmmmmmmm......

"A passage that accused certain nonprofits of engaging in illegal “ballot trafficking”

if anyone wonders how is it that fraud could have happened and with so few whistle blowers
coming forward

just look at how many millions of people cover for Joe Biden's and John Fetterman's obvious brain damage.......

with everyone all in on it they can all will keep quiet

Title: Re: 2000 Mules book backtracks?
Post by: DougMacG on October 30, 2022, 08:54:08 AM

I watched the movie and recall it differently.

" “2000 Mules,” a book that claims left-wing groups stuffed ballot boxes.."

   - The movie implies or suggests this cheating took place.  It shows video and does not claim to know which mule went to which non-profit group and deposited which ballots, IIRC.

All the debunks of it I read debunk a straw argument, criteria not set in the movie.  For example Bill Barr, who didn't investigate election fraud and didn't see the movie.  His view is relevant because he is "Trump appointee" who opines against Trump.
Bill Barr in a video the "committee" presented as "Jan 6" "evidence"."The premise that, you know, if you go buy a box, five boxes or whatever it was, you know that that's a mule is just indefensible."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/bill-barr-scoffs-2000-mules-movie

Umm, that wasn't the criteria.

"True the Vote set a high bar for its statistical subset – making sure that a mule went to the same drop box at least ten times and to a minimum of 23 drop boxes. Two thousand of these individuals in the five states met this criteria" ...
"multiple ballot boxes were being visited by the same people over and over in Democratically controlled urban areas"
https://www.libertynation.com/2000-mules-fact-or-fiction/

A family member dropping off your ballot doesn't do that.

Cell phone GPS accuracy is about 16 feet.  Nothing captured in cell phone data is evidence of what the person did there. 
https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/

Could be that a person went to these democrat supported vote organizations and to a bank or drug store that takes him right past a ballot box, 10 times each in 23 locations.  The point is, you can't make up another plausible explanation. 

One video shows the "mule" taking his gloves off after making the drop and throwing them in a trash can, just one day after a drop was investigated in another state using fingerprint data.  Then the narrator says, watch this again.  The mule approaches the drop box and drops a stack of ballots and clearly does not look to see if or where there is a trash container, then pulls the gloves and walks straight to it, like he had been there before and knew exactly what he was doing.

One "debunk":  https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/05/05/fact-checking-2000-mules-the-movie-alleging-ballot-fraud/
CLAIM: Alleged ballot harvesters were captured on surveillance video wearing gloves because they didn’t want to leave their fingerprints on the ballots.
THE FACTS: This is pure speculation. It ignores far more likely reasons for glove-wearing in the fall and winter of 2020 — cold weather or COVID-19.

  - This writer and his editors clearly did not see the movie, or know what a "cold" October night in Arizona (75 degrees?) feels like.  Why wasn't he cold after the drop, and who throws out warm gloves in October?

The movie does not tell who the dropper is, whose ballots he dropped, where he got them or who they voted for.  All we know is that IF the cell phone data really points to thousands of incidents of this, a massive fraud has taken place and should be investigated, and the practice illegal in all 50 states should be stopped.

The movie claims to have offered all its data that it paid large money for to law enforcement and mostly was treated with a yawn.

The "debunk" industry mis-portrays the criteria and the claim.  None of this is evidence of a crime.  It is a roadmap to where you very likely will find crime on a scale that is the elusive threat to democracy they all say they are looking for.

The movie does not name the Democrat supported, vote promoting organizations it was tracking.  I imagine they were named in the first printing of the book and not in the revision since the movie and the book is not evidence of a crime, and these people, if named, could deny and sue since none or few crimes were prosecuted as a result of this.

Not mentioned in the movie, does anyone remember that Zuckerberg put a half billion into liberal get out the vote organizations?  The viewer is left to guess which organizations the mules visited.
https://capitalresearch.org/article/zuckerbergs-return-on-investment-in-pennsylvania/
https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/12/the-2020-election-wasnt-stolen-it-was-bought-by-mark-zuckerberg/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on October 30, 2022, 09:23:59 AM

"."True the Vote set a high bar for its statistical subset – making sure that a mule went to the same drop box at least ten times and to a minimum of 23 drop boxes. Two thousand of these individuals in the five states met this criteria" ...
"multiple ballot boxes were being visited by the same people over and over in Democratically controlled urban areas"

yes indeed

and also these phones that pinged there way around multiple drop boxes also pinged at democrat election sites
I think someone did mention one attached to election denier Abrams - shock !  :wink:

But Bill Barr who was second in command of law enforcement yells this compelling evidence is bunk , nonsense , garbage , BS

maybe not strong enough evidence if court of law
 against armies of shysters but certainly strong enough for me see how hundreds of thousands of Biden votes seemed to miraculously show up between election night and the next morning
to swing every swing district AWAY from Trump and TOWARDS Biden

who one Josh Shapiro KNEW was the safety valve that would ensure Trump lost....

nothing to see
just my wild imagination and I am to dumb to believe everything I saw and read about with my own eyes

Bongino had good take on Dem "gaslighting " last night about this

I love that guy !

Title: TX: To monitor or not to monitor
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 01, 2022, 04:19:27 PM

GOP push to monitor voting in Texas’s Harris County spurs outcry
The conflict is centered on Houston, where Republicans say more scrutiny of the process is needed. Democrats say GOP efforts could scare off voters.
By Molly Hennessy-Fiske and Amy Gardner
Updated November 1, 2022 at 4:04 p.m.

HOUSTON — With a week to go before Election Day, a showdown is emerging between state and local leaders here over how to protect the security of the vote without intimidating voters and election workers.

Congressional districts have changed. Find yours for the 2022 midterm elections.

The clash is playing out in Harris County, Texas’s largest jurisdiction and home to Houston, where state and local Republicans are deploying monitors to oversee the handling of ballots in the Democratic enclave. Local Democratic officials have said the move is an effort to intimidate voters — and asked the Justice Department to send federal observers in response.

The result could be a partisan showdown, in which two different sets of monitors face off on Election Day in this giant metro region. That’s not including the thousands of partisan poll watchers who are expected to fan out at voting locations across Texas.


GOP officials and conservative poll watchers say heightened scrutiny is necessary to prevent election fraud and mismanagement. Voting-rights advocates and local leaders, meanwhile, say the GOP is scaring voters and election workers alike — and undermining faith in the results for a county that Republicans are pushing hard to win control of on Nov. 8.

The conflict reflects how much mistrust has infused election season across the country, giving rise to fears of confrontation and even violence between groups with wildly divergent beliefs about how best to protect democratic rights. The dynamic is particularly heightened in the cities of politically contested states, where Democrats tend to control elections and where Republicans have mounted aggressive poll-watching campaigns.

l
The office of Texas Secretary of State John Scott (R) announced plans last month to send monitors to conduct “randomized checks” and observe handling and counting of ballots as a result of what he described as bungled election security efforts in 2020. The alleged problems, discovered during a state audit of Harris’s administration of the 2020 election, include improper security surrounding electronic equipment where vote tallies were stored, the letter said. Harris officials denied the accusations.


“We are writing to inform you that our ongoing audit of Harris County has revealed serious breaches of proper elections records management,” wrote Chad Ennis, who leads Scott’s Forensic Audit Division, in an Oct. 18 letter to the county’s new elections administrator, Clifford Tatum. “The urgency of this letter is to ensure that none of these process issues occur in the upcoming November 2022 general election.”

The letter noted that Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton would send a task force to Harris to respond to any legal issues flagged by inspectors, poll watchers or voters.


Last week, Paxton announced the formation of a statewide “2022 General Election Integrity Team.” The announcement encouraged Texans to submit “information about alleged violations of the Texas Election Code.” It wasn’t clear where else the team would deploy, and Paxton’s office did not respond to a request for comment.


Harris County struggled during the March 1 primary, the first major vote under new state restrictions, when 10,000 mail ballots weren’t counted on Election Day and officials faced issues with new voting machines and a lack of poll workers. The election administrator later resigned.

The interventions from Scott and Paxton triggered an uproar from voting advocates, voters and Democratic leaders in Harris, who accused Republican officials of trying to intimidate election workers and voters in Houston.

Harris County Attorney Christian Menefee said in an interview that he, along with the county’s chief executive, Lina Hidalgo, and Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner — all Democrats — sent a request to the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division for federal election monitors to be deployed at polling and counting locations in Harris.


Menefee said he received an email from Kristen Clarke, assistant attorney general for civil rights, saying that she was looking into the request. He said he spoke by phone with DOJ staff, which typically publishes a list of places where it plans to deploy monitors about a week out from an election. The Department of Justice did not respond to a request for comment.

“Our biggest concern is we’re going to get to the counting process and there’s going to be folks from the attorney general’s office disrupting stuff in a bad-faith way,” Menefee said of Paxton’s office.

Menefee noted that both Scott and Paxton participated in Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and backed the state audit of Harris, which Trump had requested. He called the state’s letter “vague and ominous,” intended as “a political tool to undermine our elections.”


He also rejected the allegation that the 2020 election was not secure. He acknowledged initial problems gathering votes from 14 machines. But those issues were documented and witnessed by election judges from both parties, he said, meaning the machines with stored vote tallies were always accounted for.

Hidalgo also assailed the state’s intervention. “The timing of this letter is — at best — suspicious,” she wrote on Twitter about the secretary of state’s announcement. “It was sent just days before the start of early voting, potentially in an attempt to sabotage county efforts by sowing doubt in the elections process, or equally as bad, by opening the door to possible inappropriate state interference in Harris County’s elections.”

Hidalgo is in a heated reelection battle against Republican Alexandria del Moral Mealer, who promises on her campaign website to “do everything I can to safeguard our ballots and ensure free and fair elections for Harris County voters. This starts by cleaning the voter rolls.” At a conservative forum earlier this year, Mealer declined to say that Trump had lost in 2020 — though she has said so more recently, during her general-election campaign.

Sam Taylor, a spokesman for the secretary of state, said much of the backlash over the deployment of monitors is overblown given that it happens every year — and is actually required by law when a certain number of voters request it, as happened this year. While 118 observers have been dispatched so far statewide this year, the number was 250 in 2020, he said. The monitors’ role is to observe election procedures and document issues such as security failures.


Harris is the country’s third-largest county by population, after Los Angeles and Chicago’s Cook County, and one of its most diverse, with a majority of its 4.7 million residents Latino, Black or Asian. Some residents have bridled at efforts to more aggressively scrutinize the work of local election officials.


“They don’t need people making an already difficult job more difficult,” said Clay Sands, 58, a real estate broker and self-described moderate Democrat who cast his ballot this week at a popular early-voting spot near downtown Houston.

The view was very different at a Harris County library branch in suburban Katy on Friday, where Johnny Wisniski, 65, a Republican and a public-works employee in a neighboring county, said he has little faith in the election process. He welcomed the presence of local and state monitors.

“I just think there’s going to be some cheating,” he said. “I think people are going to vote twice and dead people are going to vote. There’s going to be fraud.”

In addition to the government monitors, a surge of partisan poll watchers is expected at voting locations in Texas this year.

Pro-Trump Republicans court volunteers to 'challenge any vote'

Taylor said more than 3,300 Texans have taken his office’s online training course for poll observers — a new requirement under a sweeping election law enacted in 2021. But there is no way to know how many of those will actually show up, or where, Taylor added.


Nadia Hakim, a spokesperson for the Harris County elections office, said the office received no reports of issues with poll observer misconduct, voter intimidation or major malfunctions of voting machines as of Friday, the midpoint of Texas’s two-week-long early-voting period. Several election administrators said they expect a burst of activity on Election Day.

Anthony Gutierrez, executive director of the nonpartisan voter education and advocacy group Common Cause Texas, said that while so far there have not been many complaints to his group’s hotline, he is concerned that poll observers could overstep in this year’s tense atmosphere. During a training last week, Gutierrez said volunteers reported seeing people without the required identification circulating at polling locations close to voters.

One Black voter complained to the hotline that when he showed up to vote at a polling location at a southwest Dallas community college, a White man outside told him he had to first surrender his cellphone and smartwatch, Gutierrez said. He said the voter complied, cast his ballot and recovered his items, only to discover the man who seized them “was not a worker at that poll site. They were just trying to be intimidating.”


A spokesman for the Dallas elections office confirmed multiple reports of poll observers trying inappropriately to confiscate phones and smartwatches from voters. Under state law, voters must put away their phones but can carry them into the polls. There is no requirement to remove smartwatches, he said.

One ingredient in the recipe for conflict, election administrators said, is the divergent understanding of what is allowed and what is not. Taylor said his office has received dozens of calls from observers describing poll-worker actions they assumed were illegal, but weren’t.


Harris County residents Wayne and Lisa Nellums said they worried about voters being intimidated by state poll monitoring, particularly fellow voters of color. But the couple, who are Black, said the added monitoring could also backfire on those they believe are seeking to drive away minority voters like them.

“What they don’t understand is that when they try to intimidate,” said Lisa Nellums, 61, “it just makes us want to vote more.”

Gardner reported from Washington.

Title: PA Supremes rule for vote integrity
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2022, 04:57:16 AM

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered counties to not count any ballots that are in undated or incorrectly dated envelopes in the upcoming Nov. 8 elections, siding with national and state Republican groups in a lawsuit filed just over two weeks ago.

“The Pennsylvania county boards of elections are hereby ORDERED to refrain from counting any absentee and mail-in ballots received for the November 8, 2022 general election that are contained in undated or incorrectly dated outer envelopes,” the court said in its order (pdf).

It added, “We hereby DIRECT that the Pennsylvania county boards of elections segregate and preserve any ballots contained in undated or incorrectly dated outer envelopes.”

Court justices were split 3–3 on whether not counting these ballots would violate 52 US Code section 10101 (a)(2)(B), a voting provision under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The provision states that “no person acting under color of law shall deny the right of any individual to vote in any election because of an error or omission on any record or paper relating to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting, if such error or omission is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified under State law to vote in such election.”

Chief Justice Debra Todd, and Justices Christine Donohue and David Wecht—all Democrats—would find a violation of federal law if ballots were thrown out based on requiring a date, the court order states. Meanwhile, Justice Kevin Dougherty, a Democrat, and Justices Sallie Updyke Mundy and Kevin Brobson, both Republicans, would not find a violation of federal law. The court is down one member after Chief Justice Max Baer died in September.

The court said that opinions for the decision are “to follow.”

Republicans Sought Expedited Review

The latest court decision comes after the Republican National Committee (RNC), the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), and the Republican Party of Pennsylvania in October joined in filing a lawsuit to block undated mail-in ballots and absentee ballots from being counted, even if they are received on time.

In a petition, the group asked for an expedited review, which requires the court to use its special power to bypass the lower courts in taking up the case. On Oct. 21, the court granted the request, a move that suggested it regards the matter as urgent and important.

Pennsylvania Department of State officials argued that state law between 1945 to 1968 had directed counties to set aside mail-in ballots when the date on the envelope was later than the election day. But in 1968, the state law was changed, resulting in the deletion of a section in the law that required counties to set aside ballots based on the date on the return envelope, the officials noted.

Republicans asked the justices to rule on the language of Pennsylvania’s law, which states that an absentee or mail-in voter “shall … fill out, date and sign the declaration” printed on the outer envelope of the ballot. They asked the court that if it doesn’t order counties to throw out the undated or incorrectly dated ballots, then it should at least order counties to segregate the ballots.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed the individual petitioners from the case due to lack of standing, while determining that the RNC, NRCC, and the Pennsylvania GOP have standing.

Prior to the latest legal fight, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled in May that having dates on the return envelope is not mandatory, and that mail-in ballots without the date had to be counted in a 2021 Pennsylvania judge race.

The ruling was welcomed by Democrats, including the Pennsylvania Department of State under the administration of Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat. It immediately adjusted its nonbinding guidance to say that counties should count undated ballots.

But the U.S. Supreme Court in October vacated the decision by the appeals court, and dismissed the case as moot.

Pennsylvania state law requires that voters handwrite a date on the outer envelope when they send in mail ballots. However, the date that’s handwritten on the envelope is not used to verify whether a ballot has been received on time for the election, because the ballots are supposed to be time-stamped when they arrive at county offices.

Title: AZ: True the Vote founders jailed on contempt (Konnech)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2022, 05:00:04 AM

Second

This seems complicated:

==============================================

True the Vote Founders Jailed for Contempt of Court
By Zachary Stieber October 31, 2022 Updated: November 1, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
4:29



1

The founders of the election integrity group True the Vote were jailed on Oct. 31 by a federal judge for contempt of court.

U.S. marshals detained Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips after a hearing in federal court in Dallas, according to a court docket entry.

Court filings show U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt, the Reagan appointee overseeing a lawsuit against True the Vote, Engelbrecht, and Phillips, ordered the defendants jailed after they refused to share information, including all people who have had or still have possession of any information from Konnech computers.

Konnech is an election management software firm whose CEO was arrested in October for allegedly stealing poll worker data and hosting it on servers in China.

Konnech sued True the Vote prior to the arrest, alleging that the election integrity group and its founders gained unauthorized access to its computers and gained information from them.

In the lawsuit and a motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO), Konnech said that the defendants made “completely baseless claims” that Konnech’s CEO and employees were Chinese operatives and that the FBI was investigating Konnech.

“The truth is that Konnech is a U.S. company founded and operated by a U.S. citizen who has no affiliation with the Chinese Communist Party whatsoever,” Konnech said, adding that all of its U.S. customer data “is secured and stored exclusively on protected computers located within the United States.”

That was part of the $2.9 million contract Konnech reached with Los Angeles County, but Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón, a Democrat who charged Konnech CEO Eugene Yu, said investigators found that information “was stored on servers in the People’s Republic of China.”

True the Vote said Konnech’s claims that they hacked into Konnech servers were false and that they accessed a server in China using a “pre-loaded password that did not even require typing in a password to enter the server.”

Hoyt in September ordered the defendants to stop accessing the computers and to return all property and data obtained from the computers. He also ordered them to identify each person and group involved in accessing the computers and to disclose to Konnech how the computers were accessed.

Defendants told the court in a sealed letter that they wouldn’t identify the source of the data, “arguing that to do so would hinder an FBI investigation concerning the matter, or jeopardizing ‘national security,'” Hoyt said in a recent order.

Defendants said they turned over the person’s identity to the FBI and that they shouldn’t have to make that name available to Konnech. Text messages submitted to the court were sent between Engelbrecht and FBI agents, according to an affidavit from the former.

Phillips said in an affidavit that defendants would “comply fully” with Hoyt’s order and that the name of the person who accessed information from a computer was revealed in court during a recent hearing. According to Votebeat, that person is Mike Hasson. A summons was issued to Hasson on Oct. 31.

Phillips also said that Hasson and FBI agents were the only people who had access to the information.

The defendants will be detained “until they fully comply” with Hoyt’s order to disclose information, according to a summary of the hearing.

“True the Vote calls for the immediate release of founder Catherine Engelbrecht and contractor Gregg Phillips, who were jailed for contempt today for refusing to deliver to Konnech the name of the third party who was present at a presentation of evidence of Konnech’s wrongdoing,” True the Vote said in a statement to The Epoch Times. “This evidence was provided to the LA District Attorney’s office in their investigation of Konnech, which resulted in the arrest of CEO Eugene Yu.

“True the Vote attorneys are expediting an appeal seeking to have Engelbrecht and Phillips released.”

“Trust, honesty, and respect will always be our highest values, regarding both our work and our lives,” Engelbrecht added. “As a result, we will be held in jail until we agree to give up the name of a person we believe was not covered under the terms of the judge’s TRO.

Title: Mid Term Rigging
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2022, 07:18:41 AM

file:///C:/Users/Marc%20Denny/Downloads/The%20Midterm%20Election%20Rigging%20is%20Underway%20-%20Daniel%20Greenfield%20_%20Sultan%20Knish%20articles.pdf

Can you guys see this?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 03, 2022, 08:21:54 AM

do you mean if I put this into the browser

I see what you posted :
file:///C:/Users/Marc%20Denny/Downloads/The%20Midterm%20Election%20Rigging%20is%20Underway%20-%20Daniel%20Greenfield%20_%20Sultan%20Knish%20articles.pdf

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 03, 2022, 04:09:01 PM

 :-)

Title: Biden election address, vote against election deniers
Post by: DougMacG on November 04, 2022, 08:19:16 AM

https://youtu.be/nJfFPaKiew4

Biden address, forgotten by the end of the evening it was delivered.  180,000 viewed this video, less than one out of every thousand people.  I only watched to see what he and his writers got wrong.

It should be immediately followed by this, 12 minutes of Democrats denying election results:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XX2Ejqjz6TA
Does "The Big Lie" intentionally divisive rhetoric apply to all of them as well?

He started with the horrible attack on Paukl Pelosi and did everything he could to tie all political violence to Trump, when we don't even know the |Paul Pelosi attack was political.  Dishonesty on steroids.

He delivered the reading, and then left the stage.  He called together all these journalists; why not take a question or two?Because what he said does not stand up to scrutiny.

"Every vote should be counted!"

Would it be so hard to instead say, 'every legally cast vote should be counted'?  Then we could all come together with nearly 100% agreement instead of blowing the political divisions wide open, as he intended.

While he is proclaiming every vote should be counted, cities and states are getting caught sending out ballots to non-citizens and ineligible voters in numbers more than tenfold the recorded margin of the previous election.

He showed an ID to vote in Delaware, then calls anyone (including states) racist and fascist if they favor that small, basic protection anywhere else.

If Democrats are going to wield this level of power over a near zero margin of victory, we ALL need to have ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ALL VOTE FRAUD.

"The Big Lie", repeated ad nauseum, means don't investigate or even talk about fraud, or you are perpetuating the lie and dooming the "democracy". 

We of course had the name calling, "extreme MAGA" and "election deniers".  Does he even know what MAGA stands for.  What shouldn't be extreme about making America Great Again, and having free and fair elections is of course a central part of that.

He spoke of recounts and court cases all finding in his favor.  No mention that recounts recounted all the same ballots and 99% of the court cases were dismissed for lack of 'standing', with no evidence presented or heard.  Dismissal on standing is dishonestly presented as proof of no fraud.

What really shook the confidence of those not convinced of the result was the utter failure to investigate.

He spoke of voter intimidation when the story he is referring to is 'mule' intimidation, people who drop off ballots for a living.  We ARE going to take a closer look.

EXPECT a camera on in a public place when you vote or have someone else drop off your ballot.  That's how we get the beginnings of evidence to prosecute, and keep our election fair and free, a process where both sides can believe the result.

Another point Biden made was wait a few days after the election to judge the results.  Other than centrally planned election fraud, I wonder what that was about...

Title: Milwaukee- fraudulent military ballots?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2022, 02:47:41 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/milwaukee-election-official-fired-fraudulent-request-military-ballots

Title: WSJ: PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2022, 03:20:30 AM

Trump Misses the Real Pennsylvania Voting Problem
His claim of unverified mail votes is flimsy. But beware of undated mail votes.
By The Editorial BoardFollow
Nov. 4, 2022 6:44 pm ET

SAVE

PRINT

TEXT
1129

Former President Donald Trump speaks during a rally ahead of the midterm elections in Mesa, Arizona, Oct. 9.
PHOTO: BRIAN SNYDER/REUTERS

President Trump is again missing the point on election integrity. “Here we go again! Rigged Election!” he wrote Tuesday. Mr. Trump was referring to a claim on the internet that Pennsylvania has 250,000 mail ballots that lack verification of the voter’s identity. Not really, officials say. Pennsylvania does have a voting issue, but it’s not the one Mr. Trump’s cites.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
WSJ Opinion Potomac Watch
What Else Might Be on Your November Ballot


SUBSCRIBE
Coincidentally also Tuesday, Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court deadlocked 3-3 on whether mail ballots are valid if voters neglected to date them by hand. In 2020 there were about 8,300 undated ballots in Philadelphia alone, the Associated Press says. For now, the Justices ordered that such ballots be kept separate, which is the right call. But things could get ugly if Republican Mehmet Oz wins the Senate race by a whisker over Democrat John Fetterman.

Registered Democrats account for about 70% of the mail ballots returned in Pennsylvania so far. That means the undated ones will probably break for Mr. Fetterman, who could sue to demand that they be tallied. This might reach the U.S. Supreme Court, with the loser crying that he was cheated.

***
Mr. Trump’s claim about those 250,000 mail ballots is grounded in a letter that a group of state lawmakers recently sent to the Pennsylvania State Department, raising concerns about how mail votes are tracked and verified. Yet local election authorities say nothing is amiss. “It is business as usual and the legislators who wrote the letter totally misunderstood how the system works,” says Seth Bluestein, a Republican city commissioner in Philadelphia.

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Morning Editorial Report

All the day's Opinion headlines.


Preview

Subscribed
When requesting a mail ballot in Pennsylvania, a voter is asked to provide a state ID number or the last four digits of a Social Security number. Sometimes this information can’t be verified, maybe because the voter simply misread a digit when copying it down. Even if verification fails, the law says registered voters should be sent a mail ballot, with a notice saying it won’t count unless ID is provided.

When unverified ballots come back, election workers set them aside. Chester County says it “prevents the ballot from being counted by blocking the return bar code.” When a worker goes to “check in” the arriving vote, it’s flagged as needing ID. A letter circulated by the State Department adds that Pennsylvania’s voter registration system “has a hard-stop function that will not allow a ballot from a voter without verified identification to be counted.”

According to the State Department, there are “less than 7,600 ballot applications statewide that still require voter identity verification.” Its letter suggests other figures are misreadings of the database. Chester County expects fewer than 300 unverified ballots out of 80,000 requested.


It’s classic Trump. Someone questions an obscure corner of the voting system. Mr. Trump shouts that it’s rigged, without bothering to understand the claim first. Is there any evidence that counties aren’t checking ID? “I have no reason to suspect at this juncture that they’re not doing it,” says state Rep. Frank Ryan, the lead signatory on the letter of concern. “We have not seen any nefarious behavior.”

What Mr. Ryan wants is better internal controls so the verification is visible. “To earn trust you have to build trust,” he says. Fair enough. There’s also a case for less reliance on mail ballots. At the polls, it’s verify first, vote second. Mail ballots invert that: Cast a vote today, hope it checks out tomorrow. Even so, it’s irresponsible for Mr. Trump to yell fraud the instant he sees something he doesn’t understand.

***
If Pennsylvania has a meltdown, a more likely culprit is undated ballots. The law instructs mail voters to “fill out, date and sign.” After the 2020 election, the state Supreme Court said dates were required. But the swing Justice provided a good-for-one-pandemic exception. As a result, a disputed state legislative seat flipped from a Republican to a Democrat.

After local elections in 2021, the question hit the federal judiciary. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals said a missing date was akin to a paperwork error, so throwing out such ballots would violate the Civil Rights Act. As a result, a disputed judicial seat flipped from a Republican to a Democrat.

In June the Supreme Court declined to block that ruling, over three conservative dissents. The Third Circuit’s view “is very likely wrong,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote. “If left undisturbed, it could well affect the outcome of the fall elections, and it would be far better for us to address that interpretation before, rather than after, it has that effect.” Prescient again, Sam.

Now the state Supreme Court has split 3-3. That tie was possible because Chief Justice Max Baer, a Democrat, died recently. What a mess. Voting should run by settled rules. For two straight elections, Pennsylvania has put itself in the position of having its winners potentially decided by judges after the fact. If Democrats want to shore up democracy, as they keep saying, they can help stop this from happening a third time.

Title: Goolag puts its foot on the scales
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2022, 04:28:57 PM

EPSTEIN: Google Is Shifting Votes On A Massive Scale, But A Solution Is At Hand
OPINIONSWITZERLAND-ECONOMY-DIPLOMACY-BANKING-IT
(Photo by FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images)

https://dailycaller.com/2022/11/06/robert-epstein-2022-midterm-elections-google-bing/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking&pnespid=sOc_EzVJO.hK1OvDvTOmTZyJoBvwT8dwKrmmkLEy8UZmz4GFGNvUPluuuVTUNMAtSq7H2eLW



ROBERT EPSTEIN
SENIOR RESEARCH PSYCHOLOGIST AT THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
November 06, 2022
7:03 PM ET
FONT SIZE:

My research team is currently monitoring online political content being sent to voters in swing states through more than 2,500 computers owned by a politically-diverse group of registered voters (our “field agents”), and we are concerned about what we’re seeing.

We are aggregating and analyzing search results on the Google and Bing search engines, messages displayed on Google’s home page, autoplay videos suggested on YouTube, tweets sent to users by the Twitter company (as opposed to tweets sent by other users), email suppression on Gmail, and more.

We have so far preserved more than 1.9 million “ephemeral experiences” – exposure to short-lived content that impacts people and then disappears, leaving no trace – that Google and other companies are able to use to shift opinions and voting preferences, and we expect to have captured more than 2.5 million by Election Day.

In emails leaked from Google to The Wall Street Journal in 2018, Googlers (that’s what they call themselves) discussed how they might be able to use “ephemeral experiences” to change people’s views about Trump’s travel ban. The company later denied that this plan was ever implemented, but leaked content (including multiple blacklists) and startling revelations by Tristan Harris, Zach Vorhies, and other whistleblowers show that Google is indeed out to remake the world in its own image. As the company’s CFO, Ruth Porat, said in a November 11th, 2016 video that leaked in 2018, “we will use the great strength and resources and reach we have” to advance Google’s values.

Since early 2016, my team has been developing and improving Neilsen-type monitoring systems that allow us to do to Google-and-the-Gang what they do to us and our children 24/7: to track their activity, and, specifically, to preserve that very dangerous and persuasive ephemeral content.

Since 2013, I have been conducting rigorous controlled experiments to quantify how persuasive that kind of content can be. I’ve so far identified about a dozen new forms of online manipulation that make use of ephemeral experiences, and nearly all these techniques are controlled exclusively by Google and, to a lesser extent, other tech companies.

These new forms of influence are stunning in their impact. Search results that favor one candidate (in other words, that lead people who click on high-ranking results to web pages that glorify that candidate) can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by up to 80 percent in some demographic groups after a single search. Carefully crafted search suggestions that flash at you while you are typing a search term can turn a 50/50 split among undecided voters into a 90/10 split with no one knowing they have been manipulated. A single question-and-answer interaction on a digital personal assistant can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by more than 40 percent.

In 2020, the 1.5 million ephemeral experiences we aggregated from the computers of our 1,735 field agents showed us manipulations that were sufficient, in theory, to have shifted more than six million votes to Joe Biden (whom I supported) – again, without people knowing they were being manipulated. Among other findings: Google was sending more go-vote reminders to liberals and moderates than to conservatives; that’s a brazen and powerful manipulation that would go completely undetected unless someone was monitoring.

Our preliminary analyses of the data we have collected so far in 2022 are equally disturbing. In swing states, and especially in Wisconsin, Arizona, and Florida, we are finding a high level of liberal bias in Google search results, but not in search results on Bing (the same pattern we have found in every election since 2016). In several swing states, 92 percent of the autoplay videos being fed to YouTube users are coming from liberal news sources (YouTube is owned by Google). Unless Google backs down, it will shift hundreds of thousands of votes on Election Day itself with those brazen targeted go-vote reminders – and we will catch them doing so.


That brings me to some surprisingly hopeful news. Just before the November 3, 2020 Presidential election, I was so unnerved by the extreme bias we were seeing in our data that I decided to go public. Ebony Bowden at the New York Post wrote a powerful story about election rigging that might have made the front page, but on October 30, after a phone call between an editor and a Google official, the piece was killed – no doubt because the Post was getting 45 percent of its online traffic from the company in question.

On November 5, however, three U.S. Senators sent an intimidating letter to the CEO of Google summarizing my preliminary findings, and the company instantly turned off all manipulations in the Georgia Senate races.

We were monitoring those races through more than a thousand computers owned by a diverse and undetectable pool of real voters in Georgia, and not one received a go-vote reminder. Even more striking, political bias in Google search results dropped to zero. I had thought that such a feat would be impossible, but Vorhies explained that Google can turn bias on and off “like flipping a light switch.” He also pointed me to leaked company documents such as the manual for the company’s Twiddler software, used for “re-ranking” search results.

Will the article you are now reading change the course of history? Will it cause Google to take its digital thumb off the scales in our midterm elections? Whatever Mr. Pichai, its CEO, decides to do, we will know, and we will preserve the evidence.

And this time, we will continue to expand the monitoring system, and we will be monitoring content going not just to voters but also to America’s children. By late 2023, we will have a digital shield in place – a panel of more than 20,000 field agents in all 50 states – and we will shame Big Tech into staying clear of our elections and our kids for many years to come.

Robert Epstein, Ph.D. (@DrREpstein), former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today, is senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology. A Ph.D. of Harvard University, he has published 15 books and more than 300 articles on AI and other topics. His 2019 Congressional testimony on Big Tech’s threat to democracy can be accessed at https://EpsteinTestimony.com. You can learn more about his research on online influence at https://MyGoogleResearch.com.

Title: Dem poll worker caught selecting straight Dem on voting machines
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 06, 2022, 06:36:17 PM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrat-poll-worker-ejected-pre-selecting-straight-dem-ticket-voting-machines-report?fbclid=IwAR2bfBJK7tx270a-IO-V9xNvcyZZAXj91xm8dLfaiGtIVo44I8RFTTTYHaE

Title: voted this am
Post by: ccp on November 08, 2022, 07:24:32 AM

I got IDed
had to sign in
and voted electronically

however in my NJ District no one on ballot higher then some county commissioner
I did not know any of them.

not telling you who I voted for.......

confidential  :wink:

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 08, 2022, 11:46:21 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/florida-rejects-federal-monitors-inside-polling-places-permitted?fbclid=IwAR0bZO189zxoGY2bA-D6iDxWO3b2I1KhYwc2VbpQxGVhobNztnLE0wmlnSc

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/08/justice-department-monitors-florida-desantis/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F384c56e%2F636a918c7e2620469f0795d1%2F61cdf026ae7e8a4ac205b2b3%2F11%2F70%2F636a918c7e2620469f0795d1&wp_cu=10fdb05edea8f32c1b02f6dfec609335%7CD462DD329F9C56B3E0530100007F597F

Title: Re: voted this am
Post by: DougMacG on November 08, 2022, 02:52:34 PM

Quote from: ccp on November 08, 2022, 07:24:32 AM

I got IDed
had to sign in
and voted electronically

however in my NJ District no one on ballot higher then some county commissioner
I did not know any of them.

not telling you who I voted for.......

confidential  :wink:

I voted.  No ID required in MN but I am already registered, same precinct since 1986.
I filled out a good ballot but got one wrong.  Couldn't remember which woman was the really bad one for County Attorney, an important position here.

Did everyone get out to vote?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 08, 2022, 02:53:51 PM

Cindy and I voted 3-4 days ago.  Seemed very efficient.

Title: Misc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 08, 2022, 06:22:02 PM

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/3023290/stop-the-blue-steal?fbclid=IwAR1QVt9ZPYjWU7MkSK1pMz1tVFYYEVf80xLIl8yP1_O3fGnuLF73nzaj7A8

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/nov/8/doj-sends-poll-monitors-24-states-amid-fears-voter/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=oJkXAZ%2BTfS7O03D0XytsDm4Q0WD%2FXupDFtj34hr%2BmxtOUpaE1er0kpQTS6ARJrED&bt_ts=1667952285437

Title: LA DA dismisses charges against election software CEO; Indiana State House
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 11, 2022, 05:04:00 PM

https://www.reuters.com/legal/la-dismisses-charges-against-ceo-election-software-firm-2022-11-10/

Eugene Yu, chief executive of Konnech Inc, was charged last month with two felonies for allegedly violating the company's contract with Los Angeles County by transferring election workers' personal information to servers in China.

===================================

https://michaelyon.locals.com/upost/3042153/an-indiana-state-house-seat-just-went-from-gop-win-by-1500-to-a-dem-win-by-100-due-to-a-software-err

Title: Some quick thoughts
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 11, 2022, 06:44:04 PM

second

Elections can be messed with in a variety of ways.  For example:

1) Search manipulations, suppression of stories, cancellation of truth tellers

2) BS voter criteria e.g. voter registration along with driver license in states where illegals get driver licenses, mass mail balloting, ballot harvesting, SCOTUS being intimidated by court packing threats in 2020 from taking on the BS PA Supreme Court admission of hundreds of thousands of illegitimate votes.  Balloting by mail varies widely.  Some require solicitation of ballot, verification, etc  some mail out willy nilly.  IT IS THE NATURE OF MASS MAIL BALLOTS & BALLOT HARVESTING THAT PROOF OF SKULLDUGGERY IS NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE.  Given the abuse by Trump of ballot fraud claims, is it possible that many now fear to pursue legit claims of fraud?

3) Dishonest counting.  Sec State Hobbs supervising election of Candidate Hobbs in AZ?

Maybe the polls weren't as wrong as we were led to believe?  Maybe ballot harvesting of mass mail ballots has something to do with the outcomes?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2022, 08:18:24 AM

CNN Lake's claims
"unfounded"

screw them
what are we supposed to think

of course this is suspicious
same crap
same locations
same close races
and no good explanations
just we are working as fast as we can (4 days AFTER the election ! My God )

https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/09/politics/kari-lake-arizona-governor-race

Title: Newt: WTF?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 12, 2022, 08:34:15 AM

Gingrich: GOP Got Nearly 6 Million More Votes but Lost Many Races, ‘What’s Going On?’
By Eva Fu November 11, 2022 Updated: November 12, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
7:53



1

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has been in politics for decades, and never has an election bewildered him as much as the 2022 midterms.

“I’ve never been as wrong as I was this year,” Gingrich, an Epoch Times contributor, said on Nov. 10.

“It makes me challenge every model I’m aware of, and realize that I have to really stop and spend a good bit of time thinking and trying to put it all together.”

People from both sides of the aisle were projecting substantial losses for the Democratic Party amid rising discontent over inflation, the economy, and crime. But that expected red wave didn’t happen. ​​

The Senate is currently a tossup. And with 211 House seats won against the Democrats’ 192, the GOP is still poised to take charge of the lower chamber when Congress convenes in the new year, but with less leverage than initially hoped.

Gingrich, having previously expressed confidence that his party would score sweeping gains in both chambers, is, like many others, at a loss trying to explain what went awry.

He pointed to a vote tracking sheet by the Cook Political Report, a bipartisan newsletter that analyzes elections, which shows a roughly 50.7 million Republican turnout for the House—outnumbering Democratic votes by nearly 6 million.

Gingrich noted this gap could shrink to 5 million when ballots in deep blue California are fully processed. “But it’s still 5 million more votes,” he said.

“And not gaining very many seats makes you really wonder what’s going on,” he added. “I want to know, where did those votes come from?”

It’s a puzzle that the former speaker hasn’t been able to solve.

Questions and Inconsistencies
Part of what made a difference in this race was how the incumbent lawmakers have fared. In both the 2020 and 1994 House elections, no Republican incumbents lost seats to their Democratic challengers, while 13 and 34 Democratic incumbents, respectively, were ousted. Had the same scenario played out this time, “we’d be six or seven seats stronger than we are now,” he said.

So far, Republicans have flipped 16 seats while Democrats have flipped six— Michigan’s 3rd District, New Mexico’s 2nd District, Ohio’s 1st District, North Carolina’s 13th District, Texas’ 34th District, and Illinois’ 13th District—of which three GOP incumbents lost their seats.

In exit polls by the National Election Pool, about three-quarters of voters rated the economy as weak, and about the same number of people were not satisfied with the way things were going in the country.

On Election Day, Facebook’s parent company Meta said it will cut 11,000 jobs, reducing its workforce by 13 percent, which Gingrich noted as a further sign of economic anxiety.

“But their votes didn’t reflect that,” said Gingrich.

The former speaker said he struggled to reconcile multiple such inconsistencies he observed in this election, particularly in the two races that decided the New York governor and Philadelphia senator, which were won by Democrats Gov. Kathy Hochul and John Fetterman respectively.

Pennsylvania Candidate For Senate John Fetterman Holds Election Night Party In Pittsburgh
Democratic Senate candidate John Fetterman speaks to supporters during an election night party at Stage in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on Nov. 9, 2022. Fetterman defeated Republican Senate candidate Dr. Mehmet Oz. (Jeff Swensen/Getty Images)
“How can you have 70 percent of the people in Philadelphia would say that crime is their number one issue, but they voted for Fetterman even though he had voted to release murderers and put them back on the street?” he said.

“Of the New York City voters, about 70 percent voted for the governor even though she had done nothing to stop crime in New York,” he added. Hochul won the race with a 5.8 percent edge against Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), with 96 percent of the votes counted as of Nov. 11.

Related Coverage
Gingrich: GOP Got Nearly 6 Million More Votes but Lost Many Races, ‘What’s Going On?’New York Republicans Win 5 Competitive House Seats
“It makes me wonder, you know, what’s going on? How are people thinking?” he said, questioning why people’s attitudes didn’t align with the voting patterns.

“I don’t fully understand how the American people are sort of rationalizing in their head these different conflicting things, and I think it’s going to require some real thought on our part to figure out what to do next.”

Senate Hangs in the Balance
Control of the Senate hangs on three key swing states: Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia that is heading to a runoff on Dec. 6. Republicans need to win at least two of these races to claim a majority. Both Arizona and Nevada have a sizable portion of votes to be counted.

In Arizona, incumbent Sen. Mark Kelly has a 5.6 percent advantage over his Republican challenger Blake Masters, with 82 percent of the votes counted as of Nov. 11. In Nevada’s senate race, Republican Adam Laxalt was 1 point ahead of incumbent Catherine Cortex Masto as of Thursday morning, with 90 percent of the votes in.

Epoch Times Photo
Nevada Republican U.S. Senate nominee Adam Laxalt speaks as his wife Jaime Laxalt (R) looks on at a Republican midterm election night party at Red Rock Casino on November 08, 2022 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
Gingrich is sure Laxalt can beat his rival, but certain questions about the vote count keep him on edge.

“I worry about how the Nevada count is coming because they have a propensity to steal the votes if they can, so that has a certain amount of concern for me,” he said.

“The places where Laxalt is doing really well tend to have already voted, and the places where she [Mastro] has done pretty well tend to have a huge number of votes outstanding. So you sort of have to wonder exactly what’s going on.”

Two of Nevada’s most populous counties, Clark and Washoe, had over 50,000 and 41,000 mail-in ballots to count, respectively, as of Nov. 10.

Nevada ballots postmarked by Nov. 8 but delivered by Nov. 12 to election officials will still be counted. In cases where the signature on the mail-in ballots doesn’t match with the one on file, election officials have until Nov. 14 to “cure” the ballot by verifying the voter’s identity.

‘A Majority is Still a Majority’
Another data point that doesn’t make sense to Gingrich was how voters decided to punish Donald Trump’s presidency during the 2018 midterms, but seemingly decided to let President Joe Biden off the hook this time around.

According to exit polls, of those who “somewhat disapproved” of Biden’s presidency, 49 percent still voted Democrat while 45 percent voted Republican, marking a sharp contrast to 2018 when voters who “somewhat disapproved” of Donald Trump overwhelmingly voted Democrat, at 63 percent.

Epoch Times Photo
President Joe Biden in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt on Nov. 11, 2022. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
“I don’t know to what extent it’s because Biden seems so old and so weak, that people don’t hold him personally accountable,” he said. “It’s almost like he’s your uncle. He’s really a nice guy, and the fact that he doesn’t seem to remember things and the fact that things don’t seem to work—you can’t quite get mad at him and blame him.”

It was not an election that Gingrich expected, but he noted that the GOP’s anticipated control of the House was still a bright spot.

“Democrats should feel very good that they managed to totally mess up everything and got away with it,” he said.

“The biggest change in Washington will be Pelosi giving the gavel to McCarthy,” he said, referring to the House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.). “Because you’re going to go from a very liberal Democrat to a conservative Republican.”

“It’s binary,” he added. “As my wife, who used to be the chief clerk of the Agriculture Committee, said to me, ‘The majority is a majority, no matter how small it is,’ and changing who holds the gavel is a very big change, because it changes every committee.”

Title: newt : "I was wrong"
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2022, 11:42:47 AM

(I guess we all were )

will love to hear further from Newt going forward

I notice he does not mention. how much  the abortion issue affected the election results

or about the unmarried mothers
or gen Zzzzzzzzzzz seemingly mostly breaking for Dems

He does indirectly say that people broke against Trump because of his personality
while Joe Biden is so brain dead they look at him like a gaffing uncle

I cannot agree that Biden is a nice guy though

Title: cameras go dark
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2022, 12:00:05 PM

“Officials explained that mail-in ballots must be postmarked by Election Day but can arrive as late as Saturday to be counted. Election officials have been flooded with thousands of them since Tuesday as the margins between Cortez Masto and Laxalt remain tight.

is it possible to forge post marks or crooked postal workers to back date postmarks?

https://republicbrief.com/cameras-go-dark-at-vote-counting-facility-in-key-nevada-county/

Title: Is Kari Lake full of baloney or what
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2022, 12:04:34 PM

how does she get in front of us and tell us she is 100% she will win and the next day I read this:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-elections/arizona-governor-results

WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON?

Title: Re: Is Kari Lake full of baloney or what
Post by: DougMacG on November 12, 2022, 12:20:35 PM

Quote from: ccp on November 12, 2022, 12:04:34 PM

how does she get in front of us and tell us she is 100% she will win and the next day I read this:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-elections/arizona-governor-results

WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON?

She means certain numbers of votes left are from certain areas that favor her.  I also cringed when I heard her say 100%chance.  We'll see.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 12, 2022, 01:23:56 PM

She says she is catching up, but the spread seems to be growing.

Changing subjects, did you see that the interior vote count surveillance cameras in the west Nevada county went black for 7-8 hours?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2022, 01:50:38 PM

"She says she is catching up, but the spread seems to be growing."

yes she says outstanding votes should be majority hers but every time I check it is the other way around

yes another "security camera " black out.  :x

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2022, 07:14:25 PM

thanks trump

we lost senate again
thanks to the screaming idiot

yes he is mostly to blame

so is McConnell

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 12, 2022, 09:34:17 PM

at this rate I will wake up and find the Dems control the House too

Title: polling thought
Post by: ccp on November 13, 2022, 10:01:20 AM

It seems to me,
polls that measure LIKELY VOTERS are no longer valid.

clearly Democrats are ballot harvesting from hundreds of thousands of not likely voters

to keep pulling out wins where not expected

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 13, 2022, 03:50:10 PM

"clearly Democrats are ballot harvesting from hundreds of thousands of not likely voters"

THIS.

Title: ME: Corrupted Memory Sticks
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 16, 2022, 07:24:11 AM

 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1591945894764679170

Title: WSJ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 16, 2022, 07:35:10 AM

EMAIL
OPINIONREVIEW & OUTLOOK
Kari Lake’s Loss in Arizona Destroys ‘Stop the Steal’
Candidates who took the Trump line on 2020 won fewer votes than a GOP state Treasurer.
By The Editorial BoardFollow
Updated Nov. 16, 2022 8:59 am ET


If anyone needs more evidence that “Stop the Steal” was a loser for the GOP this year, the party’s Arizona wipeout is definitive. On Monday Kari Lake joined the list of Republicans in the Grand Canyon State who ran on the stolen 2020 election and lost.


Ms. Lake, a former TV news anchor, had all the sparkling charisma that Donald Trump’s other favorite candidates lacked. She loved telling off journalists. She called 2020 “a corrupt, stolen election,” and she repeated that line to the bitter end. As Mr. Trump bragged in a phone call captured on tape: “If they say, ‘How is your family?’ she says, ‘The election was rigged and stolen.’”

But she lost, 49.6% to 50.4%, according to the latest data. The Democratic gubernatorial nominee, Katie Hobbs, ran an uninspiring campaign and went all in for the teachers union. She still won. As a reminder of how winnable Arizona should be for Republicans, Gov. Doug Ducey was re-elected in 2018 by 14 points and is finishing a highly successful second term that includes statewide school choice and a 2.5% flat tax.

Abraham Hamadeh, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for Attorney General, promised a “day of reckoning” for “those who worked to rob President Trump in the rigged 2020 election.” That race isn’t called yet and could go to a recount, but Mr. Hamadeh is currently losing, 49.9% to 50.1%.

Mark Finchem, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for Secretary of State, essentially made himself a walking referendum on 2020 fraud theories. He lost, 47.6% to 52.4%.

Blake Masters, the Trump-endorsed Republican candidate for Senate, said in an early ad: “I think Trump won.” After he captured the GOP nomination, he tried to pivot by decrying the influence of Big Tech, while saying he saw no evidence of fraudulent vote totals. That earned him a debasing rebuke from Mr. Trump. Mr. Masters lost, 46.5% to 51.4%.

One person who deserves special mention for orchestrating these defeats is Kelli Ward, Arizona’s Republican state chair. She has now presided over the loss of two Senate seats and nearly all of the top statewide jobs.


Notably, however, the GOP wipeout didn’t go all the way down the ballot: Republican state Treasurer Kimberly Yee sailed to re-election, 55.6% to 44.4%. Curious, yes. Mr. Trump might retort that this race was relatively low profile, and the Treasurer’s office has been Republican for decades. On the other hand, doesn’t that make it a proxy for generic GOP support?

Look at the raw totals. Ms. Yee won roughly 115,000 more votes than Ms. Lake. The GOP also won six of nine Arizona House districts, and Republicans in those nine races received 50,000 more votes than Ms. Lake. Both figures are well above her losing margin. What explains the gap? According to exit polls, Ms. Lake lost independents by seven points and moderates by 20. At the same time, she lost 9% of self-identified Republicans.

Many Republican voters simply don’t like being fed Trump baloney about the 2020 election. Or if baloney is too mild a word, there’s always “horse—,” which is what Arizona’s sitting Attorney General, Republican Mark Brnovich, recently called the mass fraud claims. Among other investigations, his office tracked down 282 purportedly dead voters, he wrote this summer, many of whom were “very surprised to learn they were allegedly deceased.”

Mr. Brnovich ran for Senate this year but was outflanked by Mr. Masters in the primary. If he had been the nominee, he might have won last week. But he refused to pretend the 2020 election was stolen by some shadowy conspiracy that eluded law enforcement and normal standards of proof. “We as prosecutors deal in facts and evidence, and I’m not like the clowns that throw stuff against the wall and see what sticks,” Mr. Brnovich told “60 Minutes” in October. “It’s like a giant grift in some ways.”

Nearly everywhere in competitive races last week, Mr. Trump’s endorsed candidates went down in pyrotechnics. But the flameout of an awkward eccentric, such as Doug Mastriano in Pennsylvania or Don Bolduc in New Hampshire, only says so much. Kari Lake is a telegenic fraud theorist straight out of Mar-a-Lago casting, running in a historically red state, in a year with an unpopular Democratic President and 8% inflation.

If Ms. Lake couldn’t win on “Stop the Steal” in 2022, it’s hard to see how anyone else can pull it off. Maybe at last the 2020 election is over.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 16, 2022, 07:57:02 AM

WSJ "
 "stop the steal" the explanation for loss

i believe this totally misses the mark

why should I believe. that mail in ballots that were majority Democrat votes

was people who were angry with claims the '20 election was stolen

that has NOTING to do with it

it is ballot harvesting
that explains it

anyone honestly believe a Dem went to some persons house or nursing home or in the street

and said you must vote Democrat because Kari Lake claims the '20 election was stolen
and then the "unlikely " voter said :

"wow , I am so mad I will thus vote for the other candidate"


come on WSJ
bozos

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 16, 2022, 08:15:22 AM

Well said.

That said, Trump's narcistic flatulence on this issue has tainted it for us.

How do we deal with this?

Title: Re: WSJ
Post by: DougMacG on November 16, 2022, 08:22:31 AM

"If Ms. Lake couldn’t win on “Stop the Steal” in 2022, it’s hard to see how anyone else can pull it off. Maybe at last the 2020 election is over."


   - It's obnoxious the way the other side calls it a "lie" as they keep widening the opportunities to cheat, but it is also tiresome to independents to keep hearing of the "steal" without presenting hard evidence.

Lake should have stuck with Biden failures and future agenda.

I wonder if our G M thinks this was a clean election...

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on November 16, 2022, 08:56:16 AM

"Trump's narcistic flatulence on this issue has tainted it for us.

How do we deal with this?"


Also, losing state legislatures and Governor's in swing states prevents reforms.

On cheating, we need hard evidence.  On process, we need to tighten things up and it only seems to be going in the opposite direction.

I hoped for a project veritas sting on a mule type operation.  Nothing.

'Officer Tatum' went on rant against the cheat excuse.  If ballots were switched or miscounted in GA, why did Kemp win by 8 points. NV, if they rigged to win the Senate, why did the Republican win the Gov race. Etc.

If this harvesting is legal, why aren't we going to the homeless, to the nursing homes etc.

(The answer is, their voters are easier to find in groups, cities are 80% Dem etc., They can promise free stuff.)

Still we could use cleaner elections.  Only a voter can request a ballot.  Tighter time-frames. Some surveillance, investigation, prosecutions. Greater confidence.  To say 'no fraud' is stupid.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 16, 2022, 01:41:45 PM

"I wonder if our G M thinks this was a clean election..."

I would guess his response would be to vote harder next time

while we keep losing to ballot harvesting ...........

I actually thought we already were going door to door
or doing some harvesting ....

Title: AZ: Gov race to go to recount?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 16, 2022, 03:32:36 PM

Hobbs’s Lead Over Lake Narrows in Arizona Gubernatorial Race
By Zachary Stieber November 16, 2022 Updated: November 16, 2022biggersmaller Print


Republican Kari Lake has narrowed Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’s lead in the state’s race for governor in a Nov. 15 update.

Hobbs’s lead of 19,382 narrowed to 17,249, according to unofficial results from the office of Hobbs, a Democrat, based on new reports from Maricopa County and other jurisdictions. Hobbs gained nearly 9,700 votes in the new tranche, while Lake gained 11,829.

Hobbs now has 1.276 million votes, while Lake now has 1.259 million. The margin between the candidates is about 0.6 percent, close to recount territory.

Under a new Arizona law, a recount is triggered if the margin is at or below 0.5 percent when all the votes are counted.’

Some 27,545 uncounted ballots remain, according to the office of Hobbs, who is Arizona’s top election official. That estimate may not be reliable, however—the estimate was 28,033 before the latest count, but more than 20,000 votes were reported.

According to the estimate, 11 Arizona counties have ballots that need counting. Maricopa County, with 12,277, has the most uncounted ballots.

However, according to the Maricopa County election website, 16,830 ballots still need to be counted.

The secretary of state site “only shows votes for the named candidates on the ballot,” a Maricopa County spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email. “Write-ins, undervotes, and overvotes are tallied in our totals.”

A spokesperson for the secretary of state’s office didn’t respond by press time to a request for comment.

Hobbs declared victory this week after media outlets, including The Associated Press, called the race for her. Lake hasn’t conceded.

“I want to thank the voters of Arizona for entrusting me with this immense responsibility. It is truly the honor of a lifetime, and I will do everything in my power to make you proud,” Hobbs said on Nov. 15 at what was described as a victory rally.

“For those Arizonans who didn’t vote for me, know that I will work just as hard for you.”

Lake shared a post on Twitter from Floyd Brown, founder of The Western Journal news website.

“Spent hours last night working with Lake team on a continuing war for Arizona. She will not go quietly into the night. She intends to stand and fight,” Brown wrote.

“She knew when she entered this race that it would be tough. Her opponents lack her courage. She is fighting for us.”

The winner will succeed Republican Gov. Doug Ducey, who was prohibited by term limit laws from seeking reelection.

Title: It is the bulk mail ballots stupid
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2022, 11:40:41 AM

https://patriotpost.us/alexander/92937?mailing_id=7092&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.7092&utm_campaign=alexander&utm_content=body

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 17, 2022, 11:58:30 AM

the mail ballots
are it

I was naive
I really thought that the Republicans HAD  prepared for this

it was plainly obvious they were going to do it again ........

Title: The Podesta $750M Slush Fund
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2022, 01:23:54 PM

Urgent Call for a Podesta Watchdog: The $750 Billion Schumer-Manchin So-Called Inflation Reduction Act
by Lawrence Kadish
November 17, 2022 at 3:00 pm

Send   
Print

Share63

(Image source: iStock)
Congress needs to appoint an independent non-partisan monitor with subpoena power to review the disbursements of nearly half a trillion dollars in federal funds that will be distributed by a former Clinton associate and Democratic operative on behalf of the Biden Administration.

Failure to have an independent "inspector general" act as a daily auditor could turn appropriations allegedly slated for environmental projects into one of the largest political slush funds ever suffered by the American taxpayer. What will surely be some very selective disbursements are likely to come in the midst of a presidential election cycle and at a time when Democrats are understandably seeking every advantage. No surprise, given that their standard bearer is now the oldest citizen to hold the office of president while many voters might still view as puzzling how his current vice president came to be a heartbeat away from the Oval Office.

So just who will be the "environmental expert" with the skill, insight, and professionalism to determine where, when and who receives a portion of the $370 billion earmarked for "green" projects in the $750 billion Schumer-Manchin so-called Inflation Reduction Act. Even the New York Times had to acknowledge that the designated administrator for this strategic responsibility, John Podesta, is a "Democratic stalwart." (For those unfamiliar with the word, "stalwart" can be defined as "loyal and resolute.")

And so he is.

While he may boast environmental credentials, let us be clear. Podesta has previously served as White House chief of staff to President Bill Clinton and chaired Hillary Clinton's unsuccessful presidential campaign in 2016. He is first and foremost a creature of Washington.

There is little doubt that Podesta's supervision of the allocation of hundreds of billions of dollars in a presidential election cycle requires an independent auditor to protect the taxpayer. While there is a General Accounting Office designed to monitor federal spending, they will be hard-pressed to keep tabs in real time on what Podesta is spending and where.

While a Democrat-controlled Senate will look on with a studiously indifferent gaze at what has been called this potential slush fund, it will require the Republican-controlled House of Representatives to devise a mechanism that prevents this from becoming a multi-billion dollar scandal. Voters need to appreciate that a Washington insider has been assigned to direct federal funds to achieve a victory that may have nothing to do with environmental protection and everything to do with who makes what announcement on election night 2024.

Lawrence Kadish serves on the Board of Governors of Gatestone Institute.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19126/podesta-watchdog

Title: PA: A moment of Dem integrity against vote fraud?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 17, 2022, 07:06:29 PM

DEM BUSTED FOR ELECTION FRAUD… AFTER ELECTION… PA Gov. Elect Josh Shapiro Arrests Democratic Consultant For ‘Wide Scale’ Ballot Fraud

Democratic Pennsylvania Governor-elect Josh Shapiro charged a former campaign consultant Wednesday with “wide scale” voter fraud, according to authorities.

Philadelphia political consultant Rasheen Crews was arrested Wednesday and charged with forging signatures on nomination petitions so that he could get his Democratic clients on the ballot during the 2019 primary races in the city, Shapiro’s office announced.

“In advance of the 2023 municipal elections, this arrest is an important reminder that interfering with the integrity of our elections is a serious crime,” Shapiro said in a statement. “By soliciting and organizing the wide scale forgery of signatures, the defendant undermined the democratic process and Philadelphians’ right to a free and fair election. My office is dedicated to upholding the integrity of the election process across the Commonwealth, to ensure everyone can participate in Pennsylvania’s future.”

Authorities determined that several democratic candidates hired Crews to help them obtain the required amount of signatures needed to run in the primary races. Crews then allegedly recruited individuals who were invited to a hotel room where they were asked to write names, addresses and “forged signatures on multiple petitions.”

 

MORE…FREE BEACON: Pennsylvania AG Josh Shapiro Charges His Own Former Campaign Consultant with ‘Wide Scale’ Voter Fraud

According to an arrest affidavit, Shapiro’s office opened an investigation into Crews in September 2019. It is unclear why it took three years to bring charges against him.

Crews has consulted for dozens of state and local candidates over the years, campaign finance disclosures show. Shapiro’s attorney general campaign paid Crews $2,000 in 2016, according to the Pennsylvania campaign finance database.

Crews’s clients denied knowledge of the forgery scheme, according to the affidavit. Crews allegedly hired individuals to forge signatures to get his clients placed on Democratic primary ballots for municipal elections in Philadelphia. He had the ballot petitions notarized and then filed with the Pennsylvania Department of State.

Title: Boebart recount
Post by: ccp on November 18, 2022, 07:20:50 AM

out of 326 + thousand votes Boebart leads by 551

very strange
how close these races are
almost as if the libs know exactly how many ballots to drop off to squeak ahead

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/lauren-boebert-adam-frisch-house/2022/11/17/id/1096899/

how many times to we get burned in this situation
though we did win big in Florida in 2000......by a pubic hair
of course that was ONLY because it was before ballot harvesting and mail in ballots etc
to the nth degree

Title: Re: Boebart recount
Post by: DougMacG on November 18, 2022, 08:56:13 AM

You can't do a massive mail in vote drop in Aspen the way you might in Denver or Phoenix.

Take a look at her district, the jerry meandered western half of Colorado is a mix of the old west and rich liberals buying up the most beautiful outdoor areas.
http://boebert.house.gov/about/our-district

The older towns like Craig and Grand Junction and the ranchers who live in the open spaces are now Republican.  Vail used to be considered conservative but the rich liberals coming there now and buying and building in Aspen, Steamboat and Telluride are as Left as they come. Leadville (Doug's town) is an old style Democrat mining town.

Like the gold rush, legalized marijuana brought out the young, untethered, contributing to the changing demographics and politics of this rocky mountain state.  They come for the people, and the beauty and the climate, not just for the pot you can buy anywhere.

But the liberals in their beautiful mountain mansions are anti-development, they don't want more - "more scars upon the land", as John Denver put it, so growth is not infinite like it is on the front range.

Boebert is really bold and a little bit nutty, IIRC.  Some of this is about the candidate.

Pot legalization has gone nationwide and housing prices and rents have gone sky high all across Colorado.  I would have to guess growth has peaked there, but we lost a key state.

This district won't tell us much about the nation as a whole, and won't help us win back the state.

Title: funny how SBF net worth disappeared - on election day
Post by: ccp on November 20, 2022, 08:45:49 AM

https://heartlandernews.com/2022/11/14/democrats-second-largest-donor-sam-bankman-frieds-net-worth-plummets-94-after-his-company-ftx-collapses/

one article claims at its peak FTX worth 26 billion
and "at least " 40 million donated to Democrats ......

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2022, 02:11:54 PM

Helluva coincidence.

Title: Serious Read: "Votes require people, ballots require systems"
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 20, 2022, 04:14:23 PM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/11/how_wisconsin_streetfighters_disrupted_a_democrat_ballotgathering_system.html

Title: Ga. Judge allows early voting and ballot harvesting
Post by: ccp on November 21, 2022, 07:12:11 AM

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/win-democrats-georgia-judge-allows-early-voting-senate-runoff-saturday-rcna57983

Title: GA-- overlooked memory card changes outcome
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2022, 08:11:52 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/uncounted-votes-on-overlooked-memory-card-flips-election-in-georgia_4875156.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&src_src=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-11-21&src_cmp=mb-2022-11-21&utm_medium=email&est=eY%2BZcN3arNP4OdFqYCC1Jv4a145ID6TiJQq4%2BU2ZE8WeZ0TbkwrSEz0ciUVFmVZLNX6A

Title: More on AZ Gov race
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2022, 08:13:08 AM

second

https://www.theepochtimes.com/arizonas-election-integrity-unit-demands-answers-from-maricopa-county-over-election-day-problems_4874697.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&src_src=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-11-21&src_cmp=mb-2022-11-21&utm_medium=email&est=YVZ44kwy4RL975GQeK0r0NXDvUvxxAjvhN4vVnvDzed%2BrUx66bMu5iUjkyAs1pOOVHnk

https://www.theepochtimes.com/kari-lake-says-she-will-become-governor-after-attorney-generals-letter_4875040.html?utm_source=Morningbrief&src_src=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2022-11-21&src_cmp=mb-2022-11-21&utm_medium=email&est=Tq1WRvJU86Az54RUfUkYHY2SeO6OKSt2I9Oj1j8ea%2FYVXmo3mXp8sVM%2BpTYsU9QSypYA

https://dailycaller.com/2022/11/21/maricopa-maricopa-tabulator-ballot-memo/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking&pnespid=tKI8USZeZLgLwanY_Tq1D8_Us0_oVJBwIbLhzfd2rEFm4EHjHEh6ujSkPOCdFk6KrtDGavpS

Title: WI: Streetfighters disrupt Dem ballot harvesting system
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2022, 08:14:30 AM

third

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/11/how_wisconsin_streetfighters_disrupted_a_democrat_ballotgathering_system.html

Title: no front license plates on the ballot harvesters dropping off the ballots
Post by: ccp on November 21, 2022, 11:49:32 AM

I assume this was from Arizona :

https://republicbrief.com/ballot-box-dropoffs-video-from-maricopa-county-raises-serious-questions-in-tight-az-election/

https://law.justia.com/codes/arizona/2005/title28/02354.01.html#:~:text=(b)%20One%20plate%20on%20the,or%20is%20canceled%20or%20revoked.

Title: despite Repubs having 71% turnout to 17 % election day votes were counted even
Post by: ccp on November 22, 2022, 02:13:52 PM

https://republicbrief.com/breaking-kari-lake-delivers-message-to-arizona-and-all-americans-on-botched-and-broken-november-8-election/

Title: AZ gov race still up in the air
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 22, 2022, 04:08:51 PM

Red Pill News posted a video to playlist Red Pill Report.
18h  ·
The Arizona Attorney General is refusing to certify the 2022 gubernatorial election until Maricopa County provides answers to several questions about mechanical failures that took place at several polling locations on election day. Who knows what happens next.
To keep big tech happy, below is context from competing sources.
PolitiFact asserts that the tabulator and printing issues had no effect on the outcome.
https://www.politifact.com/.../no-maricopa-vote.../
Washington Post asserts, counter to Kari Lake's claim that half of locations experienced issues, that issues existed at only 25 percent of locations.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../problems-with-voting.../



https://www.theepochtimes.com/mohave-county-delays-certifying-arizona-election-results-in-protest_4877875.html?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2022-11-22&src_cmp=gv-2022-11-22&utm_medium=email&est=XmWwkGt%2BLbZLLHJB9ym3A73yrs0dqGCEkLSMg7BuN%2F98JRn9OlkwcGs4irupsubcm5Zn

Title: WT: Some Reps calling to embrace ballot harvesting
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 23, 2022, 04:23:32 PM

Let’s fight back: GOP activists want more ballot harvesting after Election Day dud


In this June 9, 2020, file photo election workers process mail-in ballots during a nearly all-mail primary election in Las Vegas. As President Donald Trump&#39;s reelection campaign challenged Nevada&#39;s new voting law in court, the president and Republicans argued the rules would facilitate fraud and illegal voting. Chief among their volley of criticism was the law&#39;s provision allowing “ballot harvesting.&amp;quot; The Nevada lawsuit highlighted a practice that has long fueled Republicans&#39; suspicions about the dangers of mail-in voting. (AP Photo/John Locher) **FILE**

In this June 9, 2020, file photo election workers process mail-in ballots during a nearly all-mail primary election in Las Vegas. As President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign challenged Nevada’s new voting law in court, the president and Republicans argued the ... more >

By Kerry Picket - The Washington Times - Updated: 5:25 p.m. on Wednesday, November 23, 2022
Republican candidates and conservative activists are embracing the long-shunned election strategy of ballot harvesting after the party got defeated again by Democrats who use that game plan.

This year, it became clearer that Republicans won in places where they competed with Democrats’ ballot harvesting operations.

Ballot harvesting — when a third party collects completed ballots from voters and delivers them in bulk to election officials — was long opposed by Republicans, who said it was ripe for fraud.

Reps. Mike Garcia and Michelle Steele, California Democrats, said they couldn’t afford to stay on the sidelines while Democrats reaped the benefits of ballot harvesting.

Both of them won reelection with the help of their campaigns’ ballot harvesting initiatives.

Mr. Garcia said ballot harvesting is the final part of an ongoing strategy of voter contact.

“It’s not necessarily about harvesting; it’s about getting the vote,” he told The Washington Times.

He treats his campaigns as long-term courtships, he said, by deploying volunteers in communities for two years before an election and intensifying door-knocking as early voting and Election Day draw near.

“So we rely on several institutions. Some of the churches have helped us in that regard. We have multiple drop boxes, obviously, throughout the county that serve as very effective ways to have people drop off their ballot in a very convenient way,” he said.

Among the 31 states where voters authorize others to cast ballots on their behalf, nine restrict the number of ballots an authorized individual can return and four cap the period of time those ballots can remain in the authorized person’s possession, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

These prohibitions were established out of concern that providing the convenience of returning ballots could evolve into pressuring people to vote a particular way.

Republican activists celebrated the party’s advances with ballot harvesting even if the results of the midterm elections were disappointing in some respects, including the failure to win the Senate majority.

“The House of Representatives is GOP-controlled thanks to how we performed in states with the most liberal ballot harvesting and vote-by-mail laws — New York, Oregon, California. We can master this system. Democrats are praying that we refuse to try,” Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk said in a post on Twitter.

“I miss politics where the better arguments and the hardest working candidates won elected office,” he said. “Now it’s a matter of which political machine can capture the most ballots in a 30-day window. So be it, we will now have to beat the left at the game.”

Mr. Kirk is not alone in his thinking. The Federalist’s CEO and co-founder, Sean M. Davis, said in a tweet that Republicans blaming midterm results on “candidate quality” and former President Donald Trump are just putting up a “smokescreen for the GOP getting its bell rung on ballot harvesting and the base mechanics of electioneering.”

He added, “The *one thing* that’s the actual job of the party establishment is the one thing it refused to do.”

Harmeet K. Dhillon, chairwoman of the Republican National Lawyers Association, responded to Mr. Davis by saying, “The party establishment is fine doing this. The base doesn’t like it. We do ballot harvesting in CAGOP and get attacked by ‘election integrity’ groups. You can dislike the law and work to change it, but it’s silly to leave votes on the table.”

A Republican National Committee spokesman said it is sticking to its policy of opposing ballot harvesting but is leaving wiggle room for candidates.

“Republicans also know we must play by the rules set out by each state and will leave no stone unturned to win as many races as possible up and down the ballot,” the RNC said in a statement to The Times.

The RNC prevailed with the 2021 Supreme Court ruling of Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee to uphold a ban on ballot harvesting in Arizona. The RNC also partnered with the California Republican Party to drive up voter turnout via different ballot collection methods.

American Conservative Union Chairman Matt Schlapp said part of the problem with the term “ballot harvesting” is that it is not clearly defined.

“Ballot harvesting is a completely corrupt process that Republicans should reject. That being said, as we know, it’s been made legal,” Mr. Schlapp said. “In some ways, you can say it’s always been legal because you always had people who were handicapped or people who were older, who needed assistance.

“The law never meant to say that you can’t vote if you have difficulties and, of course, as the left does with everything, they run a Mack truck through any kind of little exception,” he said.

Mr. Schlapp encouraged Republicans to engage in ballot harvesting where the practice is legal if it is the only way to defeat Democrats.

“It’s kind of like a business that deals with a corrupt tax code. It can yell about the tax code … but in the end, it has to follow the tax code and take advantage of the tax code,” he said. “And even businesses that take advantage of tax deductions they find abhorrent and immoral, but they still do it.”

• Kerry Picket can be reached at kpicket@washingtontimes.com.

Title: Illegal aliens and foreign diplomats to vote in DC?!?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 23, 2022, 07:59:48 PM

Noncitizen Bill Makes Aliens and Diplomats D.C. Voters
Congress can stop a law that gives the franchise to any adult 30-day district resident.
By The Editorial Board


Nov. 23, 2022 6:40 pm ET

Hard as it is to believe, the mayor of Washington, D.C., might soon be elected with votes from illegal immigrants or the staff at the Chinese embassy. Last month the D.C. City Council passed a bill to expand the franchise in local elections to any adult with 30 days of residency. Mayor Muriel Bowser did not sign or veto it, so the bill was officially enacted Monday without her signature.

A few jurisdictions have moved to let noncitizens vote in local races, but the D.C. plan stands out, given how it follows progressive ideas to a bizarre conclusion. New York City passed a noncitizen voting law that a court ruled this year was a violation of the state Constitution. But that proposal at least required noncitizen voters to have U.S. work authorization. No such limitation appears in the D.C. bill, meaning illegal aliens and foreign college students would be able to vote, and that’s not all.

“There’s nothing in this measure to prevent employees at embassies of governments that are openly hostile to the United States from casting ballots,” the Washington Post reported. A writer at the lefty New Republic agreed with that assessment: “A Russian diplomat could live their entire life in Moscow or St. Petersburg, take a job as a cultural attaché at Russia’s D.C. Embassy in August 2024, move into their new apartment that September, and cast a ballot in D.C.’s local elections that November.”

It reads like a bad parody of progressive decadence. Try to imagine American diplomatic personnel showing up to cast ballots for the mayor of Beijing or Moscow. Beyond that, the standard objections to noncitizen voting apply. It weakens the incentive to naturalize. Only U.S. citizens can vote in federal races, so including noncitizens in local races would force election officials to manage two voter lists and two sets of ballots. It’s begging for a fiasco.

These arguments didn’t persuade the D.C. City Council, which passed the bill 12-1 on first reading. Because the district is a federal enclave, acts of the council are subject to review by Congress, and the bill now goes to Capitol Hill. Lawmakers have 30 legislative days to object via a joint resolution.

Republican Sens. Tom Cotton and Ted Cruz have said they will seek to block the noncitizen voting proposal. Will Democrats stand in the way of that attempt? Let’s see the roll call.

Perhaps this is also a moment to think bigger. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has suggested “a constitutional amendment, a U.S. constitutional amendment, that only American citizens vote in our elections.” A 2024 presidential candidate who takes up that call might find a receptive public.

As for D.C., if the passage of this bill with little dissent reflects the rest of its governance, maybe Congress is overdue to consider some deeper reforms in how America’s capital city is run.

Title: AZ: Kari Lake files lawsuit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 24, 2022, 07:42:56 AM

‘They’re Trying to Run Out the Clock:’ Kari Lake Files 1St Lawsuit After Election
By Zachary Stieber November 24, 2022 Updated: November 24, 2022biggersmaller Print


Arizona Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake on Nov. 23 filed a lawsuit against Maricopa County.

Lake sued Stephen Richer, the county’s recorder, and other officials in Arizona Superior Court. She’s asking the court to compel the officials to promptly produce records on the administration of the midterm elections, which featured widespread issues in the state’s largest county.

“Given instances of misprinted ballots, the commingling of counted and uncounted ballots, and long lines discouraging people from voting, as demonstrated in the attached declarations, these records are necessary for Plaintiff to determine the full extent of the problems identified and their impacts on electors,” the 19-page suit states.

Maricopa County officials have acknowledged that tabulators across many polling sites stopped working properly on election day. Among the advised solutions was voters placing their ballots into a box to be counted later. Declarations attached to the new suit from poll observers say that workers mixed counted and uncounted ballots in the same container at the end of the night.

Another solution to the tabulator problem was a voter checking out of a site and utilizing a mail-in ballot. To try to figure out the extent of the problems, the Lake campaign on Nov. 15 requested information such as all records related to voters who checked into a site and who also submitted a ballot by mail. The campaign sent another request on Nov. 16. None of the records have been produced yet, which violates Arizona law that public record requests must be fulfilled “promptly,” the suit states.

“We need information from Maricopa County,” Lake said on Steve Bannon’s “War Room.” “They ran the shoddiest election ever, in history, and we want some information. We’re on a timeline, a very strict timeline when it comes to fighting this botched election. And they’re dragging their feet. They don’t want to give us the information, so we’re asking the courts to force them to give us the information.”

At present, Lake’s opponent Katie Hobbs, a Democrat who serves as Arizona’s secretary of state, is ahead in the race. Maricopa County is scheduled to canvass the results on Nov. 28, with the state following on Dec. 5. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey this week said he’s working to help Hobbs transition to become governor.

The suit asks the court to compel the county to produce the records prior to the canvassing. “This deadline (or its substantial equivalent) is, under the circumstances presented, necessary to ensure that vital public records are furnished promptly and that apparent deficiencies can be remedied before canvassing of the 2022 general election,” it says.

Maricopa County did not return requests for comment on a different lawsuit filed this week by Abe Hamadeh, the Republican candidate for state attorney general, and the Republican National Committee. Its offices were closed on Thursday for Thanksgiving.


Attorney General
The office of Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, recently requested information from Thomas Liddy, the chief of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office’s Civil Division, after receiving hundreds of complaints about issues related to the midterms.

“These complaints go beyond pure speculation, but include first-hand witness accounts that raise concerns regarding Maricopa’s lawful compliance with Arizona election law,” Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Wright wrote. “Furthermore, statements made by both Chairman Gates and Recorder Richer, along with information Maricopa County released through official modes of communication appear to confirm potential statutory violations of title 16.”

The information indicated that the county did not uniformly administer the election, as is required by state and federal law, and that poll workers weren’t trained to check out voters who left sites where the tabulators weren’t working right, she added.

Wright requested the information on or before the county submits its canvass to the secretary of state because the issues “relate to Maricopa County’s ability to lawfully certify election results.”

Bill Gates, the Republican chairman of the county’s Board of Supervisors, said in a statement that the county would not delay the canvass.

“Prior to the canvass, the County will respond to a letter from the Arizona Attorney General’s Office requesting information about the administration of the November General Election,” he said at the time. “Board members received this letter on Saturday night and had a team working on a response all day Sunday, even as staff continued counting votes. We look forward to answering the AG’s questions with transparency as we have done throughout this election.”

Brnovich’s office has not indicated that the county has provided the information, nor has the county said it handed over the information.

Lake said on “War Room” that the county is “trying to run out the clock,” referring to the looming canvass.

Not the ‘Main Case’
At least one other lawsuit is in the works, according to Lake.

“This is not our main case. When our main case drops, they will hear it,” she said.

Lake reiterated that whistleblowers are coming forward and that officials “better think long and hard” before certifying the election in light of the widespread issues that unfolded in Maricopa County.

The forthcoming suit may cite findings from nearly a dozen Republican attorneys who observed the election at Maricopa County sites and attested to the tabulator failures being more widespread than county officials presented.

The issues led to “substantial voter suppression,” attorney Mark Sonnenklar wrote in a memorandum summarizing the findings. Since Republicans voted in larger numbers on the day than Democrats, “such voter suppression would necessarily impact the vote tallies for Republican candidates much more than the vote tallies for Democrat candidates,” he added.

Title: Noncitizen Bill Makes Aliens and Diplomats D.C. Voters Congress can stop a law t
Post by: ccp on November 24, 2022, 09:49:20 AM

"These arguments didn’t persuade the D.C. City Council, which passed the bill 12-1 on first reading. Because the district is a federal enclave, acts of the council are subject to review by Congress, and the bill now goes to Capitol Hill. Lawmakers have 30 legislative days to object via a joint resolution."

of course
bill passes and 30 days are up just before Repubs take over Congress.

what has happened to this country ?

this should be a scandal all over the media

 :x

Title: NEWSMAX backs down from claims on Dominion
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 24, 2022, 12:12:33 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pro-trump-newsmax-releases-2-minute-video-clarifying-claims-of-election-fraud/vi-AA14trFI?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=2f4e1662588944c69c16d3600eb11f02&category=foryou

Title: Election deniers won big!!!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 27, 2022, 02:08:05 PM

Well played!

https://dailycaller.com/2022/11/27/opinion-election-deniers-won-big-in-the-midterms-but-theres-a-catch-deroy-murdock/?utm_medium=email&pnespid=tKhtDy5XJaoG1PTQrDG3T8yX4Bm0CZt9NvS.x.NkrRtmtf2ViEMiuO2ULqjxsUg4joS868qV

Title: AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 28, 2022, 07:34:04 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-in-ariz-pa-counties-decline-to-certify-midterm-election-results/ar-AA14Fm1N?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=520d6e3448314e5bbea07cf20593c8eb

Title: Maricopa certifies
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 29, 2022, 05:07:29 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/maricopa-county-votes-to-certify-election-results_4891323.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-11-29-1&src_cmp=breaking-2022-11-29-1&utm_medium=email&est=Q0qJyZTf6Puq%2FIgWqVZ%2BbUPK2g8Gp9O%2BAUBPw3w%2FRht2H8slM%2BYmS1AYlFPMnL37h7Rt

Title: AZ: Lake fights on
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 29, 2022, 07:38:16 PM

second

https://www.theepochtimes.com/kari-lake-doesnt-concede-after-maricopa-county-certifies-results_4892882.html?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2022-11-29&src_cmp=gv-2022-11-29&utm_medium=email&est=asBMiFToiwN0wDlsWpH4OU6l3QxTL3jOMDiayWzjoyNqtUiXr4M6Vn9VOaRPVZli7j0k

Title: WSJ: Kari Lake is the New Stacey Abrams
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 01, 2022, 07:11:46 PM

Kari Lake Is the New Stacey Abrams
If the election was a ‘sham,’ how did other Republicans win?
By The Editorial BoardFollow
Dec. 1, 2022 6:55 pm ET


What Kari Lake wants the public to forget is that she lost the Arizona gubernatorial race by 17,116 ballots, or 0.7 percentage point, which is outside of recount range. She’s now calling the election a “sham.” Congrats, Ms. Lake, you’ve earned the 2022 Stacey Abrams Sore Loser Award.

Election Day in Arizona included real problems in Maricopa County, home to Phoenix and more than half the state’s population. But it simply isn’t believable that these snafus cost Ms. Lake the election. How did she perform in Maricopa specifically, compared with other Republicans?

Ms. Lake received 77,342 fewer votes than GOP state Treasurer Kimberly Yee.

Ms. Lake received 39,165 fewer votes than the combined GOP U.S. House candidates.

Ms. Lake received 23,901 fewer votes than GOP county prosecutor Rachel Mitchell.

These figures are especially striking because voter interest wanes down the ballot. Compared with the Governor’s race, 78,000 fewer people voted for local prosecutor. Yet Ms. Mitchell still won more raw ballots than Ms. Lake.

If granular numbers tell the story better, the Arizona Republic points to a Maricopa precinct called Bayshore, where it says Republicans have an 11-point registration advantage. The state’s three Trumpiest politicians all lost the precinct. Ms. Lake garnered 2,003 votes. Senate aspirant Blake Masters took 1,911. Secretary of State nominee Mark Finchem had 1,877.


Ms. Yee won Bayshore with 2,229 votes, 11% more than Ms. Lake. Ms. Mitchell earned 2,080. A GOP state Senator had 2,120. The takeaway? Ms. Lake would have won if she hadn’t alienated mainstream Republicans. But she called John McCain a “loser” and echoed President Trump’s debunked 2020 fraud claims. Some GOP voters don’t want a Governor who will say almost anything for a pat on the head from Mr. Trump.

The screw-up in Maricopa was that many ballot printers were producing ink too light to be scanned by on-site tabulators, though it was “easily readable by the human eye,” the county says. A Washington Post analysis found that precincts with printer issues were 37% Republican, close to the 35% for the county overall. Some affected areas were heavily Democratic.

The county says the longest reported wait time at 85% of its 223 vote centers was under 45 minutes, and half were under 15 minutes. But at seven locations it was 80 to 115 minutes. This is not acceptable.

Maricopa should promise it won’t happen again and acknowledge that some potential voters could have been discouraged. On the other hand, the county’s model is flexible: Residents aren’t locked into a polling place and can cast a ballot at any voting site. Many people surely routed around bottlenecks.

As a fail-safe, ballots that won’t scan can go into a secure slot on the tabulator box, marked with a number 3, to be tallied later. Yet conspiratorial Republicans urged voters to refuse. “DO NOT PUT YOUR BALLOT IN ‘BOX 3,’” tweeted Arizona GOP Chair Kelli Ward. In the end, 16,724 ballots went into those slots. The county says all were tabulated. Another 206 voters checked in at one site and cast a ballot at another.

Ms. Lake’s argument is that fed-up voters left the line or even stayed home. Perhaps some did, Democrats included: After all, Governor-elect Katie Hobbs won Maricopa, 51.1% to 48.6%. But how can Ms. Lake blame no-shows for her loss, when other GOP candidates in Maricopa outran her by tens of thousands of votes?

Arizona is waiting on Cochise County to certify its results, and then Ms. Lake is promising to challenge the election in court. We’ll see how that turns out. One of her claims is that Ms. Hobbs, as the current Secretary of State, was “the woman in charge of running her own election.” Where have we heard that one before? Oh, right, Stacey Abrams in Georgia in 2018

Title: Our thoughts on this?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2022, 05:50:37 AM

Republicans Need to Embrace Early Voting
Election Day matters less than it used to. Unless the GOP adapts, it is doomed to keep losing.
By Arthur Herman
Dec. 1, 2022 1:00 pm ET


Disappointment over the red wave that didn’t happen has led to soul-searching and recriminations among Republicans. Some blame Donald Trump, others Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy. Still others blame the Supreme Court’s reversal of Roe v. Wade. Republicans need to craft a new message or better package the old message. Republicans agree that they can turn things around before the 2024 election, but only if Mr. Trump doesn’t run—or only if he does.


But the GOP’s real problem wasn’t its message or the messengers. It was a more basic failure: not understanding or accepting how Americans today participate in elections. Early voting and mail-in balloting have irrevocably changed things. Election Day no longer counts as it once did. Yet Republicans continue to rely on a massive Election Day turnout to prevail, while conceding the rest of the electoral terrain to Democrats. When Democrats win, some Republicans blame election fraud or unfair practices instead of their own failure to adjust their ground game.

In fact, the more that Republicans decry mail-in ballots and early voting, and wish that somehow they could elect governors and state legislators who will bring back the good old days and the old rules, the more they miss an opportunity to seize the new electoral terrain from their opponents. If Republicans don’t recognize the new rules that shape elections, 2024 will be as disappointing as 2022, if not more so.

Forty-six states allow early in-person voting; 27 don’t require voters to justify using an absentee or mail-in ballot. Eight states, including Nevada and Oregon, conduct elections primarily by mail. Twenty-five states, including Florida, New York, and California, allow “ballot harvesting,” in which someone other than the voter hands in absentee or mail-in ballots. According to the Los Angeles Times, this year nearly 46 million voters cast their ballots before Election Day. That’s more than one-third (37%) of the total 122 million votes cast in the 2018 midterms, which was the highest midterm turnout rate since 1914.


TargetSmart, a political-data firm, calculated on Oct. 24 that 55% of those early voters were Democrats, while less than 34.5% were Republicans. In Pennsylvania in 2020, more than half the ballots cast were either mail-in or absentee. This year in Pennsylvania’s crucial Senate and gubernatorial contests, by Nov. 5 Democrats made up more than 80% of voters 18 to 29 who had voted early, while Republicans had barely 15%, with unaffiliated voters at 5%. Overall, the Washington Post estimated that one-third of all votes in the 2022 midterms would be cast early.

Republicans ignore early voting and mail-in balloting at their peril. According to Gallup, from 2010 to 2014 Republicans had the edge in early voting. But in the 2018 midterms, the GOP lead had slipped to 46% compared with 44.7% for Democrats. By the Biden-Trump election, the Democrats had a 54% to 32% advantage over Republicans, with 38% of independents voting before Election Day.

This suggests that Republican early voters, combined with a majority of their independent counterparts, could overwhelm the Democrats—but not if their candidates wait for Election Day to bring home the vote.


What can Republicans do to address the new electoral reality? First, make mail-in balloting an opportunity to flood the zone with sample ballots for registered voters. In Nevada, for example, every registered voter gets a mail-in ballot. Why not send a sample ballot to each a day or two earlier, with the GOP choices clearly marked and highlighted? Mail-in voting can be a powerful messaging opportunity. So can ballot harvesting, with GOP precinct workers gathering properly marked ballots from friends and neighbors.

Second, don’t wait for televised debates or TV ads to turn the tide in the election’s final days. The Pennsylvania Senate debate between Mehmet Oz and John Fetterman should have exposed the folly of this 1960s-style campaign strategy. Instead, the decisive platform for delivering messages is social media, operating in a longer time frame that fits with Americans’ new voting habits.

Richard Nixonshowed in 1968 how to use television to win elections by answering callers’ questions in a telethon. The next Republican president will be the one who understands how to use social media—not to berate and belittle opponents, let alone to discourage early voting as Mr. Trump did this cycle, but to build a compelling conservative narrative over the expanded timeline for voting.

Finally, after the 2008 election Republicans set up a GOP Data Center, with information about voters’ habits and where they live. This trove could be used to create a new strategy for mobilizing traditional Republican voters with early-voting initiatives.

Republicans have been reluctant to abandon the traditions and mystique of Election Day. They should heed the wisdom of the French general who summed up the Charge of the Light Brigade: “It is magnificent, but it is not war.” Republican reliance on Election Day turnout is magnificent, but it isn’t politics in today’s America.

Mr. Herman is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 02, 2022, 06:24:10 AM

"Republicans have been reluctant to abandon the traditions and mystique of Election Day. They should heed the wisdom of the French general who summed up the Charge of the Light Brigade: “It is magnificent, but it is not war.” Republican reliance on Election Day turnout is magnificent, but it isn’t politics in today’s America."

yup

and that is one reason we usually lose

Title: Here is how they did the fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2022, 01:11:14 PM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/11/heres_how_they_did_it_realtime_election_fraud.html

Title: Our friend Rick, from two years ago
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 02, 2022, 01:21:09 PM

A smart friend writes:

If you don’t have sufficient internal controls over any process, there will be fraud.  The reasons why the chief executives of publicly traded companies must now certify their filed financial statements under penalty of perjury were the frauds at Enron, WorldCom and Global Crossing, among others.  Executives at those companies saw loopholes in the laws, gamed the system as it was back then, and took advantage of them.  To the detriment of their shareholders and the public.  In those cases, the number of people involved in the frauds was not widespread, but the amount of the fraud was widespread.  And the perpetrators rationalized their acts by things like, “We didn’t see any rule requiring us to do something different.”  “It was our professional judgment that we could capitalize those costs.”  “The auditors reviewed the numbers and didn’t say they were inaccurate.”  And even these new certifications did not stop channel stuffing at MiMedx, the massive fraud in Germany at Wirecard and the recent issues at Nikola.

The same issue has arisen in this year’s election.  There were not enough internal controls in place to safeguard the election against fraud because the system was designed for in-person voting.  A mail-in system was patched on top of it.  But just like the Patriot Act of 2001-02, no one thought through the wisdom and long range consequences of adding layers and telling them to mesh rather than designing a system to do just that.  When you have partisan elected Secretaries of State in charge of voting as well as locally elected Clerks or Election Supervisors, that is a recipe for fraud unless sufficient internal controls are implemented to restrain their natural competitive impulses.

The natural inclination of competitive people, whether in business or in politics, is to win.  That will cause some to cheat when they view it to be necessary for their success.  We saw that last election when a Republican candidate for House in NC hired a notorious cheater to solicit and collect absentee ballots.  The solution was a do-over for that House seat.  We also saw it in 1960 when JFK won in a manner similar to Biden appears to have won this year.  By that, I mean close in-State contests but no down ballot coattails for the winner along with allegations of voting fraud.  In 1960, it was an open secret that Richard Daley’s Chicago machine tipped the Illinois vote in favor of JFK with a number of dead people voting.  And there were many indications of fraud in West Virginia in 1960.  Nixon conceded rather than put the country through the ordeal of what we are going through now.  And that concession led to a different history.  Including JFK’s assassination.

We have an unsafe election system because various States made it that way and the various elected officials in charge of making it safe chose not to implement sufficient internal controls.  They chose not to purge their voter rolls of dead people.  They advocated for no identification.  They solicited voters to vote by mail.  They permitted political operatives to be out in the streets soliciting ballots.  They advocated for no signature verification.  The list goes on and on.  These people made these decisions for various reasons, but the most likely reasons were:  1) avoid political controversy to keep their jobs; and, 2) they thought their side could game the system to their advantage.  Notice that I have not called out one party here.

And, if you think all the motivations here are pure, then think about every redistricting battle that takes place after every census.  A lot of them, if not all of them, end up being challenged in court because the parties in power in each State are trying to game that system.  And that started just after the creation of our republic by Elbridge Gerry who drew the new districts for Massachusetts in 1810 and who later became Madison’s VP.

Whichever candidate wins the Electoral College in two weeks, this election is tainted because the people in charge in the various States at issue failed to install sufficient internal controls for a vote by mail system.  If we do not resolve to fix these issues and continue to vote by mail, then things will change irreparably for the worse because each losing side will rightfully believe that their candidate was cheated out of victory.

Rick

Title: Hobbs censoring Lake via Twitter
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 07, 2022, 11:17:08 AM

 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1599399706613923840

Title: vote fraud, AZ
Post by: DougMacG on December 10, 2022, 07:55:59 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/12/huge-runbeck-whistleblower-reveals-chain-custody-298942-maricopa-county-ballots-delivered-runbeck-election-day-not-exist-employees-allowed-add-family-members-ballots/

Title: The electoral process, Georgia
Post by: DougMacG on December 11, 2022, 07:16:55 AM

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-gops-lost-vote-harvest-georgia-midterms-election-voter-turnout-gop-trump-candidates-mail-in-absentee-early-11670536141

Paywall, sorry.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 11, 2022, 08:57:42 AM

leave it to anything will name Wall Street on it to wring every dime out of you.

and them likely sell out data to others to make even more profit.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on December 11, 2022, 09:34:01 AM

I like Kim Strassel and they used to put most of the opinion page free on the internet.  Then new owners found out there's no other reason to buy their paper.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 11, 2022, 08:16:38 PM

I will be back in NC on my home computer in a few days and can post it then.  Feel free to remind me.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, AZ, Lake lawsuit
Post by: DougMacG on December 12, 2022, 06:56:34 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/12/showdown_in_arizona_will_kari_lake_prevail_in_her_election_lawsuit.html

Title: "Election Day" is the law
Post by: DougMacG on December 12, 2022, 09:43:01 AM

"Election Day" is the law, Federal Law:

According to 2 U.S. Code § 7, "the Tuesday next after the 1st Monday in November, in every even numbered year," is the date for electing members of Congress and, quadrennially, per 3 U.S. Code § 1, presidential delegates to the Electoral College. These laws specify November — not October or September. Neither statute allows for voting on Halloween or just after Americans leave the sand dunes on Labor Day.

https://jewishworldreview.com/1222/murdock121222.php3

Title: Re: Electoral process, vote fraud, AZ, Lake lawsuit, update
Post by: DougMacG on December 13, 2022, 04:21:19 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on December 12, 2022, 06:56:34 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/12/showdown_in_arizona_will_kari_lake_prevail_in_her_election_lawsuit.html

Update:  Judge takes an interest/

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/12/13/huge-development-in-kari-lakes-election-lawsuit-n1653242

Title: Re: The electoral process, ranked choice, Georgia, NO!
Post by: DougMacG on December 14, 2022, 06:52:06 AM

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/12/12/georgia-secretary-of-state-brad-raffensperger-will-propose-ranked-choice-voting-to-state-legislature/

STOP THIS!

Title: AZ: Lots of info and details
Post by: DougMacG on December 14, 2022, 08:59:26 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/12/electionfraud_corruption_is_deeper_than_anyone_can_imagine.html

Lots of details and links here.

Title: AZ: OAN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 14, 2022, 12:26:09 PM

https://www.oann.com/video/oan-contribution/bobb-maricopa-county-recorder-collaborated-with-cisa-to-censor-election-information/

Title: AZ: Shocking Discrepancy found in Maricopa Vote Count
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 15, 2022, 08:37:20 AM

https://www.westernjournal.com/shocking-discrepancy-found-maricopa-vote-count-exactly-hobbs-needed-win-lawsuit/?fbclid=IwAR2rMePsWoGWKh2-Rvu8qPGLDDoJ7mvGulZ9DHxAr-wWDMBaxH2_EGEeqCs

ecember 14, 2022
Election-Fraud Corruption Is Deeper than Anyone Can Imagine
By Jack Gleason
Multiple polls conclude that upwards of 70 percent of Americans think our elections are filled with fraud.  But we're learning it's deeper and more organized than just a few thousand mules dropping fake ballots into election boxes.

The corruption involves both political parties.  Big Tech manipulates search engine results, and takes down "dangerous" websites.  With Elon Musk's revelations, we now see that our own FBI is working actively with Twitter to censor conservatives and silence dissenting speech.  It's next to certain that Twitter wasn't the only social media giant the FBI was giving orders to.  And the mainstream media are all in on ridiculing, dismissing, or attacking people willing to speak out.

Anyone who floats the idea that the Republican red wave disappeared because of poor GOP tactics, or inadequate candidates, is either stupid or part of this conspiracy.  In fact, it's an excellent "RINO detector"!

Any "conservative" news organization that is not focusing 100 percent on the corruption that has been unearthed in Maricopa County is complicit.

The left and their RINO allies, along with who-knows-how-many other corporate and foreign actors, have set up the most complicated electoral fraud system in history.  Every step of the voting process — from who is allowed to vote, how they vote, how the votes are tallied, to how the results are reported — is compromised.  They are so far into their corruption that being exposed is not an option.  They will do literally anything to avoid being caught.


A good place to start is with the voter rolls.

They are so rife with inaccuracies, full of outdated and blatantly false information, that no election can be considered safe.  The data are completely unsecured and can be manipulated at will.  And most efforts to clean up the rolls are either ignored or done so slowly or incompletely as to be useless.


One county in Arizona noted "42,000 changes to the election rolls within weeks of the election — most were illegal.  21,000 new voters added to the election rolls, within 29 days of the election — almost every one is illegal.  8,000 voters appear to live in a business — each one would be illegal.  1,951 people received ballots at one address, and then voted from a different address — every one is illegal.  The Republican candidate — with an 11-point lead in the polls — lost by around 21,000 votes to a woman who was afraid to debate her!"

Absentee ballots are the currency of election fraud.

When you can manipulate the voting rolls, you can easily create "floating ballots" in states where absentee ballots are mailed out to every voter.  Just change a digit in the ZIP code, and a corrupt postal worker can easily gather up those ballots when they return as undeliverable.  All you have to do is line up a buddy at the Post Office and send incorrectly addressed ballots to his ZIP code.


Another method is to change or delete box numbers for apartment buildings or college campuses.  Again, when they come back as undeliverable, they can be snapped up to be saved up for Election Day.  If it looks as though your candidate is losing by 2,000 votes, just fill in 2,500, and voilà: victory!

The addresses in the voter rolls need only be changed for a single day so the ballots can go to the wrong addresses, and the data are changed back.  "In a real-life example, this month, we found a county that changed 31,500 zip codes, yet the voter remained at the same address."


There's no way to know this is happening unless someone happens to download the manipulated data at the right time.  An almost undetectable crime.

Another type of phantom voter is someone on the rolls who hasn't voted in the last two or three elections.  Send an absentee ballot for him at a wrong address, and vote for him.  Heard cases where in-person voters are told on Election Day that they've already voted?  Their absentee ballot was filled out by someone else first.

More detail can be found at "How to steal an election."

The vote-counting process is completely insecure.

There's a great video from 2020 with over a million views, focusing on Michigan vote-tabulating procedures, which are similar in most of the rest of the country.  Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, MIT Ph.D., explains the issues affecting voting system accuracy and exposes a "Weighted Race Feature" in the actual user manual for "Global Election Systems" software that allows system operators to change votes by any percentage for any candidate.

This "feature" is present in almost all voting systems and is seen as early as 2001.

In one case, Ayyadurai's team analyzed early voting and Election Day voting in four counties in the 2020 Michigan election.  They concluded that in three major counties, Trump's votes were decreased by at least 69,000, and Biden's votes were increased by 69,000, using a computer algorithm within the voting machine software.

At the 21:00 mark, they explain how it happened.  In Michigan, you can vote by selecting individual candidates or simply choose to vote for one political party or the other.  Obviously, a precinct with a lot of Republican-party-line voters would also have a lot of Republicans chosen by the vote-in-each-contest voters.  But somehow, 2020 data showed that the more Republican-leaning the precinct, the more votes were different from the one-party voters vs. the individual voters — always in favor of Biden!  This demonstrates likely use of the weighted race feature, which was absent in a predominantly Democrat county.

Even more damning is that when the data are charted, the line is perfectly straight, and the slope of the line in each county is very similar to the others.  This could not happen without a mathematical formula being applied to the actual number of votes.

So what can be done?  Looking up individual entries on voter rolls, comparing them to local property records for non-existing addresses, and submitting changes to the local Boards of Elections would take hundreds of years.

Fractal computing to the rescue.

Now fraud-savvy groups are analyzing voter rolls and using "fractal computing" to compare them to other data — county property records that show the type of building at each address so a voter can't register if his address is a vacant lot or a convenience store, post office databases that show who has moved out of state, or a deceased voter who is listed as alive, then votes, then goes back to being deceased the next day.  What if a single house with one bathroom has 35 people listed as living there?

"One team in Wisconsin challenged almost 400,000 alleged phantoms.  A Georgia team, in one county, 37,000."

The one thing in common among the candidates victimized by this level of fraud is not that they are Republicans, but that they are MAGA conservatives.  It's clear that both parties use these tactics to favor Democrats and RINOs.

We need voter ID and permanent voter registration cards, publically viewable software, hand-marked paper ballots, and all data to be kept for public viewing.

If we expect the RINOs to actively work to end election fraud, we are just plain stupid.  We must insist on new leadership for the RNC, support opposition to Kevin McCarthy as speaker of the House, and hope that turtle McConnell is ousted as the Senate minority leader.  And do everything we can to support Kari Lake in her lawsuit to overturn the Arizona gubernatorial election.

Jack Gleason is a conservative political writer.  For other websites, to share inside information for important stories, article requests, or comments, contact him at jackgleason9@protonmail.com.

Title: PA County to recount 2020 vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 16, 2022, 10:08:16 AM

Pennsylvania County to Recount 2020 Election Results in 2023
By Beth Brelje December 15, 2022 Updated: December 15, 2022biggersmaller Print

0:00
4:12



1

Persistent questions from voters and a petition with 5,000 signatures have convinced the Lycoming County Commissioners in Pennsylvania to recount its 2020 election results.

Around the state, loosely organized groups of voters have been asking various counties for recounts from 2020.

“In our county, they approached our commissioners and leveled allegations that there were thousands of uncounted votes in our county based on what I believe are nonsense statistics,” Lycoming County Director of Elections Forrest Lehman told The Epoch Times.

Groups of 20-80 people started attending county meetings asking for the recount. The county showed various information to answer their questions, Lehman said, but voters still wanted a recount and gathered some 5,000 signatures to make that request.

“That’s when county commissioners decided, as the board of elections, that if there are 5,000 people who signed this petition and have this belief, then we need to hand count these ballots in order to restore public trust in the outcomes of our elections,” Lehman said.

The county has about 70,000 registered voters and a population of around 120,000, so to the commissioners, 5,000 is a lot of signatures, he said.

“This is not something we want to do after every election, but we need to do it once, at least, in order to prove once and for all that our voting system counts the votes accurately and that there were not thousands of uncounted votes that were hidden by an algorithm or some other nonsense like that,” Lehman said.

Electoral workers began processing ballots
Electoral workers began processing ballots at Northampton County Courthouse in Easton, Penn., on Nov. 3, 2020. (Kena Betancur/AFP via Getty Images)
Hand Count
Lycoming County votes by machine. Voters fill in ovals on paper to indicate the candidate they want, then the paper is fed into a scanning machine where an image of the ballot is captured, and the vote is counted. The paper ballot is saved in a secure location. The scanned count is stored on a removable USB device on the scanning machine in each precinct, Lehman explained.

When the polls close, all precincts take their USB device to election headquarters, where each USB dumps its information into the county machine, and ultimately those vote totals are given to the Department of State for statewide totals.

That is not how the recount will go.

Instead, around 40 county staff members will hand count the nearly 60,000 paper ballots. They will look at two 2020 races—U.S. president and Pennsylvania auditor.

“We chose the auditor general as the second contest for two reasons,” Lehman said. “It is on the front of the ballot along with president, so that’ll eliminate the need to flip every ballot over. The other reason we picked auditor general is because that was a statewide contest that was won by a Republican. Because obviously the presidential contest was won by a Democrat.”

The county wants to look at voter behavior and see how often people split their vote between parties.

“There has been an inability to believe that voters might have split their tickets. That they might have voted for a Democratic president, but then they turned around and voted for a Republican for other offices,” Lehman said. “There’s been an inability to believe that people might do those things. Whereas, I absolutely know that people do those things because I see the ballots.”

He does not expect recount results to be precisely the same as the original report.

“We don’t expect that any recount of that many ballots is going to match one-to-one with the voting system,” Lehman said. “We expected that there will be human errors committed during that hand count.” But they also don’t expect to be off by the thousands, he said.

The Department of State sent counties a letter in November advising that, although the two year retention schedule for 2020 ballots was over in November, 2022, counties should look at their individual situations and, if they are challenges over the 2020 election, consider keeping the ballots longer. Lycoming County Commissioners intent to keep the ballots through 2023, Lehman said.

The recount will start Jan. 9 and could take a week or more.

“We have to get back to people being able to accept the outcomes of elections,” Lehman said. “Even if your side loses. You can’t just love democracy when you win.

Title: GA: Raffensperger calls for
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 16, 2022, 04:12:23 PM

https://nationalfile.com/raffensperger-calls-for-ranked-choice-voting-lowering-runoff-threshold-in-georgia/

Title: The conservative case that Trump lost
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 19, 2022, 07:03:51 AM

https://lostnotstolen.org//wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Lost-Not-Stolen-The-Conservative-Case-that-Trump-Lost-and-Biden-Won-the-2020-Presidential-Election-July-2022.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Title: last minute out the door dem&never trumper legislation
Post by: ccp on December 21, 2022, 09:41:36 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/senators-confident-bill-to-block-election-subversion-will-become-law-212158562.html

Title: Electiion fraud deniers
Post by: DougMacG on December 22, 2022, 08:52:04 AM

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2022/12/19/the_big_d_in_the_democratic_party_is_denialism_148618.html#2

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on December 22, 2022, 09:09:47 AM

"The ‘Big D’ in the Democratic Party Is Denialism'

well written

so depressing how we are so powerless against the Lefts onslaught covered for and by the  MSM
which controls most of the airwaves......

Joe Scarborough is the biggest pig of all - used to be Republican ....... :-(

:cry:

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, AZ Trial
Post by: DougMacG on December 23, 2022, 11:03:43 AM

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/12/jack-clifford-lake-v-hobbs-day-2.php
------
Defense attorney, it's Republican voters fault for waiting until election day to vote.

Title: Electoral process, vote fraud, AZ verdict, appeal
Post by: DougMacG on December 24, 2022, 12:29:49 PM

https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-arizona-judge-rejects-kari-lakes-election-lawsuit-lake-to-appeal?utm_campaign=64501

Title: Re: Electoral process, vote fraud, AZ verdict, appeal
Post by: DougMacG on December 26, 2022, 05:11:39 PM

Quote from: DougMacG on December 24, 2022, 12:29:49 PM

https://thepostmillennial.com/breaking-arizona-judge-rejects-kari-lakes-election-lawsuit-lake-to-appeal?utm_campaign=64501

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/12/jack-clifford-lake-v-hobbs-the-ruling.php

Title: WT: 2022 a Year of Victories for Election Integrity (?!?)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 27, 2022, 08:47:43 AM

2022: A year of victories for election integrity

Yet there is still more work to be done

By J. Christian Adams

The 2022 elections are over, and we can all breathe a sigh of relief that they largely followed the rule of law. Compared with the COVID19-infected 2020 elections, 2022 was a breeze. Americans woke up to the vulnerabilities in election administration and sought improvements.

After 2020, smart states passed reforms to strengthen election security. Court victories also bolstered the rule of law in elections.

A big win for the rule of law occurred in Delaware. The Public Interest Legal Foundation, of which I am president, blocked the Department of Elections from enforcing mail voting and same-day voter registration.

Mail-in voting and same-day registration confl icted with the Delaware Constitution. The state constitution allows absentee voting only in certain enumerated circumstances, such as being ill. The Delaware Constitution also provides reasonable registration procedures, not walk-up no-verification voting on Election Day.

In legislative debate, Delaware Speaker of the House Peter Schwartzkopf quipped, “I don’t know whether [the law’s] constitutional or not constitutional, and neither do you guys or anybody else in here.” No kidding.

He went further: “The best way to get this thing done is to hear this bill, move forward, and let a challenge go to the courts and let them decide it.”

Decide they did. Days before ballots were mailed, the Delaware Supreme Court ruled that both laws were unconstitutional. This ruling effectively stopped a lawless election in Delaware.

In another major win for the rule of law, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled in July that drop boxes would be allowed only at the offices of election clerks. Our friends at the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty scored this win for the rule of law. The court said that the Wisconsin Elections Commission does not have the power to enact and change election statutes. That power belongs only to the Wisconsin Legislature.

In addition to victories for the rule of law, there were also victories for transparency in our elections. The Public Interest Legal Foundation won cases in North Carolina and in Pennsylvania to obtain records relating to foreigners registering and voting in our elections.

Foreigners participating in U.S. elections — either through glitches or deliberately — is a story the legacy media don’t want you to hear. But it is happening, and the vast majority of Americans care that it is happening.

Transparency matters. We know how to improve election administration only after we learn where it is breaking down. When Pennsylvania and North Carolina hide the facts about foreigners voting, it is impossible to fix these failures. It is also impossible to judge whether election officials adequately responded to the failures.

These victories were great steps that improved our election process in 2022. There is still much to be done, however, before the 2024 elections.

Many voter rolls across the country still contain thousands of duplicates, people who have moved or have died that need to be removed. We are currently in litigation with Michigan’s secretary of state for failing to remove over 25,000 deceased registrants from the voter roll, even after learning of the problems. Every deceased registrant is a problem, costing money to people who rely on lists and inviting far worse problems, especially in states where mail ballots are automatically mailed to every single registrant.

Voting by mail is the worst way to run an election. and states that allow it must enact safeguards to protect voting rights. This includes requiring some verification, such as requiring the unique voter number or driver’s license number of the registrant.

Vote-by-mail states must also require that all ballots arrive by Election Day. Americans deserve to know election results on election night, not two weeks later.

This year was filled with less chaos, but there is still more work to be done to improve the integrity of our elections.

J. Christian Adams is president of the Public Inter-est Legal Foundation, a former Justice Department attorney, and current commissioner on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

Title: WSJ: AZ: Kari lost
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 28, 2022, 05:21:28 AM

Kari Lake’s Election Challenge Falls Flat
What a sad end to eight years of GOP success under Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey.
By The Editorial Board


Dec. 27, 2022 6:33 pm ET

Unsuccessful political candidates are entitled to go to court, but if they don’t have real evidence, it’s an exercise in begging to lose again. That’s what happened in Arizona to Kari Lake, the Republican gubernatorial contender who fell short by 0.7 percentage point, or 17,117 votes, which is outside of recount range.

“A court setting such a margin aside, as far as the Court is able to determine, has never been done in the history of the United States,” state Judge Peter Thompson ruled on Christmas Eve. “No system on this earth is perfect,” he added, but Arizona’s voting was “more than sufficient to comply with the law and conduct a valid election.”

Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, had inexcusable problems with its ballot printers on Election Day, which contributed to long lines. But this was hardly the stuff of conspiracy theories. As Judge Thompson summarized the evidence, a county election technician testified that the most effective printer fix was “shaking the toner cartridge.” Other helpful measures included “letting the printers warm up” or “cleaning the corona wire.”

Some ballots were printed slightly too small, 19 inches instead of the usual 20 inches, which stopped the county’s tabulators from accepting them. Ms. Lake argued this must have been intentional and malicious, despite having no direct evidence. The county said that when technicians were trying to solve the toner problems, a few of them might have incorrectly set those printers on a mode called “shrink to fit.”


Yet too-small ballots were still tallied, Judge Thompson said: “Plaintiff’s own expert acknowledged that a ballot that was unable to be read at the vote center could be deposited by a voter, duplicated by a bipartisan board onto a readable ballot, and—in the final analysis—counted.” Although some Maricopa voters might have been dissuaded by lines, “there was no evidence at Trial” that anyone was “turned away or refused a ballot.”

Ms. Lake said she intends to appeal, but the evidence suggests that what really cost her the election was ticket-splitting. In Maricopa, Ms. Lake won 77,342 fewer votes than GOP state Treasurer Kimberly Yee; 39,165 fewer than the GOP’s U.S. House candidates; and 23,901 fewer than a local GOP prosecutor. The same trend is evident in precinct data.

Maricopa County asked the court to impose sanctions on Ms. Lake, arguing she “decided well before the election that if the results did not favor her, she would deny that they were legitimate.” On Christmas, Ms. Lake tweeted an article claiming the judge’s ruling probably “was ghostwritten” by “left-wing attorneys.” She later deleted the tweet. Judge Thompson on Tuesday declined the request for sanctions but ordered Ms. Lake to cover about $33,000 in expert witness fees for the defense.

Judges also have rejected lawsuits from Mark Finchem, the Republican who lost the Secretary of State race by 4.8 points, or 120,208 votes, as well as Abe Hamadeh, who lost the close Attorney General’s race by 511 ballots. What a sad and ignominious end to eight years of successful GOP governance in Arizona. Gov. Doug Ducey has cut taxes and expanded school choice, while winning re-election in 2018 by 14 points.

That’s a record that would stand up well on a presidential debate stage in 2024. Alas, Arizonans will have to fight for the next four years to keep Mr. Ducey’s work from being undone.

Title: Electoral process, FBI
Post by: DougMacG on January 07, 2023, 03:57:28 PM

https://www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2023/01/image014-copy.png

Title: Brazil-- Bolsonaro supporters storm
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 08, 2023, 01:33:50 PM

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/bolsonaro-supporters-storm-brazilian-congress-supreme-court-over-election-results/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=breaking&utm_campaign=newstrack&utm_term=30189778

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 13, 2023, 05:39:29 AM

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-push-amend-constitution-16-year-olds-vote

All the while teachers unions form teaching subjects that enforce Democrat policies only.

"It’s our younger generation that will face the long-term consequences of our political challenges – like stymied action on climate change, gun violence, and reproductive rights," said Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. "We need to defend their right to vote."

Notice there is nothing in there about 32+ trillion in the national debt due to infinite spending initiatives.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on January 13, 2023, 06:23:33 AM

16 year olds CAN vote.  When they're 18, like everybody else.

We should repeal the 18 year old.  We have new information their brains aren't fully developed until 26.

Minimum drinking age is 21.  Cannot buy legal cannibis in Colorado untill 21.  Why is that?
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/minimum-legal-drinking-age.htm#:~:text=The%20MLDA%20in%20the%20United,varied%20from%20state%20to%20state.

At 16 and 18, their developing brains are still attending indoctrination, not out thinking on their own.

Great, divisive issue for Democrats.  Get them hating conservatives even more before they do go out to vote.

What do kids know about world affairs and US economics at 16?  Only what they're told.

We already know educational institutions don't allow conservative views.

Title: Candidate's wife caught vote cheating
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 13, 2023, 09:32:56 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republican-candidate-s-wife-arrested-charged-with-casting-23-fraudulent-votes-for-her-husband-in-the-2020-election/ar-AA16hJmX?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=09cd6edae4454656894b0104ebc75143

Title: Kari Lake more election fraud evidence to come forward soon
Post by: ccp on January 14, 2023, 01:06:32 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/01/watch-know-stole-election-evidence-coming-forth-kari-lake-joins-bannons-war-room-discuss-arizona-court-appeals-setting-conference-historic-election-lawsuit/

hopefully , this time it has real juice in the meat

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 14, 2023, 01:50:03 PM

I had high hopes for Kari-- gutsy, witty, good-looking, and articulate.   Since then on the election fraud issue she has been portrayed with effect as Trump 2.0. 

It would be awesome that if/when the facts come out, she is vindicated.

Title: Recount in PA: All is well
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 17, 2023, 07:37:28 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/pennsylvania-county-completes-hand-recount-of-2020-presidential-election_4983090.html?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2023-01-16&src_cmp=gv-2023-01-16&utm_medium=email&est=gNR8%2FYmINMnEwc5wG%2BHN6IiRSLSveyeEap6G%2BE5m%2BYBmPK23ZZkdQ1fLYQ5pkQ0xFKT6

Title: how does this guy afford endless cyclic prime commercials on newsmax fox etc
Post by: ccp on January 20, 2023, 10:17:18 AM

https://www.yahoo.com/news/done-nothing-wrong-mike-lindell-000500501.html

Title: VT Supremes get camel's nose of non-citizens voting into the tent.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2023, 03:54:53 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/vermont-supreme-court-okays-noncitizen-voting-in-municipal-elections_5000375.html?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2023-01-21&src_cmp=gv-2023-01-21&utm_medium=email&est=jgjw%2BzFfQrtWAcWgYaHvVpwciv60dPNsOr5uNNnYTlaR9V%2BCucpoOpITL1s4u5IHl%2F2g

Title: OMG
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 21, 2023, 07:34:02 PM

https://nypost.com/2023/01/20/beat-up-box-of-important-docs-was-out-in-open-at-joe-bidens-house-laptop-reveals/?fbclid=IwAR3q6Upt8SHvn0NRrgiyU8ACvw7OaUfACaQ9CL82BlGbvT-HNgS4IJR54YU

Title: Why Kari Lake lost
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 23, 2023, 07:32:08 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kari-lake-lost-because-nearly-40-000-maricopa-county-voters-cast-ballots-for-other-gop-candidates-but-not-her/ar-AA16Dhdh?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=a92936610f194fb3927be05522964d7c

Title: so exactly why did some repubs not vote for her?
Post by: ccp on January 23, 2023, 09:38:05 AM

https://www.newsweek.com/kari-lake-lost-arizona-governor-election-republican-voters-1775682

I tried to look more at sources (and I find Newsweek and MSFT - liberal sources )

and Arizona Central .

but no definite identification of the reasons why .

some referral to her calling out RINOs only
very vague and incomplete conclusion or "analysis" to me.

Title: Re: so exactly why did some repubs not vote for her?
Post by: DougMacG on January 23, 2023, 01:02:14 PM

Some thoughts:

1. The term Arizona Republican has meant centrist moderate for decades.  cf. Mccain, Flake, Sandra Day O'Connor.

2. Arizona's rapid population growth is made up of people from other places with other voting habits, people from Minnesota, for example. That is why it moved left and became a politically divided state.

3. They omit the other possible reason (cheating) she lost.

4. We heard the good about Kari Lake but they heard the bad, that she's a batsh*t crazy election denier, and supporter of he who shall not be named.

5. To attack 'RINOs' while in a fight to unite is of questionable efficacy.

Title: AZ: Kari Lake claims 40K illegal votes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 25, 2023, 08:18:42 AM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/kari-lake-40k-ballots-illegally-counted-in-gov-election/

Title: Stacey Abrams not to be found
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 25, 2023, 08:26:56 AM

second

https://dailycaller.com/2023/01/24/abrams-silent-new-poll-0-black-georgians-trouble-voting/?utm_medium=email&pnespid=u_c7ATRcbK8ZgKnBumisCpGGvR2.RIcrN.Klzu12vBFm.0JdBBbm8EA.zudPbRBCuxqWL4DB

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 25, 2023, 08:50:38 AM

AZ: Kari Lake claims 40K illegal votes

look at the signatures

don't need to be this guy to see the sigs DO NOT MATCH

https://www.beckett-authentication.com/steve-grad

outrageous!
where is the criminal investigation ?

the Dem governor who was credited for the victory will simple ignore this.
DOJ will ignore this.

media will scream election denier
:x

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 25, 2023, 09:44:24 AM

My sense of things is that people have already formed their opinions and have moved on. 

She has asserted the 40K, but where is the presentation of her proof? e.g. in a major serious video?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 25, 2023, 10:19:52 AM

maybe I jumped the gun

how does she know it is 40K

are there these many signatures that do not match

if true why cannot this not be demonstrated?
is she being blocked from doing so?

Title: AZ: Some specificity at last?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 27, 2023, 09:16:16 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/01/ready-exclusive-arizona-state-senator-wendy-rogers-reacts-newly-discovered-signature-verificatio/

Title: AL: Does this make sense?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 29, 2023, 04:35:59 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republican-secretary-of-state-s-first-act-in-office-withdrawing-alabama-from-voter-registration-organization/ar-AA16Qacv?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=fca3e6d1d3614ee997cbdda0eb351b87

Title: Re: AL: Does this make sense? Problems of the ERIC system
Post by: G M on January 29, 2023, 08:20:40 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 29, 2023, 04:35:59 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republican-secretary-of-state-s-first-act-in-office-withdrawing-alabama-from-voter-registration-organization/ar-AA16Qacv?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=fca3e6d1d3614ee997cbdda0eb351b87

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/01/good-news-alabama-secretary-state-officially-announces-states-withdrawal-failed-corrupt-eric-voter-roll-system/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 29, 2023, 09:23:14 AM

Very good response-- thank you GM.

Title: Ronna McDaniel will continue not fighting !
Post by: G M on January 29, 2023, 12:43:35 PM

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/rnc-chairwoman-ronna-mcdaniel-gets-criticized-for-being-completely-unprepared-to-deal-with-election-fraud/

Uniparty Strong!

Title: AZ
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 30, 2023, 08:40:53 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/01/election-day-footage-unbelievable-ballot-rejections-maricopa-county-seems-like-just-ballots/

Title: GA: Dems do about face
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 31, 2023, 07:47:01 AM

https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/democrats-do-an-about-face-on-georgia/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MJ_20230131&utm_term=Jolt-Smart

Title: Massive fraud in AZ
Post by: G M on February 07, 2023, 07:18:46 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/02/arizona_voting_patterns_challenge_the_democrats_2022_election_narrative.html

Title: Germany appears to have better elections
Post by: G M on February 16, 2023, 07:11:03 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/02/mirror-image-new-election-held-germany-previous-election-declared-void-citing-serious-systemic-flaws-polling-station-glitches-just-like-maricopa-county-az/

Title: Rep trickery in AZ?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 22, 2023, 09:17:37 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/22/arizona-election-fraud-claims-mark-brnovich/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F3931988%2F63f648691b79c61f87a25a16%2F61cdf026ae7e8a4ac205b2b3%2F9%2F72%2F63f648691b79c61f87a25a16&wp_cu=10fdb05edea8f32c1b02f6dfec609335%7CD462DD329F9C56B3E0530100007F597F

Title: They actually don’t care
Post by: G M on February 22, 2023, 12:36:56 PM

https://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=29380

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 22, 2023, 06:07:18 PM

A suitable place for this post.

Title: FOX and Dominion lawsuit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2023, 11:22:15 AM

Well this is inconvenient , , ,


https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3863605-five-top-revelations-from-dominions-explosive-court-filing-in-fox-news-lawsuit/

The Pravdas have been having a field day with this, my many headlines (deliberately?) giving the impression that FOX doubted all claims, not just Powell & Wood.

I trust we here will remember that we called out Powell & Wood at the time.

Title: We'll get them next time!
Post by: G M on February 25, 2023, 11:33:02 AM

https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/image00000322.png

(https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/image00000322.png)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 25, 2023, 11:45:04 AM

"we called out Powell & Wood at the time"
you did
I think I held my judgement with wishful thinking and maybe a sucker who believed, or wanted to believe these people had the evidence to prove what they were saying.

Is not the legal standard "malicious intent"?

Can that be proven to a preponderance of the evidence level here ?

Appears the suit is filed in Delaware :

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3863605-five-top-revelations-from-dominions-explosive-court-filing-in-fox-news-lawsuit/

Dominion looks like it has locations in Colorado and Canada
Maybe incorporated in DE?

At least suit not filed in DC
which would be an automatic  several billion verdict against Fox  for sure .

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 25, 2023, 11:53:39 AM

"we called out Powell & Wood at the time"

you did


Thank you.

Title: zuckerberg will cease funding elections
Post by: ccp on February 27, 2023, 04:10:57 PM

will cease funding elections

reported in 2022
yet I keep seeing bits and pieces in the conservative news he is spending ?$80 mill to do just that . MSM ignoring on purpose

what the heck is this !  :x

since when does private money get accepted to fund elections ?

we need to keep this guy out of our elections

https://www.thecentersquare.com/north_carolina/just-say-no-zuckerbucks-for-elections-declined-by-two-in-old-north-state/article_3d0917ea-9830-11ed-957c-df4969ee3768.html

Title: every slimy move during the '20 election by crats
Post by: ccp on February 28, 2023, 05:50:31 AM

which we all saw before our eyes could not be "proven".  Now the crats and their propaganda ministry and with  their shyster lawyers can turn it around .

https://news.yahoo.com/murdoch-testified-fox-commentators-endorsed-222614792.html

[I don't care personally but
electioneering and fraud happened.]

And now the enemies see a legal means to extract blood from Fox .

funny how NYT WP CNN MSPCP can't be sued for Russia collusion hoax and more.
they knew it was false.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 28, 2023, 06:42:57 AM

"funny how NYT WP CNN MSPCP can't be sued for Russia collusion hoax and more.
they knew it was false."

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on February 28, 2023, 07:00:37 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 28, 2023, 06:42:57 AM

"funny how NYT WP CNN MSPCP can't be sued for Russia collusion hoax and more.
they knew it was false."

It's almost like the same lawfare used against Alex Jones will be used against everyone else eventually.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 28, 2023, 07:32:01 AM

A point better developed in the Media thread.

Title: should Republicans ballot harvest?
Post by: ccp on March 08, 2023, 11:41:21 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/03/should_the_gop_adapt_ballot_harvesting.html

Title: Re: should Republicans ballot harvest?
Post by: G M on March 08, 2023, 12:12:57 PM

Quote from: ccp on March 08, 2023, 11:41:21 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/03/should_the_gop_adapt_ballot_harvesting.html

You will never outcheat the dems.

Title: 1.8 billion defamation suit
Post by: ccp on March 11, 2023, 01:35:12 PM

https://www.reuters.com/legal/is-dominion-voting-case-against-fox-news-worth-much-16-billion-2023-03-10/

Title: Alaskan bill to endrun electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2023, 06:42:33 PM

The Alaska Senate Judiciary Committee is holding a public teleconferenced hearing this Monday March 13th at 1:30 pm on (SB-61) National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. If you live in Alaska please contact your State Senators & Representatives and urge them to oppose this dangerous NPV legislation, immediately! You can also call today and ask to testify remotely at 844-586-9085
https://www.akleg.gov/basis/Bill/Detail/33?Root=SB61

Title: The Threat of "National Popular Vote" (NPV)
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2023, 06:52:20 PM

second post

https://www.nbcnews.com/now/video/could-a-national-popular-vote-replace-the-electoral-college-67192389796?fbclid=IwAR2eCkxeTyoYZ4pU-e2tMeA2WqwfMtbg65kE6GGFjPk-9u2T2uqjMUmOSi4

Title: NPV makes no sense
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2023, 06:59:53 PM

Third post

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-national-popular-vote-interstate-compact-is-gaining-steam-it-still-makes-no-sense?fbclid=IwAR0C2TAjxn65Ae4YEpJ9zXdhUs0bjjBd05T5o2zjw8RoWZbXQGdPYspJa0g

Title: NC NPV bill
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2023, 07:01:46 PM

Fourth post

A National Popular Vote bill (HB-191) was filed yesterday in NC. If you live in NC please contact your State Representatives and urge your Representatives to deny the National Popular Vote scheme in your state!

Title: Re: The Threat of "National Popular Vote" (NPV)
Post by: G M on March 11, 2023, 07:53:32 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2023, 06:52:20 PM

second post

https://www.nbcnews.com/now/video/could-a-national-popular-vote-replace-the-electoral-college-67192389796?fbclid=IwAR2eCkxeTyoYZ4pU-e2tMeA2WqwfMtbg65kE6GGFjPk-9u2T2uqjMUmOSi4

Weird how popular dem ideas are, yet they always have to cheat and game the system.

Title: Don’t worry, they promise not to cheat in 2024! (Recount not the same as Audit)
Post by: G M on March 23, 2023, 09:18:48 AM

https://www.frontpagemag.com/auditing-bidens-victory/

Title: Do it again in 2024!
Post by: G M on March 24, 2023, 07:30:46 AM

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/vote-harder.png

(https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/vote-harder.png)

Title: Re: Do it again in 2024!
Post by: G M on March 24, 2023, 07:36:01 AM

Quote from: G M on March 24, 2023, 07:30:46 AM

https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/vote-harder.png

(https://granitegrok.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/vote-harder.png)

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/132/868/349/original/3769986ba62347c2.jpeg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1050,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/132/868/349/original/3769986ba62347c2.jpeg)

Title: 50K non-citizens can now vote in DC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2023, 12:41:22 PM

https://thefederalist.com/2023/03/14/illegal-residents-can-now-vote-in-dc-thanks-to-chuck-schumer/?fbclid=IwAR3sTsMIy757ihXTUsSfrF5HGsITPx-8mauLwth9MTiQ0GX2IR0JxkKlECU

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 28, 2023, 01:48:13 PM

 *An RMG poll conducted over the weekend found that 75 percent of Americans oppose allowing noncitizens to vote in local elections.*

but 25 % do not oppose it

what the hell is this

the 25 are mostly  non citizens and hard core demorats

how stupid is this  :x

Title: 10 out 100 score considered high confidence in Maricopa county
Post by: ccp on April 02, 2023, 09:52:53 AM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/signature-verification-software-used-maricopa-county-says-10-high

Title: Re: 10 out 100 score considered high confidence in Maricopa county
Post by: G M on April 02, 2023, 12:13:23 PM

Quote from: ccp on April 02, 2023, 09:52:53 AM

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/signature-verification-software-used-maricopa-county-says-10-high

They did the same thing in Nevada.

https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/opinion-columns/victor-joecks/victor-joecks-clark-county-accepted-my-signature-on-6-mail-ballot-envelopes-2674184/

Title: signature verification
Post by: ccp on April 02, 2023, 01:12:16 PM

*** They did the same thing in Nevada ***

OH, BUT WE HAVE E VERIFY!!!!  does shout the election FRAUD deniers .

[ :wink: ]

The Dem fraud brigades continue to shyster the rigging process now that anyone and everyone can get a mail in ballot simply by lowering the "e verify" bar to levels it is not really effective .

let's see if I sign my name Y instead of X would that pass?
3/4 of an X is a Y.

Title: Re: signature verification
Post by: G M on April 02, 2023, 01:17:32 PM

Quote from: ccp on April 02, 2023, 01:12:16 PM

*** They did the same thing in Nevada ***

OH, BUT WE HAVE E VERIFY!!!!  does shout the election FRAUD deniers .

[ :wink: ]

The Dem fraud brigades continue to shyster the rigging process now that anyone and everyone can get a mail in ballot simply by lowering the "e verify" bar to levels it is not really effective .

let's see if I sign my name Y instead of X would that pass?
3/4 of an X is a Y.

Don't worry, we will just vote harder next time!

Title: Luongo: The end of US politics
Post by: G M on April 02, 2023, 02:17:38 PM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/luongo-indicting-trump-end-us-politics

Title: Most popular president in American history!
Post by: G M on April 05, 2023, 07:20:45 AM

Emerald Robinson ✝️

Another thing that Democrats have unintentionally confirmed by indicting President Trump on bogus charges is that Biden did not really win the 2020 election.

Why rig the legal system in 2023 against a guy that you can easily beat with your 81 million voters in 2024?

Title: Shasta County CA goes to hand count only
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 07, 2023, 10:57:44 AM

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/04/far-right-county-throws-out-voting-machines-with-nothing-to-replace-them

Title: Nevada may join NPV
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 09, 2023, 07:51:14 AM

https://wgme.com/news/nation-world/nevada-may-join-interstate-compact-to-elect-president-through-national-popular-vote-silver-state-george-w-bush-donald-trump-2028-2024-election-electoral-college-democrats-republicans-independents-national-mandate-primary-election#

Title: Re: Nevada may join NPV
Post by: G M on April 09, 2023, 07:59:47 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on April 09, 2023, 07:51:14 AM

https://wgme.com/news/nation-world/nevada-may-join-interstate-compact-to-elect-president-through-national-popular-vote-silver-state-george-w-bush-donald-trump-2028-2024-election-electoral-college-democrats-republicans-independents-national-mandate-primary-election#

Stolen elections have consequences.

Title: Montana rule change threatens Sen. Tester
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 11, 2023, 06:20:13 AM

https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=edba6d0703d170acb23cf6f5df704f16_64355b5e_6d25b5f&selDate=20230411&goTo=A03&artid=1&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=washingtontimes-E-Editions&utm_source=washingtontimes&utm_content=Read-Button

Title: O'Keefe
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 11, 2023, 06:42:10 AM

Have not had a chance to watch these yet.  It appears that O'Keefe has a new operation?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpBJPHUoFKo&t=4s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnKCPK_OACc&t=2s

Title: Forgotten overseas voters potential fraud hotbed
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 17, 2023, 12:53:58 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/forgotten-overseas-voters-present-myriad-of-fraud-vulnerabilities-in-us-elections_5191955.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-04-17-1&src_cmp=breaking-2023-04-17-1&utm_medium=email&est=OAkl7z%2BTRwqckJc26FH7qC%2FaEu58EKZwG9Wxgjk%2ByYR4XohAuiA1NzPjWQcV1ymEb9iv

Title: DOJ brings charges
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 19, 2023, 04:27:27 AM

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/us-citizens-and-russian-intelligence-officers-charged-conspiring-use-us-citizens-illegal?fbclid=IwAR0vN7b_e5WlYQYcM-XJVF6zN7t-ho6vXmDIpfZ1C3697fZVjVEZQFkR8o0

Title: Registered voter aliens in Maricopa County
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 25, 2023, 02:54:26 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/apr/25/hundreds-noncitizens-ended-voting-rolls-maricopa-c/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=8BO7KHGbkNZuKdrVABaccybYnvaHWGAE4ZM75BDBFdOUnjBire2BGr4%2BR4TMKLgR&bt_ts=1682457694117

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on April 25, 2023, 03:24:48 PM

"The 222 names in Maricopa County are of people who self-reported as noncitizens. Mr. Adams said immigrants seeking citizenship often come forward and acknowledge that they are on the rolls because one of the questions on the naturalization form is whether they ever were illegally registered. Lying on that form can quickly earn deportation."

so these are the ones who came forward and admitted it.
how many more are there

how do they get on the rolls in the first place, fake  IDs?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on April 25, 2023, 04:45:27 PM

Quote from: ccp on April 25, 2023, 03:24:48 PM

"The 222 names in Maricopa County are of people who self-reported as noncitizens. Mr. Adams said immigrants seeking citizenship often come forward and acknowledge that they are on the rolls because one of the questions on the naturalization form is whether they ever were illegally registered. Lying on that form can quickly earn deportation."

so these are the ones who came forward and admitted it.
how many more are there

how do they get on the rolls in the first place, fake  IDs?

Accidentally! Whoopsie!
https://calmatters.org/politics/2018/12/my-turn-motor-voter-was-a-disaster-waiting-to-happen-and-it-did/

Totally inadvertently!

Title: The Big Tech threat to election integrity
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 30, 2023, 07:05:09 AM

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19608/election-threat-big-tech

Title: Good news for FL
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 02, 2023, 05:23:38 AM

Appeals Court Upholds Election Integrity Law in Florida
A ballot drop box at the Orange County Registrar of Voters in Santa Ana, Calif., on March 5, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)
A ballot drop box at the Orange County Registrar of Voters in Santa Ana, Calif., on March 5, 2021. (John Fredricks/The Epoch Times)
Gary Bai
By Gary Bai
April 30, 2023Updated: May 1, 2023
biggersmaller Print

0:00
4:09



1

A federal appeals court on Thursday upheld a law that, among other modifications of election rules, added security measures on the use of drop boxes and put restrictions on voting by mail in the Sunshine State.

On Thursday, the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling that struck down a law passed by Florida’s Republican-majority legislature in 2021, siding mostly with Florida’s GOP lawmakers in a legal battle that lasted for two years.

That law (pdf) amended Florida’s election administration rules when it added identification requirements for voting by mail (including name, address, and date of birth); added monitoring requirements for drop boxes by election administrators; limited the locations on the use of ballot drop boxes; added identification requirements for voter registration updates; added requirements for third-party voter registration organizations; prohibited use of private funds for election-related expenses.

It also made it illegal for anyone to “solicit any elector in an effort to provide assistance to vote” within 150 feet of the polling place, drop box location, or early voting site.

Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the bill into law on May 6, 2021, touting it as an action that would “increase transparency and strengthen the security” of Florida’s elections. League of Woman Voters of Florida, a political advocacy organization, sued Florida state officials on the same day, seeking a court injunction on the law’s enforcement.

In 2022, District Judge Mark Walker, an Obama appointee, ruled in favor of the League of Women Voters. In his ruling (pdf), Walker wrote that the lawmakers showed “intent to discriminate against Black voters” and struck down most of the provisions in the law. Walker is also presiding over the Disney v. DeSantis lawsuit.

In his ruling, Walker said that “Florida has a history of maintaining its voter rolls in a discriminatory manner” and that the law is evidently “the stark results of a political system that, for well over a century, has overrepresented White Floridians and underrepresented Black” residents.”

Walker then ordered that Florida officials, in a ten-year period upon his ruling, must seek court approval for enacting any laws regarding ballot drop boxes, voter solicitation at the polls, and regulation of third-party voter registration organizations.

The appeals court disagreed.

“We hold that the findings of intentional racial discrimination rest on both legal errors and clearly erroneous findings of fact,” reads the appeal court’s 2-1 ruling (pdf) filed on Thursday.

The appeals court reasoned that Walker made a mistake in reasoning that “a racist past is evidence of current intent” and that past case precedents do not provide “an unlimited look-back to past discrimination.”

“Under our precedent, this history cannot support a finding of discriminatory intent in this case. Florida’s more recent history does not support a finding of discriminatory intent,” wrote Pryor.

Chief Judge William Pryor, a Bush appointee, voted in favor and delivered the majority opinion. Judge Britt Grant, a Trump appointee, voted in favor. Judge Jill Pryor, an Obama appointee, dissented.

The appeals court reversed the lower court’s judgment that provisions of the bill regarding drop-box, solicitation, and registration-delivery provisions are unconstitutional. It also reversed the lower court’s ruling that required the state to seek preclearance for amending election laws. The court affirmed, in part, the lower court’s ruling that the solicitation requirement imposed by the law is “unconstitutionally vague.” It then returned the case to the lower court “for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

In a Thursday statement posted on Twitter, the League of Women Voters of Florida wrote that it is “disappointed” by the appeal court’s ruling.

Jeffrey Clark, former acting assistant attorney general for the Civil Division under the Trump administration, hailed the appeal court’s ruling as a “big victory … for election integrity in Florida” in a Thursday statement published on Twitter.

Title: Sounds pretty good to me!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 03, 2023, 11:28:44 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/texas-bill-will-give-republican-official-power-to-overturn-elections/ar-AA1aEO09?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=54b715e63d374ac6b8f0c11ee6066610&ei=31

Title: GA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 03, 2023, 11:30:06 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/judge-mulls-whether-voting-machine-case-should-go-to-trial/ar-AA1aERfa?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=54b715e63d374ac6b8f0c11ee6066610&ei=27

second post

Title: JW wins in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 03, 2023, 02:45:29 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/judge-rules-in-favor-of-jw-client/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=corruption+chronicles&utm_term=members

third

Title: Protest the next stolen election, go to federal prison
Post by: G M on May 06, 2023, 07:46:03 AM

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/137/130/487/original/88057bb8efca9e14.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/137/130/487/original/88057bb8efca9e14.jpg)

Title: ET: SCOTUS inches closer to major redistricting decision
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 07, 2023, 09:49:07 AM

Supreme Court Inches Closer to Decision in Major Redistricting Case
The Supreme Court held a special sitting on Sept. 30, 2022, for the formal investiture ceremony of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States/Getty Images)
Matthew Vadum
By Matthew Vadum
May 5, 2023Updated: May 5, 2023
biggersmaller Print



The U.S. Supreme Court is moving closer to deciding if it will issue an opinion in a high-profile case in which Republicans want the court to recognize state legislatures’ power to regulate federal elections without interference from state courts, which they say the U.S. Constitution requires.

Many legal observers had speculated that the case was dead after a state supreme court overturned the ruling being appealed, but late in the day on May 4, the U.S. Supreme Court indicated it wanted to hear from the opposing litigants and from U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, the Biden’s administration top lawyer at the Supreme Court.

At issue is the once-obscure independent state legislature doctrine, under which Republicans argue that the Constitution has always directly authorized state legislatures alone to make rules for the conduct of federal elections in their respective states.

The case, Moore v. Harper, is currently being deliberated by the justices after a marathon oral argument session on Dec. 7, 2022, which The Epoch Times reported on at the time.

Republican Tim Moore, speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, is asking the nation’s highest court to recognize that state legislatures have preeminent authority under the Constitution to make the rules for presidential and congressional elections without state courts getting involved in the process.

The Elections Clause in Article I of the U.S. Constitution states in part: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof[.]”

Specifically, Moore is appealing an order by the then-Democratic-dominated Supreme Court of North Carolina redrawing the state’s electoral map against the wishes of the state’s Republican-majority legislature. The state court had found the legislature-approved map unlawfully disfavored Democratic Party voters.

Republicans now represent seven of the state’s U.S. House districts; Democrats represent the other seven districts. Some political analysts said the legislature’s map would allow Republicans to increase their standing in the state’s congressional delegation.

But while the justices in Washington were deliberating the case, on Feb. 3, the Supreme Court of North Carolina, which now has a Republican majority, decided to rehear the underlying case, known in that forum as Harper v. Hall. At that time, the U.S. Supreme Court also asked lawyers for the parties to file supplemental briefs on how to proceed.

The state supreme court reheard Harper v. Hall and then overruled itself on April 28, finding 5-2 that the General Assembly—not judges—have sole authority over the redistricting process. The majority opinion states that there is “no judicially manageable standard by which to adjudicate partisan gerrymandering claims” and that courts “are not intended to meddle in policy matters.”

“This case is not about partisan politics but rather about realigning the proper roles of the judicial and legislative branches. Today we begin to correct course, returning the judiciary to its designated lane,” North Carolina Chief Justice Paul Newby, a Republican, wrote for the court.

In a short unsigned order (pdf) on May 4, the justices asked attorneys for Moore and North Carolina voters who favor allowing the judge-made state electoral map to remain in place “to file supplemental letter briefs addressing the following question: What is the effect on this Court’s jurisdiction of the April 28, 2023 order of the North Carolina Supreme Court?”

The briefs are due by 2 p.m. on May 11.

The U.S. Supreme Court could decide to dismiss Moore v. Harper as moot because the underlying controversy that gave rise to the appeal no longer exists.

The court could also move forward with issuing a formal opinion in the case if the justices believe the issues at hand are too important to ignore.

Title: Judicial Watch successes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 13, 2023, 07:03:35 AM

Here’s the latest in our many successes for cleaner elections.

Judicial Watch settled an important federal election integrity lawsuit against Pennsylvania and five of its counties.

Pennsylvania admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations thanks to Judicial Watch pressure. The new settlement specifically commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years, along with a payment to us of $15,000 for legal costs and fees.

In November 2021, we filed an amended complaint in our ongoing National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) lawsuit. The amended complaint sought to compel Pennsylvania and five of its counties (Luzerne County, Cumberland County, Washington County, Indiana County and Carbon County) to comply with their voter list-maintenance obligations under Section 8 of the NVRA (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, et al. (No. 1:20-cv-00708)).

In the settlement agreement, Pennsylvania agreed to publish the total number of registered and eligible voters (active and inactive) in the five counties by June 30 of each year on the Department of State’s website, for the next five years.
It also agreed to publish the total number of address confirmation notices sent to registered voters and the number returned as undeliverable or not responded to. It also will publish the total number of voters removed from the registration rolls on account of death, or for failing to respond to an address confirmation notice and failing to vote in the two most recent federal general elections.

We alleged a “multi-year failure” to take reasonable steps to maintain accurate voter registration lists as required by federal law. On April 22, 2021, we sent a notice-of-violation letter to the Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth setting forth a range of violations by the Commonwealth and 27 identified counties.

In September 2021, Pennsylvania informed the court:
Upon receiving the [April 22, 2021] letter, the Secretary [of the Commonwealth] immediately took action by investigating the issues raised and working with the identified 27 counties to remove outstanding inactive voters who had failed to return a confirmation notice and did not participate in the subsequent two consecutive federal elections. With the Secretary’s assistance, the counties removed every single inactive voter eligible for removal from the rolls. The total inactive voters removed was 178,258.

Separately, a 2020 letter from us to Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, led to the removal of 69,000 outdated registrations. According to a January 14, 2020, CBS news report, “This mountain of faulty registrations has now courted the attention of the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.” David Voye, Elections Manager for the county told CBS, “I would concede that we are behind on culling our rolls,” and that this had “been put on the backburner.” Allegheny County later confirmed to us on January 31, 2020 that the removals had occurred.

Pennsylvania’s election rolls are cleaner – and will remain cleaner – thanks to us.  This federal lawsuit settlement is good news for voters in Pennsylvania who want to ensure that only eligible voters are on voter rolls. Our remarkable run of litigation successes resulted in well over 2 million ineligible registrations being removed from voter rolls across the nation in the last two years!

As you know, we are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.

In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide us with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.

In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit that Judicial Watch filed in 2017.

We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.

In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.

In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional gerrymander.

In May 2022, we sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to stop state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.

Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.

Title: Maricopia County : signature verification is subjective
Post by: ccp on May 13, 2023, 09:40:07 AM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/05/just-in-kari-lake-election-challenge-maricopa-county-attorney-joseph-la-rue-admits-signature-verification-is-subjective-its-not-really-a-hard-and-fast-science-video/

Title: From my FB page
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 14, 2023, 07:59:57 AM

Richard Pivarnik
Judicial Watch is doing an outstanding job in going after the number 1 problem in election integrity and security: dirty voter rolls.
Unfortunately, in 2020, many states, including the battleground states, only did their voter roll updates AFTER the election, by design, when the damage was already done.
New Judicial Watch Study Finds 353 U.S. Counties in 29 States with Voter Registration Rates Exceeding 100%
https://www.judicialwatch.org/new-jw-study-voter.../
Basically, this is how the fraudulent election process works.
> Establish how many people need to be removed from the voter rolls. (Most states typically have several hundred thousand. Judicial Watch won a suit in NC where 430,000 inactive names were removed, and in CA earlier this year where a whopping 1.2 million names were removed).
> Create ballots with the inactive names for the candidate of your choice.
> Have operatives deliver those ballots to various drop boxes for $10 a ballot. Have them wear latex gloves so as not to leave fingerprints, and take pictures of the ballots as they are delivered for proof of delivery. Spread the ballots around to various drop boxes so not too many are in any one box.
> As the ballots are being counted, you can get a sense of how many you need to win and continue to deliver ballots until your candidate gets just enough to win but yet not so close that it forces a recount. If you have done any vote switching via Dominion, you will have to either backfill ballots to account for the extra votes, destroy ballots from the other candidate, or both.
> Congratulations! You just frauded an election and shredded the constitution, but your candidate wins. The judicial system does not want to get involved at all, but it helps if you have judges and Attorney General's in your pocket.
Note: Recounts typically will not discover this process as there is no consideration for the authenticity and legality of the ballot. A recount simply has you counting the same fraudulent ballots over and over.
For an excellent introduction to these processes, I recommend the following:
Exposing America's Ballot Trafficking Cartel - Part I
https://kanekoa.substack.com/.../2000-mules-exposing-the...
Exposing America's Ballot Trafficking Cartel - Part II
https://kanekoa.substack.com/.../exposing-americas-ballot...
Hacking America's Computerized Voting System
https://kanekoa.substack.com/.../110-articles-affirm...
Exposing America's Ballot Trafficking Cartel - Part IV
https://kanekoa.substack.com/.../exposing-americas-ballot...
Exposing America's Ballot Trafficking Cartel - Part V
https://kanekoa.substack.com/.../exposing-americas-ballot...
Widespread Election Fraud in Wisconsin - Part VI
https://kanekoa.substack.com/.../wisconsins-voting...
Consideration: Though a recount will not discover these ballots, only a forensic audit will, but that is extremely time consuming and expensive, and highly unlikely to occur. An indicating factor to be considered is how many people within a voting precinct voted. As the number approaches 72%, the odds become greater for fraud. Once you exceed 80%, you are looking at fraud, above 90%, you are buried in fraud.
In Pima County, AZ in 2020, forty precincts have virtually impossible turnout rates of 97 percent or more.
Was Massive Vote Fraud Confirmed with a Fishtail?
https://www.americanthinker.com/.../was_massive_vote...
Without question, the 2020 election was a fraud.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 14, 2023, 09:00:28 AM

and the msm calls this an outrageous lie
a conspiracy
and you lose your job

Title: You are not voting your way out of this
Post by: G M on May 14, 2023, 10:15:30 PM

https://michaelyon.substack.com/p/uniparty-strategically-positioning

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 15, 2023, 09:54:27 AM

"You are not voting your way out of this"

and we are not fighting an insurgency out of this either
 :-P

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 15, 2023, 10:04:04 AM

Quote from: ccp on May 15, 2023, 09:54:27 AM

"You are not voting your way out of this"

and we are not fighting an insurgency out of this either
 :-P

Surrendering?

Title: PA; CO voter rolls
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 01:43:41 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/pennsylvania-settles-voter-roll-lawsuit/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members

https://www.judicialwatch.org/jw-cleans-up-colorado-voting/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members

Title: Brennan admits CIA 2020 election rigging
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 02:12:30 PM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12085077/Ex-CIA-chief-admitted-Dirty-51-letter-political.html 

Title: Re: Brennan admits CIA 2020 election rigging
Post by: G M on May 15, 2023, 02:13:42 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 02:12:30 PM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12085077/Ex-CIA-chief-admitted-Dirty-51-letter-political.html

Vote harder!

Title: Re: Brennan admits CIA 2020 election rigging
Post by: G M on May 15, 2023, 02:15:52 PM

Quote from: G M on May 15, 2023, 02:13:42 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 02:12:30 PM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12085077/Ex-CIA-chief-admitted-Dirty-51-letter-political.html

Vote harder!

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/137/912/713/original/e9ae5f02d4d08aee.jpg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/137/912/713/original/e9ae5f02d4d08aee.jpg)

We have one branch of government.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 02:23:30 PM

GM, please stop being an asshole with posting "Vote Harder" every time the rest of us post something about trying to win an election.

You are on the edge of wrecking this forum.

Knock it the fuck off.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 15, 2023, 02:30:32 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 02:23:30 PM

GM, please stop being an asshole with posting "Vote Harder" every time the rest of us post something about trying to win an election.

You are on the edge of wrecking this forum.

Knock it the fuck off.

The truth sucks. The American Republic is gone. It's an ugly reality. The Deep State is the one branch of government and you can't outvote their rigged elections.

Title: Illegal, unconstitutional and no consequences, as usual
Post by: G M on May 15, 2023, 02:56:10 PM

https://thefederalist.com/2023/05/15/senate-republicans-demand-biden-forfeit-info-over-his-attempt-to-federally-interfere-in-u-s-elections/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 03:09:50 PM

"The truth sucks. The American Republic is gone. It's an ugly reality. The Deep State is the one branch of government and you can't outvote their rigged elections."

We are well aware of your thoughts on this.  They may well be correct.

That said, your continuous repetitions of this refrain have become a giant fart that is driving away some of your fellow comrades in arms here.  You need to allow those of us who have not given up this part of the fight to carry on without this flatulence.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 15, 2023, 03:13:55 PM

touche

 8-)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 03:45:45 PM

PS:  You may have noticed that our Fourth Musketeer has not been with us for a while.  You are why.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 15, 2023, 04:02:21 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 03:45:45 PM

PS:  You may have noticed that our Fourth Musketeer has not been with us for a while.  You are why.

Illusions and self-delusion are luxuries we cannot afford. Pretending that you can vote to fix an utterly corrupted federal system is more disconnected from reality than the Trans movement.

The Four Horsemen are about to ride through this land. Trying to cope with where we are by pretending that the feral government cares about our votes instead of focusing on tangible things to try to survive what is coming is wasting very precious and limited time.

Title: Drug Cartels and election fraud
Post by: G M on May 15, 2023, 04:38:49 PM

https://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2023/05/drug-cartel-operations-and-us-electoral.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 15, 2023, 06:29:01 PM

"PS:  You may have noticed that our Fourth Musketeer has not been with us for a while.  You are why.

"Illusions and self-delusion are luxuries we cannot afford. Pretending that you can vote to fix an utterly corrupted federal system is more disconnected from reality than the Trans movement."

What a stupid and insulting comment.  No one here is pretending that the challenges are not real.  It is why for example I give to Judicial Watch.

"The Four Horsemen are about to ride through this land. Trying to cope with where we are by pretending that the feral government cares about our votes instead of focusing on tangible things to try to survive what is coming is wasting very precious and limited time."

As I have previously related here, like a poker player, we can only think in bets.  As you often do, you are placing all your chips on one possible outcome.

What do you do when the facts prove you wrong?

You did this (and others of us here too) quite incorrectly in the aftermath of 2008.  Yet we were wrong and Scott Grannis was right.  Are you able to admit this?

What do you do when the facts prove you wrong?

You do this now with your predictions of Russian victory in Ukraine.  To say that the actual outcome may well be otherwise is not to say the Deep State was right to do as it has done, it is only to acknowledge that the outcome may still be up for grabs-- and to recognize the possibility that you might turn out to be wrong.

But this is not the deeper point.  Despite my banging you over the head today so far you continue to miss the deeper point-- it is how you talk to us.  You talk to us like we don't get the possibilities in our country's situation.

Your contributions here are huge, but you need to respect that ALL OF US make considerable effort for this forum to be what it is.  A LOT of people lurk here-- look at the numbers!-- and it makes sense to me to think that they are well into the upper half of the population or they would not be here.  This forum is well worth the effort, so please don't insult us your comrades.  You have a true gift for snark, but not infrequently you overdo it and sometimes become an asshole who drives we your comrades away. 

Your "You're not voting your way out of this" at some point has become a stutter and an ongoing fart at the dinner table of our conversation about the election and related matters.  You are gladly given ample room to develop your hypothesis-- which you research well, but PLEASE let go of this compulsion to fart every time we discuss the election.

REALLY!!!

The three of us "think in bets" and just in case you/we are wrong yet again, we believe we should do what we can to win this election.  We do not place all of our chips on TEOTWAWKI outcomes.  Indeed, we place some of our chips on preventing such outcomes!

GET THIS-- IT DOES NOT MEAN WE ARE NOT PREPARING FOR FAR LESS HAPPY OUTCOMES-- THE THREATS TO OUR COUNTRY ARE QUITE REAL.  IT JUST MEANS THAT THIS MAY NOT BE THE PLACE TO DISCUSS THESE THINGS.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 16, 2023, 06:35:42 AM

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/137/953/583/original/65389528058a0630.gif

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 16, 2023, 06:51:24 AM

GM

we get it.
well discussed in depth. here

Posted numerous times I believe DeSouza's movie

can we  consider *all* means of fighting the left ?  it is not wasting valuable time. It is part of forming a more unified multifaceted multi-pronged front .

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 16, 2023, 07:43:58 AM

"We get it. Well discussed in depth. Here.  Posted numerous times I believe DeSouza's movie. 

"Can we consider ALL means of fighting the left?  It is not wasting valuable time. It is part of forming a more unified multifaceted multi-pronged front."

Heartily concur!

And much more pithily stated than my efforts yesterday!

Title: From my Congressman
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 16, 2023, 08:58:07 AM

second post:

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2023/05/11/hearing-exposes-election-integrity-partnership-as-government-censorship-stooges/

https://dailycaller.com/2023/05/10/dan-bishop-dhs-alleged-censorship/

Title: AZ: Kari Lake says 334k mail ballots were not verified.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2023, 07:01:12 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kari-lake-drops-major-bomb-maricopa-county-s-own-data-proves-334k-mail-in-ballots-were-not-verified-in-nov-governor-s-count-attorney-claims/ar-AA1bphBW?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=8231dcb385204d4cb5fe0ceff9eea775&ei=18

Title: Re: AZ: Kari Lake says 334k mail ballots were not verified.
Post by: G M on May 20, 2023, 07:06:47 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2023, 07:01:12 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kari-lake-drops-major-bomb-maricopa-county-s-own-data-proves-334k-mail-in-ballots-were-not-verified-in-nov-governor-s-count-attorney-claims/ar-AA1bphBW?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=8231dcb385204d4cb5fe0ceff9eea775&ei=18

The cartels need Abortion Mouse as Governor.

Gosh, I hope the FBI investigates!

Title: Re: AZ: Kari Lake says 334k mail ballots were not verified.
Post by: G M on May 20, 2023, 09:57:18 PM

Quote from: G M on May 20, 2023, 07:06:47 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 20, 2023, 07:01:12 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kari-lake-drops-major-bomb-maricopa-county-s-own-data-proves-334k-mail-in-ballots-were-not-verified-in-nov-governor-s-count-attorney-claims/ar-AA1bphBW?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=8231dcb385204d4cb5fe0ceff9eea775&ei=18

The cartels need Abortion Mouse as Governor.

Gosh, I hope the FBI investigates!

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/138/362/274/original/db5ebf7ed96e2756.png

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/138/362/274/original/db5ebf7ed96e2756.png)

Title: We'll get them next time!
Post by: G M on May 22, 2023, 06:34:59 AM

https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/b4b1f4d8c67ec9ef.png

(https://westernrifleshooters.us/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/b4b1f4d8c67ec9ef.png)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 06:44:52 AM

Ah yes, today's episode in "GM meming the same point yet again" , , ,

Yes, in and of itself makes a lucid accusation of cognitive dissonance, but the supply of these memes exceeds the demand , , ,

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 22, 2023, 06:46:34 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 06:44:52 AM

Ah yes, today's episode in "GM meming the same point yet again" , , ,

Yes, in and of itself makes a lucid accusation of cognitive dissonance, but the supply of these memes exceeds the demand , , ,

Our lurkers might like them. Obviously there are lots of people still clinging to fantasy.

Title: The AZ selection should be set aside
Post by: G M on May 22, 2023, 06:57:22 AM

https://www.westernjournal.com/lake-attorneys-closing-argument-least-70k-votes-not-verified-election-must-set-aside/

Probably betrayed by the courts again.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 07:33:27 AM

Lake impressed during her campaign, but in its aftermath not infrequently has looked like a Trump toady.  She needs to start producing some legal wins.  If she does so- and her determination here on first glance does seem to assert meaningful specifics-- it will be powerful for our cause.  OTOH continuing legal losses, given Trump's poor making of his case, will drive us further into seeming to independent voters like sore losers in denial.

"Our lurkers might like them."

Dammit!  My lurkers argument being used against me!

"Obviously there are lots of people still clinging to fantasy."

Given this abundant 15 year (!!!) track record of this thread, I'm not thinking there any here!!!  In other words, please do consider your supply here, as witty as some of them are, exceeds demand.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 22, 2023, 07:36:15 AM

The is zero reason to expect the courts will do anything.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 07:40:34 AM

Well, solid evidence would be of help , , ,

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on May 22, 2023, 07:41:37 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 07:40:34 AM

Well, solid evidence would be of help , , ,

Everything from 2020 on...

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 07:53:49 AM

Well, , , no.

Trump and his toadies have spewed plenty of horsesh*t too.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on May 22, 2023, 08:15:23 AM

".Well, , , no.

Trump and his toadies have spewed plenty of horsesh*t too."

still waiting for the "KRAKEN" whatever that was supposed to mean

and would much more listen to O'Reilly's pushing his products (actually I don't even listen to that as I fast forward everytime a commercial plug comes on )

then that idiot kook Lindell

haven't seen Sid Powell lately -

like Gulliani's radio show when I am in the car at the time but am concerned about allegations against him - less the sexual harassment ones (since the lady is clearly a gold digger and willing partner if any of it true and manipulater)

but the ones he was selling pardons for 1 to 2 million bucks along with Trump - if true that is totally unforgivable

 

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 09:31:37 AM

The Rudy pardon sell accusations struck me as a smear.  The recent affirmation that there WAS Romanian money going to the Biden Mafia, affirms work he was doing and getting smeared for a few years back around 2020.

Anyway, yes good examples (and there are many more) of the point I was making.

Title: Another win for JW, this time in PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 02:11:24 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/pennsylvania-settles-voter-roll-lawsuit/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members

Title: Skullduggery in NY
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 22, 2023, 02:22:39 PM

Third

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/05/another_mistake_in_new_york_nearly_a_million_registered_voters_become_democrats.html

Title: AZ: Judge rules against Kari Lake
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2023, 08:42:59 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-rules-against-kari-lake-in-election-lawsuit-confirms-katie-hobbs-as-arizona-governor_5284720.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-05-23-1&src_cmp=breaking-2023-05-23-1&utm_medium=email&est=H56fI%2B%2FpaNtITxGrId9sclO2WRyMQqxHRxqiwLELI%2BNAiarLKDLqmr5cuTEQmwYIT7F9

Title: Re: AZ: Judge rules against Kari Lake
Post by: G M on May 23, 2023, 10:15:45 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2023, 08:42:59 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-rules-against-kari-lake-in-election-lawsuit-confirms-katie-hobbs-as-arizona-governor_5284720.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-05-23-1&src_cmp=breaking-2023-05-23-1&utm_medium=email&est=H56fI%2B%2FpaNtITxGrId9sclO2WRyMQqxHRxqiwLELI%2BNAiarLKDLqmr5cuTEQmwYIT7F9

Crooked court.

Title: Re: AZ: Judge rules against Kari Lake
Post by: G M on May 23, 2023, 11:11:11 PM

Quote from: G M on May 23, 2023, 10:15:45 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 23, 2023, 08:42:59 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/judge-rules-against-kari-lake-in-election-lawsuit-confirms-katie-hobbs-as-arizona-governor_5284720.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-05-23-1&src_cmp=breaking-2023-05-23-1&utm_medium=email&est=H56fI%2B%2FpaNtITxGrId9sclO2WRyMQqxHRxqiwLELI%2BNAiarLKDLqmr5cuTEQmwYIT7F9

Crooked court.

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/138/551/768/original/c83da42984f18676.jpeg

(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=852,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/138/551/768/original/c83da42984f18676.jpeg)

Title: What is a "ballot chasing operation"?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 24, 2023, 02:32:41 PM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/kari-lake-announces-largest-ballot-chasing-operation-in-american-history/

Title: Re: What is a "ballot chasing operation"?
Post by: G M on May 24, 2023, 02:40:46 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on May 24, 2023, 02:32:41 PM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/kari-lake-announces-largest-ballot-chasing-operation-in-american-history/

As a guess:

Closely document every polling place and vote counting center, and every irregularity and discrepancy you can in great detail.

So you can take the evidence collected before the court and have it dismissed no matter how compelling and have the media call you a conspiracy theorist.

Title: Trump campaign to ballot harvest
Post by: ccp on May 29, 2023, 11:54:02 AM

https://thepostmillennial.com/trump-campaign-fundraises-for-ballot-harvesting-operations-in-battleground-states?utm_campaign=64487

if one wants to contribute his/her money

good idea
but we can't find a Conservative Mark Zuckerberg to fund?

Title: Motor Voter Registration in Chicago
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 29, 2023, 01:09:13 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/may/29/federal-law-allowed-hundreds-noncitizens-register-/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=newsalert&utm_content=newsalert&utm_term=newsalert&bt_ee=d8vhseOWUjFruDxx3eiVYY4NcKFX1Tc2ULTwASwjguE6CYMYGzhDju9V6EOToxrH&bt_ts=1685384773795

Title: TX bills going to Gov. Abbott
Post by: Crafty_Dog on May 29, 2023, 05:52:33 PM

Second

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/texas-passes-bills-targeting-elections-in-democratic-stronghold/ar-AA1bOnwz?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=1fdce7670e574ac89e61da961ea03f70&ei=7

Title: It's just that easy
Post by: G M on June 03, 2023, 07:23:18 AM

https://twitter.com/its_the_Dr/status/1661924416337457152?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1661924416337457152%7Ctwgr%5Ed45586efc066434eaa6b2cc091a94b23166e1ee1%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theburningplatform.com%2F2023%2F05%2F27%2Fgovernment-media-ridicule-470%2F

Title: Youtube changes policy-- election denialism now allowed
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 03, 2023, 03:41:31 PM

https://www.axios.com/2023/06/02/us-election-fraud-youtube-policy?fbclid=IwAR3PbGYZR57P8Dq5xqB_0xW9iX2HWttsAGObCefD7-EhNMcqDMDDqwlG5es

Title: not really ballot harvesting
Post by: ccp on June 07, 2023, 01:48:57 PM

like the LEFT:

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/early-voting-republican-national-committee-bank-your-vote/2023/06/07/id/1122722/

Title: mainstream pravdas twist it around
Post by: ccp on June 08, 2023, 03:55:52 PM

Republicans REVERSE course!
After yrs of unproven claims of election fraud
now republicans

"Democrats were critical of the new GOP effort after years of messaging by Republicans against mail voting.

“Donald Trump and extremist Republicans have spent years telling lies about elections to justify their losses. That includes demonizing mail ballots and ballot collection,” said Jena Griswold, Colorado’s secretary of state and head of the Democratic Association of Secretaries of State. “These hypocritical extremists are only interested in spreading chaos and trying to gain power at any cost.”

ME-> well if this is so  legit as they say what are  Democrats bitching about?

I guess it is not fair for us to game the system cheat like they do.

Title: Be sure to VOTE HARDER for your DOJ approved candidate!
Post by: G M on June 09, 2023, 06:18:25 AM

Greg Price
@greg_price11
We learn Joe Biden took a $5 million bribe from Burisma which his son sat on the board of and on the same day his DOJ indicts a former president and his chief rival for 2024 for "mishandling" classified documents, which Biden kept in his office, garage and other places.

The Biden DOJ targeted school board parents as terrorists, launched FBI raids on peaceful protesters at abortion clinics, and goes after his political rivals as his Attorney General commits perjury and son commits crimes like people breathe air.

This is your country.

The DOJ went from hiding their corruption, to pretending they're not corrupt, to being corrupt loud and proud just because they can.

If this happened in Russia or some Middle Eastern hellhole, all the people cheering it on would call for regime change.

Title: 2020 absentee ballots in MI storage locker
Post by: G M on June 11, 2023, 07:43:37 AM

https://www.dailywire.com/news/police-investigating-discovery-of-2020-absentee-ballots-in-michigan-storage-locker

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 11, 2023, 06:22:19 PM

Actually, on first read that doesn't sound too bad.  Spoiled ballots?  What is the connection with fraud?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 11, 2023, 06:29:29 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 11, 2023, 06:22:19 PM

Actually, on first read that doesn't sound too bad.  Spoiled ballots?  What is the connection with fraud?

It certainly implies improper custody of ballots, does it not?

I don't have any evidence of any crimes I have investigated in my personal possession.

Title: Justice Thomas' dissent
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 11, 2023, 07:03:13 PM

https://resistthemainstream.com/justice-clarence-thomas-issues-50-page-dissent-in-key-supreme-court-case/?expand_article=1

Title: Devin Nunes on the John Batchelor podcast; Ballot harvesting
Post by: ccp on June 12, 2023, 07:17:39 AM

very important

start at about the 5 minute mark - first part is about the water in California then Devin speaks about how he was successful in Republican ballot harvesting in Ca. and how this will be blueprint for RNC going forward :

https://audioboom.com/posts/8315834-ca-california-ballot-harvesting-in-2022-leads-the-way-for-the-gop-in-2024-devinnunes-truthso?playlist_direction=forward

BTW - does anyone hear listen to Truth Social -

if it all about the Don but if about other conservative issues I would be interested
reminder Devin Nunes does run Truth Social

Title: MI GOP chair ordered to pay legal fees
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 14, 2023, 12:58:34 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/michigan-republican-chairperson-karamo-others-ordered-to-pay-legal-fees-for-failed-election-lawsuit/ar-AA1cvW7a?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=9d8cb5fc999942888d22ee8a20d3fbf5&ei=15

Title: Stolen election, LBJ
Post by: DougMacG on June 18, 2023, 10:25:58 PM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/mar/31/lyndon-b-johnsons-stolen-election-detailed-in-audi/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 19, 2023, 09:54:50 AM

Nice find.

Title: Foxweiser might have settled a bit too early!
Post by: G M on June 19, 2023, 01:51:27 PM

https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/06/18/stunning-halderman-report-reveals-critical-vulnerabilities-in-dominion-machines/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 19, 2023, 04:42:08 PM

What is the date of that article?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 19, 2023, 04:58:08 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 19, 2023, 04:42:08 PM

What is the date of that article?

Yesterday

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 05:06:57 AM

Seeing that the report was from 2021 and the initial post simply said "today" left me confused, but now that I see that it reads as "two days ago I can agree that its' date is 6/18/23.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on June 20, 2023, 05:08:42 AM

The President who signed the 'Voting Rights Act's rose to power via ballots stuffing.  Who knew.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 05:19:40 AM

That Halderman Report piece seems important to me for its ability to transcend the losing arguments Trump has been making and so I fear it being Memory Holed-- but when I try to paste the content here all I can get is the link.  Can someone paste here the actual content?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 20, 2023, 06:20:05 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 05:19:40 AM

That Halderman Report piece seems important to me for its ability to transcend the losing arguments Trump has been making and so I fear it being Memory Holed-- but when I try to paste the content here all I can get is the link.  Can someone paste here the actual content?

Stunning ‘Halderman Report’ Reveals ‘Critical Vulnerabilities’ in Dominion Machines.

The 2021 Halderman Report, released this past week, lays bare a litany of “critical vulnerabilities” in Dominion Voting Systems’ machines, currently being used in a number of states, and in all voting locations in the U.S. state of Georgia. Compiled by Prof. Alex Halderman and Prof. Drew Springall as part of the lawsuit Curling v. Raffensperger, the newly released though still partly redacted report explains how ballot scanners ad ballot marking devices (ICX), “can be exploited to subvert all of its security mechanisms” and that “ICX could be used to change the votes of individual Georgia voters.” The seven principles findings establish that “attackers can alter the QR codes on printed ballots,” and that attackers “can install malware with only brief physical access to the machines.” “An attacker with brief access to a single ICX or a single Poll Worker Card and PIN can obtain the county-wide [cryptographic] keys,” writes Halderman, warning that “[a] dishonest election worker… with just brief access to the scanner’s memory card could violate ballot secrecy and determine how individual voters voted.” The security issues are so bad, the report says, that “merely patching these specific problems is unlikely to make the ICX substantially more secure… It is very likely that there are other, equally critical flaws… yet to be discovered.” The 96-page report is extremely technically detailed, with Halderman showing how “ICX malware can still change individual votes and most election outcomes without detection.” Even the “auditability of the ballots” can be compromised, and “such cheating could not be detected by [a risk limiting audit] or a hand count.” “My technical findings leave Georgia voters with greatly diminished grounds to be confident that the votes they cast on the ICX BMD are secured,” Halderman concludes. By November 2020, 24 states used one or more components of the Dominion Democracy Suite voting system, and the ICX mentioned used in 16 states, with Georgia mandating the system as the primary method of voting.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 06:27:02 AM

Thank you.


Question:  Why are we seeing this only now, two years later?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 20, 2023, 06:31:27 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 06:27:02 AM

Thank you.


Question:  Why are we seeing this only now, two years later?

Just released. Because the system is rigged.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 06:57:48 AM

Released by whom?

On what basis was it withheld?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 20, 2023, 07:06:28 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 06:57:48 AM

Released by whom?

On what basis was it withheld?

Ask the judge.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6139924/curling-v-raffensperger/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 20, 2023, 07:13:44 AM

The Maestro of Google Fu strikes again!

Title: Not that it was ever trying to win...
Post by: G M on June 21, 2023, 07:44:17 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/06/the_gop_is_losing_the_vote_fraud_war_.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 21, 2023, 07:48:56 AM

so that many people are dumb enough to believe in the BIG LIE?
 :wink:

Title: Re: Not that it was ever trying to win...
Post by: G M on June 21, 2023, 07:54:06 AM

Quote from: G M on June 21, 2023, 07:44:17 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/06/the_gop_is_losing_the_vote_fraud_war_.html

https://www.theburningplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Fy6zeKfXgAIk36o.jpg

(https://www.theburningplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Fy6zeKfXgAIk36o.jpg)

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 21, 2023, 08:02:18 AM

" I should have voted harder"

Yes and we need to vote more smartly
and continue to fix the rigging of voting by the Dems where and whenever we can.

NO BUT WE SHOULD HAVE HAD MORE LAWYERS FIGHT THE RIGGING OF '20 election

we knew the fix was in when we read 600 DNC lawyers were sent with instructions to rig the election so ballots could be harvested

yes we did not trust the mail
but we could see what the LEFT was doing the whole time
we reported here and of course the RNC just told us to go out and vote on election day without ballot harvesting .....    :x

Title: voting harder
Post by: ccp on June 21, 2023, 08:06:08 AM

our PRIME battlefield still remains -->> believe it or not --->> the ballot boxes

not that we need sit on our hands for other means

Title: Dominion in GA for 2024, nothing to see here, keep moving , , ,
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 22, 2023, 07:49:17 AM

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/14/politics/dominion-voting-georgia-vulnerabilities-2024/index.html


Even CNN...


Georgia won’t update vulnerable Dominion software until after 2024 election

WashingtonCNN —
Georgia election officials have been aware of existing vulnerabilities in the state’s voting software for more than two years but continue to insist the system is safe and won’t be updated until after 2024, according to a report that was unsealed this week as part of a controversial court case in Georgia.

The report’s findings focus on weaknesses in software for certain Dominion Voting machines. Those weaknesses were previously verified by federal cybersecurity officials, who urged election officials across the country to update their systems.

A lawyer for Georgia’s top election official, Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, recently told a federal court that officials would forgo installing Dominion’s security patches until after the 2024 presidential election.


Georgia election officials insist it is highly unlikely that the vulnerabilities will be exploited in real attacks. Those officials also say they have already carried out a number of security recommendations without having to update the system’s software.

“Upgrading the system will be a massive undertaking, and our election officials are evaluating the scope of, and time required for the project,” Mike Hassinger, a spokesperson for the Georgia secretary of state’s office, told CNN when asked about the delay.

Title: Re: Dominion in GA for 2024, nothing to see here, keep moving , , ,
Post by: G M on June 22, 2023, 09:58:20 AM

All future "elections" will be fortified for their protection.

Good thing we live in the land of the free!

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 22, 2023, 07:49:17 AM

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/14/politics/dominion-voting-georgia-vulnerabilities-2024/index.html


Even CNN...


Georgia won’t update vulnerable Dominion software until after 2024 election

WashingtonCNN —
Georgia election officials have been aware of existing vulnerabilities in the state’s voting software for more than two years but continue to insist the system is safe and won’t be updated until after 2024, according to a report that was unsealed this week as part of a controversial court case in Georgia.

The report’s findings focus on weaknesses in software for certain Dominion Voting machines. Those weaknesses were previously verified by federal cybersecurity officials, who urged election officials across the country to update their systems.

A lawyer for Georgia’s top election official, Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, recently told a federal court that officials would forgo installing Dominion’s security patches until after the 2024 presidential election.


Georgia election officials insist it is highly unlikely that the vulnerabilities will be exploited in real attacks. Those officials also say they have already carried out a number of security recommendations without having to update the system’s software.

“Upgrading the system will be a massive undertaking, and our election officials are evaluating the scope of, and time required for the project,” Mike Hassinger, a spokesperson for the Georgia secretary of state’s office, told CNN when asked about the delay.

Title: Good thing the FBI won't interfere in 2024!
Post by: G M on June 26, 2023, 07:06:06 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2023/06/22/fbi-knew-hunter-bidens-laptop-was-authentic-a-year-before-pressuring-big-tech-to-censor-it/

Because reasons!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 26, 2023, 07:12:22 AM

"FBI Knew Hunter Biden’s Laptop Was Authentic A Year Before Pressuring Big Tech To Censor It"

the LEFT will sarcastically point out = funny how conservatives are for the police but not the FBI !   :roll:

 the Truth - funny how the progs are against the "police" but love the FBI.

Title: Good thing they won't do this in 2024!
Post by: G M on June 26, 2023, 07:18:02 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11500433/FBI-agent-says-bureau-met-weekly-social-media-giants-2020-election-report-says.html

It's just the FBI censoring speech, as intended in the constitution.

Title: Re: Good thing they won't do this in 2024!
Post by: G M on June 26, 2023, 07:49:27 AM

Quote from: G M on June 26, 2023, 07:18:02 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11500433/FBI-agent-says-bureau-met-weekly-social-media-giants-2020-election-report-says.html

It's just the FBI censoring speech, as intended in the constitution.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/blatant-political-corruption-rot-americas-democracy-explained-under-1000-words

I'm sure they'll let DeSantis win so they can go to prison!

Title: NRO: SCOTUS rejects Independent State Legislature theory
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 27, 2023, 01:33:07 PM

Supreme Court Rejects ‘Independent State Legislature’ Theory, Finds State Courts Can Rule on Federal Elections
By JEFF ZYMERI
June 27, 2023 10:24 AM

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that state legislatures do not have sole discretion in setting the rules for congressional elections, dismissing the plaintiffs’ argument that questions surrounding partisan gerrymandering are outside the reach of North Carolina courts.

“The Elections Clause does not insulate state legislatures from the ordinary exercise of state judicial review,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the 6-3 majority. He was joined in the opinion by Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. However, Roberts clarified that “state courts may not transgress the ordinary bounds of judicial review such that they arrogate to themselves the power vested in state legislatures to regulate federal elections.”

In a concurring opinion, Kavanaugh agreed with Roberts that state courts do not have free rein, but added that the general principle for federal review articulated by the Court should be distilled into a more specific standard in the future. Kavanaugh suggested chief justice William Rehnquist’s standard in Bush v. Gore: whether the state court “impermissibly distorted” state law “beyond what a fair reading required.”

The case — Moore v. Harper — centered on the “independent state legislature” theory, which holds that state legislators have the power under the U.S. Constitution to regulate federal elections with little to no interference from state courts. The theory is based on the Elections Clause of the Constitution, which says that “the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.” It is also based on the Electors Clause of the Constitution.

In this case, the state of North Carolina was sued over a congressional map drawn in 2021 by the legislature, which likely would have given Republicans ten of the state’s 14 congressional seats. The challengers asserted the map was an extreme partisan gerrymander and claimed it violated the state’s constitution. In February of last year, the North Carolina Supreme Court agreed with the challengers by a vote of 4-3, striking down the map for last year’s midterm elections and adopting a new map drawn by three court-appointed experts.

Republican legislators led by Speaker Timothy Moore of the North Carolina house appealed to the Supreme Court, which declined to intervene in the case before the 2022 midterms, with Republicans and Democrats winning seven seats each. However, the high court decided in June it would hear oral arguments in the case.

Moore argued that the text of the Constitution only mentions the state legislatures for a reason, explaining the drafters could have included a role for other entities if they wanted. On the other hand, Rebecca Harper and others who challenged North Carolina’s congressional map in state court argued that the legislature’s theory was “extreme” and that lawmakers should not be “immune from judicial review.”

In late April, the North Carolina Supreme Court justices overruled their 2022 decision — Harper v. Hall — that struck down the original map. Two new justices had joined the court, flipping the balance of power to a majority of Republican-appointed justices. “There is no judicially manageable standard by which to adjudicate partisan gerrymandering claims. Courts are not intended to meddle in policy matters,” wrote Chief Justice Paul Newby for the five-justice majority. “In its decision today, the Court returns to its tradition of honoring the constitutional roles assigned to each branch.” At that point, the U.S. Supreme Court sought clarification from the parties in Moore v. Harper as to whether the case was moot, but received conflicting answers.

Despite the high court in Raleigh overruling itself, Roberts found that the Supreme Court still had jurisdiction to rule in favor of the North Carolina justices in the February majority. The practical effect for North Carolina is minimal as the court in Raleigh has already provided for a new congressional map. However, state legislatures throughout the country have reduced ability to appeal to the theory in the 2024 elections and beyond.

Justice Clarence Thomas dissented from the majority and was joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch. Thomas would have dismissed the case as moot given the April decision of the North Carolina Supreme Court.

“This is a straightforward case of mootness. The federal defense no longer makes any difference to this case— whether we agree with the defense, disagree with it, or say nothing at all, the final judgment in this litigation will be exactly the same,” wrote Thomas. The justice added that the majority creates uncertainty with the decision, opening the possibility of “Bush-style controversies over state election law.”

Moore v. Harper followed another major elections case this month — namely, Allen v. Milligan. In that case, Roberts and Kavanaugh joined the Court’s liberals to strike down Alabama’s congressional map on the grounds that it wasn’t race-conscious enough. On Monday, in line with that decision, the Supreme Court lifted its stay of a federal court ruling that Louisiana’s congressional lines likely violated the Voting Rights Act. Further litigation will follow.

Title: WSJ on the SCOTUS ruling on Independent State Legislature
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2023, 08:06:39 AM

The Supreme Court’s Elections Muddle
In Moore v. Harper, the Justices invite many more legal challenges to state ballot laws.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
June 27, 2023 6:43 pm ET




So much for the radical Supreme Court. A 6-3 majority on Tuesday rejected the argument advanced by some conservatives that the U.S. Constitution bars state courts from reviewing Congressional maps and voting laws. The result isn’t the runaway victory that progressives claim, but it will lead to more election-law controversies.

The dispute in Moore v. Harper centered on a North Carolina House redistricting plan in 2021 that was blocked by a Democratic majority on that state’s High Court. State Justices claimed the gerrymander violated their Constitution’s guarantee to “free elections,” “a right to assemble,” “freedom of speech,” and “equal protection of the laws.”


In other words, partisan state judges read a ban against political gerrymanders into the penumbra of state law. As a result, Democrats carried three more Congressional seats under a court redrawn map last November than they were predicted to under the Legislature’s.

GOP lawmakers argued that the North Carolina court’s ruling violated the U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause, which requires “the Legislature” of each state to prescribe “[t]he Times, Places and Manner of ” federal elections. They claimed state courts may not strike down a legislature’s maps or voting laws affecting federal elections.

Chief Justice John Roberts rebuffs this reading of the Elections Clause with a middle of the road, or muddle of the road, decision. On the one hand, he says state legislatures are subject to state judicial review under the state constitution when they write election law.

But he also stresses that “state courts do not have free rein” and “this Court has an obligation to ensure that state court interpretations of state law do not evade federal law.” So state court election rulings will be subject to U.S. Supreme Court review.

Yet the majority declined to adopt a standard for reviewing such state court decisions. “The questions presented in this area are complex and context specific,” the Chief writes. “We hold only that state courts may not transgress the ordinary bounds of judicial review such that they arrogate to themselves the power vested in state legislatures to regulate federal elections.”

But what does “ordinary bounds” mean? Perhaps as with pornography, the Court will know it when it sees it. But in practice any review is likely to be highly deferential to state courts, as Justice Brett Kavanaugh notes in a concurrence. He favors Chief Justice William Rehnquist’s standard in Bush v. Gore (2000) that considers whether the state court “impermissibly distorted” state law “beyond what a fair reading required.”

As Justice Clarence Thomas explains in a dissent joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, “it seems likely that ‘the bounds of ordinary judicial review’ will be a forgiving standard in practice,” swelling courts with election lawsuits that will be “quickly resolved with generic statements of deference to the state courts.”

The exceptions, he adds, “will arise haphazardly, in the midst of quickly evolving, politically charged controversies, and the winners of federal elections may be decided by a federal court’s expedited judgment that a state court exceeded ‘the bounds of ordinary judicial review’ in construing the state constitution.” Or vice versa.

This sounds right. Partisans routinely challenge state ballot laws in election years, and state courts often intervene at the last minute. Democratic attorney Marc Elias has built an entire legal practice doing this. The Court’s Moore ruling will invite more such legal elections mischief.

Will the High Court intervene and risk being attacked for election interference? Don’t count on it. The Court had precisely that opportunity in 2020 after Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court literally rewrote state election law to extend the deadline for receiving mail-in ballots. Justice Samuel Alito urged the Justices to hear the appeal, but the Court refused.

***
The Moore ruling is the third in three weeks that shows the supposedly partisan Justices tip-toeing around election law—almost certainly to the benefit of Democrats.

In Allen v. Milligan, the Court struck down a GOP Legislature’s map because it didn’t include a second majority-black district. On Monday the Court declined to review a lower judge’s order requiring that Louisiana’s Congressional map be redrawn to add another majority-black district. This encourages more lawsuits using Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to strike down GOP gerrymanders.

The Roberts Court may have a center-right majority, but it includes many flavors of conservative. That won’t stop the left from trying to destroy individual Justices, though perhaps Moore will provide a 24-hour respite.

Title: AZ elections director quits due to MAGA pressures
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 28, 2023, 01:20:37 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/arizona-county-elections-director-quits-accusing-officials-of-politicization_5359586.html?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-06-28-1&src_cmp=breaking-2023-06-28-1&utm_medium=email

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on June 28, 2023, 01:57:18 PM

"Roll was a registered Republican until recently. In a phone interview with PinalCentral, Roll expressed her changed sentiments toward her Republican colleagues, saying, “I can’t be associated with these people.”

I am skeptical.... of this .

 certainly possible, but

 now she sides with crats?

Title: Weird how deep staters keep getting these jobs
Post by: G M on June 29, 2023, 04:46:18 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/06/here-we-go-again-former-cia-agent-promoted/

Fortified, for their protection!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2023, 04:51:18 PM

Correct to point this out-- but if I am not mistaken, Zuck is blocked from using "Zuck bucks" via govt electoral agencies this time around.  Yes, the Pravdas will prada, but a shot not fired is always a miss.

Title: A lot of people are awake
Post by: G M on June 29, 2023, 05:48:34 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/06/huge-66-americans-two-thirds-believe-2024-presidential/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: G M on June 29, 2023, 08:22:00 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on June 29, 2023, 04:51:18 PM

Correct to point this out-- but if I am not mistaken, Zuck is blocked from using "Zuck bucks" via govt electoral agencies this time around.  Yes, the Pravdas will prada, but a shot not fired is always a miss.

 :roll:

Title: Re: Weird how deep staters keep getting these jobs
Post by: G M on June 29, 2023, 08:22:31 PM

Quote from: G M on June 29, 2023, 04:46:18 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/06/here-we-go-again-former-cia-agent-promoted/

Fortified, for their protection!

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1607539875712217089.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on June 30, 2023, 05:10:19 AM

a) The eye roll response to a fair and accurate point, which graciously acknowledged your point, annoys a bit.

b) I will be playing forward the IT-Goolag connection article in your next post.

c) Applying blockchain to voting seems like a potent idea.

Title: get psyched VOTE harder - we need to get the ballots
Post by: ccp on July 02, 2023, 11:45:59 AM

Mamma said knock the Dems out!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vimZj8HW0Kg

I got to join local Republican Party

Title: Mail in vote fraud
Post by: DougMacG on July 05, 2023, 05:45:35 AM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/07/a_line_of_defense_against_mailin_ballot_fraud.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2023, 05:53:54 AM

Doug:

This seems super powerful to me!

Pasting the whole thing here so it does not get Memory Holed somehow!

Playing this forward wherever I can!

==================

A Line of Defense Against Mail-in Ballot Fraud - American Thinker

July 4, 2023
A Line of Defense Against Mail-in Ballot Fraud
By Jay Valentine
One of the best things about a segment on the War Room, after virtually meeting Steve Bannon, is the incoming mail two days later.

The RNC, the Trump Campaign, almost every Republican state party chairperson believes the road to 2024 electoral victory is to “out-ballot-harvest the left.” It’s hard to argue with absolute nonsense.  To the rescue, however, comes a retired mail carrier who sent the following message:

Message: I am a retired mail man.

I just saw your War Room interview.
I now know where the mules got their ballots. Straight from the post office in returned/undeliverable mail.
While I have zero proof of where they ended up, I had those ballots you were talking about in my mail bag with wrong addresses or lacking apartment numbers or even people that moved and still had ballots delivered to their old apartment.
We put those ballots in a basket and someone came by and picked them up.
Hundreds or even thousands of ballots.
Who picked them up, where did they go?
Now we know why signature match was removed…
Someone needs to investigate the post office and their democratic union run activities.

Tell us, RNC, how are you going to beat this?


The only way to stop the government, in particular the United States Post Office, from gathering hundreds of thousands of loose ballots, all of which go somewhere other than to Republican candidates -- is to stop those ballots in the first place.

We know, from numerous sources, that the Post Office is one of several ballot-gathering apparatuses of the Left.  How much ballot harvesting at evangelical churches is needed to make up for government-sponsored ballot harvesting -- industrial scale?

A key to winning in 2024 is to identify every, or as close to every as technology and diligent work can enable -- every ballot being sent out that will land in that “basket” that “somebody” later picked up.

What are the addresses on those ballots?

Ballots mailed to vacant lots -- or in Arizona, street corners.
Ballots sent to apartment buildings without the unit or APT number.
Ballots sent to college dorms for students registered there for decades.
Ballots sent to fraternities with a 105-year-old student.
Ballots sent to churches -- which have no bedrooms, thus cannot be someone’s domicile.
Ballots for the person who moved -- over a year ago.
Ballots mailed to hotels and casinos.
Ballots where the address was modified -- by the voter commission (as in Arizona) -- the week those ballots went out, thus missing the recipient.
Ballots sent to Manchurian restaurants, laundromats, banks, and 7-Elevens -- all of which are not valid addresses for voters.
Ballots sent to UPS and FedEx boxes -- sometimes to a dozen people living in that little box.
Ballots sent to the apartment building -- but the address is the clubhouse -- which has no bedrooms.
Ballots sent to the 22,000 new voters in a single county entered just days before the election -- who were invisible to Arizona Republican candidates in 2022.
Ballots sent to Mr. Gonzales, Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Gonzalles, all at the same address with the same date of birth.
Ballots sent to the Wisconsin college dorm that has 1,000 registered voters but can house only 250 adults.
Ballots sent to the 11 adults at the single-family Houston home that is 823 square feet with one bedroom and one bathroom.
Ballots mailed to people registered at an address in 2020 but the building was not built until 2022.
Ballots sent to the rehab facility for dozens of people who claim it as a residence for years.  (Rehab is not a “years” thing.)
Welcome to the Undeliverable Ballot Database.


A simple mail carrier, supported by other mail carriers we interviewed in person, shows how completely useless is the GOP campaign to “out-ballot-harvest” the Left.

Ballots -- which will not land in an eligible recipient’s hand - must be identified, months in advance of being mailed.

Most of those ballots, using super-compute technology, can be identified, shown to be illegitimate, and brought to everyone’s attention 6 months before election day.

When Harris County (Houston) floods the zone six months before early voting with 240,000 new voters, each needs to be instantly checked, verified, validated, and if necessary challenged -- before the 2024 election.  Wake up, Ted Cruz!

When Arizona and Wisconsin counties change identifiers the week mail-in ballots go out, then change them back, real time compute needs to flag it and ask “why?”

Here, let’s do it.

Two state legislatures invited the Fractal team to do a “proof of concept” for their state voter rolls.  So, that’s what we’re doing.

We ingest multiple copies of the voter rolls.  We want at least three dates but in one of the states, we will probably do a dozen.  Multiple copies of voter rolls shows movement, lights up changes made to the voter rolls that make you say hmm.

We compare every copy of the voter roll with every other copy -- every cell against all corresponding cells.  If someone’s zip code was changed, we flag it.  Might be no big deal, but then, might be Arizona where 33,000 zips were changed days before the election.

In a state rep election, for a Republican candidate, a primary, we found 212 people who moved from all over the state to this guy’s district.  They all voted.  Then about a month after the election, they all moved out of the district.  Where do you think they moved?  Back to their original houses!  He won!

We ingest the personal property tax rolls for the county.  Those show the type of building, if it is a business, the number of bedrooms, baths, units, year built, square footage of living space, and about 40 other useful attributes.

In Austin, Texas, we add the construction/permit rolls, giving us a closer to real time view of every property improvement.

For these two state legislatures, we want something for the Attorney General.

We bring in the FEC (Federal Election Commission) contribution rolls.  With a single click, the AG can see every “contribution mule” in the state.  If that’s not enough, we bring in the massive Medicaid rolls -- all claims, all providers, all recipients for dozens of years.  At this point, we are in the tens of billions record level -- and guess what we find?

Some of those same sketchy voter addresses -- fake people living in UPS boxes correspond to Medicaid providers -- who are likely fake.  We migrated from just cleaning voter rolls to making a state some real dough -- identifying Medicaid fraud.

This is the power of real time super-compute.

Our thesis to state governments is that it isn’t just voter fraud.  It’s identity fraud and it is not just in their voter rolls, identity fraud permeates every state government roll.

While we developed the Undeliverable Ballot Database to identify every address where a ballot will be sent yet not find an eligible recipient, we also created an address and identity database for people who claim one identity in Medicaid, another in WIC and another on the voter roll.

Vast government databases are virtually invisible to current SQL/relational technology.  Fractal and other super-computes are delivering real-time visibility to identity fraud lasting decades.

One of the first benefits is the Undeliverable Ballot Database -- saving the mail carrier all those fake ballots.

Jay Valentine led the team that built the eBay fraud detection engine and the TSA No-Fly List.  His Fractal team is currently working with several state legislatures to identify identity fraud in voter rolls, Medicaid and WIC rolls, FEC contribution mules.  Jay can be reached at Omega4America.com and his Twitter is @OmeAmerica17300

Image: National Archives

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on July 05, 2023, 06:27:36 AM

I agree.  Even with '2000 mules' exposé, we were not fully understanding HOW they were doing it and therefore not able to stop them.

Now this from inside the US Postal Service:

"I now know where the mules got their ballots. Straight from the post office in returned/undeliverable mail.
While I have zero proof of where they ended up, I had those ballots you were talking about in my mail bag with wrong addresses or lacking apartment numbers or even people that moved and still had ballots delivered to their old apartment.
We put those ballots in a basket and someone came by and picked them up.
Hundreds or even thousands of ballots.
Who picked them up, where did they go?"

(Doug) Yes, that makes sense, now how do you stop it?

You need a 'poll watcher' on every postal carrier and every post office at every possible moment for weeks and months?

The obvious answer is election rules (laws) that control the fraud:

No absentee voting without a good reason

No ballot mailed out without a formal request from the voter.

Election day, not election season.

I received multiple forms to register to vote from the City of Minneapolis by mail when anyone could see from the address I don't live in the city (and don't need multiple forms).

They started this process by electing/installing 'Soros' prosecutors and 'Soros' state secretaries of state to 'regulate' and administer the elections. 

Funny that we finally found something liberals want to deregulate, elections.

They narrowed the targets to maybe 6 cities and maybe just certain precincts in those cities.  And then they turned in whatever they needed.

Anyway, it can't be disrupted without being fully understood.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 05, 2023, 06:32:44 AM

Yes AND we now have a simple, clear, easy-to-state hypothesis to the many, many people deeply offended by what they believe about Trump.  THIS matters!!!

Title: WT: Federal law versus state vote count times
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 07, 2023, 09:23:06 AM

CLASH: States expanded their early voting and mail-in ballot period during the depths of the COVID-19 pandemic. Congress set a national Election Day in the 1840s to standardize and speed up what had been a month of voting across different states. ASSOCIATED PRESS


The pandemic dramatically expanded the number of jurisdictions with permissive mail balloting rules, fueling some skepticism about the integrity of elections. The timing of delivery for mail-in ballots can rest with the local post office. ASSOCIATED PRESS

ELECTIONS

State’s expanded voting rules test federal Election Day law

Lawsuit seeks to cut North Dakota’s 13-day ballot count

BY STEPHEN DINAN THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Activists are challenging the expansion of Election Day into a full election season with a lawsuit aimed at trying to stuff the genie back in the bottle.

The immediate target is North Dakota, which counts ballots received nearly two weeks after the big day. The broader target is the growing sense that the country has moved beyond the concept of a single day for deciding elections.

“Election Day is supposed to be election day. That’s what Congress said, that’s what people grew up with in this country, and the last two elections it’s become election month,” said J. Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation.

The foundation brought the lawsuit on behalf of Mark Splonskowski, Burleigh County auditor and a member of the county’s election canvassing board in North Dakota. He says he is forced to violate either state law, which allows ballots to be received and counted up to 13 days after elections, or federal law, which sets Election Day as the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.

The question is likely to come down to what counts as casting a ballot.

North Dakota’s law requires mailed ballots to be filled out and postmarked by the day before the election, though the lawsuit claims they can be counted

if they are received before the county canvassing boards meet. That date is 13 days after Election Day.

The state is generous with its absentee policy. It allows anyone to request a mail-in ballot without giving a reason until the day before an election.

In his lawsuit, Mr. Splonskowski says at least 212 ballots received after Election Day last year were counted, including one without a postmark.

North Dakota’s secretary of state, which oversees elections, and its attorney general did not respond to requests for comment.

Mr. Adams said the issue of post-Election Day ballots grew more important as states rushed to embrace expansive absentee and mailed-ballot rules, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Several cases involving post-Election Day ballots have risen through the courts, but the Supreme Court has largely batted them down without getting to the heart of the issue that Mr. Splonskowski is raising.

Congress set a national election day in the 1840s to standardize and speed up what had been a month of voting across different states. In the 1870s, Congress fixed the day for all federal contests.

Voting was public in the Colonial days and the early days of the republic. Those eligible showed up at specific times and places to announce their votes — often after candidates plied them with alcohol.

War made absentee voting necessary. Pennsylvania allowed absentee voting for troops fighting the War of 1812, and many Northern and Southern states adopted the practice for 1864. Some voted at their Civil War encampments, and others cast ballots through the mail. Some historians said these were the votes that ensured President Lincoln won a second term.

The practice was generally restricted at first. In recent decades, states have moved to expand the reasons for allowing early or mail voting. Some states now conduct all-mail elections in which every eligible voter is automatically sent a ballot.

The pandemic dramatically expanded the number of jurisdictions with permissive mail balloting rules, fueling some skepticism about the integrity of elections. President Trump criticized mail-in voting as “out of control” for the 2020 elections.

Mr. Adams said the delayed deadlines for counting ballots allow elections to “linger and linger.” Meanwhile, ballots are in the hands of the post office.

The lawsuit seeks a declaration from the U.S. District Court of North Dakota that the state’s law violates federal law. If Mr. Splonskowski prevails, Mr. Adams said, other states could face challenges.

Congress has created carve-outs from the law, specifically for military and overseas voters, whose mail-in ballots received after Election Day are counted.

Mr. Adams said that bolsters his argument because it’s proof that Congress must write exceptions when it wants states to circumvent the Election Day law.

“If there’s going to be an extended election, Congress has to give the specifi c green light on a specific topic,” Mr. Adams said.

He said ballots cast before Election Day don’t raise the same integrity issues because they are ready to be counted before the big day.

Federal courts have ruled on the issue and found early voting to be in accordance with federal law, he said

Title: Zuck bucks
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 12, 2023, 09:46:59 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZTOGLd8ysU

Title: Election accuracy confidence
Post by: DougMacG on July 14, 2023, 07:39:37 AM

22% of Republicans and 44% of voters have confidence votes will be counted accurately.

THAT NUMBER SHOULD BE 99.9%+.

Source:  http://apnews.com/

Title: More Zuck bucks
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 15, 2023, 07:05:24 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZTOGLd8ysU

Title: Criminalizing the electoral process
Post by: DougMacG on July 19, 2023, 05:42:59 AM

(where is our j6 thread?)

https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/07/trump-says-hes-a-target-of-jan-6-grand-jury-expects-imminent-arrest-and-indictment/

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2023/07/18/turley_jack_smith_needs_real_evidence_of_trump_doing_more_than_speaking_to_charge_him_over_january_6.html

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 19, 2023, 02:28:22 PM

https://firehydrantoffreedom.com/index.php?topic=1903.1900

https://firehydrantoffreedom.com/index.php?topic=2662.msg103572#msg103572

Title: NC: Student IDs to vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 21, 2023, 03:46:06 PM

https://ncnewsline.com/briefs/nc-elections-board-approves-list-of-university-and-government-ids-that-can-be-used-for-voting/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=96ca7054-f702-4c98-b25d-22ef3452a885

Title: JW success in IL
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 22, 2023, 08:50:11 AM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/illinois-conservative-union-et-al-v-illinois-et-al-settlement-05542/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=weekly+update&utm_term=members

Title: Election process, fraud, Republicans should fight tooth and nail!
Post by: DougMacG on July 23, 2023, 03:22:19 PM

https://dailycaller.com/2023/07/23/opinion-republicans-should-fight-tooth-and-nail-to-reverse-dems-assault-on-election-integrity-deroy-murdock/

Go after election integrity like they stole it from you.

Title: WSJ on "True the Vote"
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 24, 2023, 05:51:04 AM

If we are to succeed in restoring vote integrity, we need to do one fk of a lot better than this:

============‘2000 Mules’ but No Evidence
True the Vote stiff-arms law enforcement as it faces a defamation case.
By The Editorial Board
July 23, 2023 6:15 pm ET



President Trump keeps insisting the 2020 election was stolen, and in a recent interview he referred to the group True the Vote, saying “they have people stuffing the ballot boxes on tapes.” This was the thesis of the movie “2000 Mules,” but then why is True the Vote refusing to work with law enforcement?

This month Georgia officials sued the group for ignoring a subpoena for substantiation of its claims. True the Vote submitted a complaint in 2021 about ballot trafficking in Georgia. In April 2022, the State Election Board issued a subpoena for, to pick one thing, “the identities of the ‘ten hubs’ in Atlanta that you allege participated in a ballot harvesting scheme.”

Shouldn’t they be eager to comply? Instead, after the subpoena arrived, True the Vote asked to withdraw its complaint. The state board declined, given the gravity of the allegations, and now it’s telling a judge the subpoena is being flouted: “True the Vote continues to indifferently vacillate between statements of assured compliance and blanket refusal.”

Curious. In a letter to the FBI and the IRS last fall, the Arizona Attorney General’s Office said True the Vote also gave it the runaround. Reggie Grigsby, chief special agent, wrote that True the Vote publicly asserted “they had provided us with the information—to include a hard drive.” He called this “patently false.”

According to Mr. Grigsby, True the Vote told the FBI they’d given their evidence to the state, while telling the state they’d given it to the FBI. Because the nonprofit group was using its fraud claims to raise “considerable sums of money,” Mr. Grigsby said, “further review of its financials may be warranted.” True the Vote did not reply to a request for comment on Georgia’s and Arizona’s contentions.

The group and Dinesh D’Souza, who narrates “2000 Mules,” are also being sued for defamation by a Georgia voter depicted in the movie. Surveillance tape shows Mark Andrews putting ballots into a drop box. “What you are seeing is a crime,” Mr. D’Souza says. “These are fraudulent votes.” Mr. Andrews responds that he was legally delivering his family’s ballots. His unblurred face and license plate appeared in True the Vote media hits. State investigators cleared him three days before “2000 Mules” was released.

What sticks out most is the movie’s elisions. True the Vote says it bought 10 trillion signals of cellphone data and looked for phones near 10 drop boxes and five unnamed liberal nonprofits. Voilà: 250 mules in Georgia, 200 in Arizona, 1,100 in Philadelphia.

Yet the Georgia Bureau of Investigation told the group in 2021 it lacked probable cause to examine 279 phones that “made multiple trips to within 100 feet of a voter drop box.” A hundred feet? That might snag any visitor to a public library where a drop box was placed. With 10 trillion pings, what are the odds that some random patterns would show up even in states that Mr. Trump won?

The film shows a map of an alleged mule’s route in Atlanta, but critics say the dots don’t exactly match actual drop box sites. “The movie graphics are not literal interpretations of our data,” a True the Vote analyst told the Washington Post. Philadelphia is cited as having the most mules. But wait, Mr. Trump won 17.9% of ballots there, notably better than his 15.4% in 2016. Also, Philly fell to 10.7% of the state’s total vote, from 11.6%. Heckuva job, liberal mules.

To bolster the phone data, True the Vote says it obtained four million minutes of surveillance video, but why doesn’t “2000 Mules” show any of the alleged footage of the same person going to multiple drop boxes? “It was taken out,” True the Vote said, “because the video is extremely poor quality.”

Four million minutes of tape, and no clear shot of illegality. If activists want to double-check voter lists and surveillance videos, go ahead. But if they take liberties with facts and refuse to help law enforcement, what game are they really playing?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 24, 2023, 02:30:32 PM

interesting on 2,000 mules

yet despite this something certainly did happen

all the voting rules were changed to give Dems more time to bring in ballots

When we went to bed Trump was leading in all the swing regions

When we woke up 10s of 1,000 ballots all get dumped and counted overnight and Trump was behind in all the same swing locations

Right in front of our eyes

I don't have faith in Ronda McDaniel ........

 :|

Title: POTH: Giuliani concedes having made false statements
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 26, 2023, 09:06:47 AM

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/26/us/politics/giuliani-georgia-election-workers.html?unlocked_article_code=adThQtTRg6lDJM8z3BFIQbAByEe45Jh7zzcW3b82Dc-3mwKiD0sZ0X9pr8YfelVnyn0Te5rBdKLhdjQ98OxDyKwvn4IxD4mvhQjjqZAN1pDpNtqEnjX7bi3sTC90tLFRaNEpodPZElP-2zlsSUJNTgrrfeuXlcygrzDxPbbGNTtt4ct0xrwhJ68YhDpmnENkB52FkcuC-Pto1M25gvRFdIiNj_p9nC4a26kSFIKWRRFIcrITu05jlbwa5sBJPDFl3XIQCVp2VrCdW_o5Q_Bd_VoLBkcIon_h5JPMmfZCofgMwucM36zTcYQZXLJfvgOFLfa0bZesOoGo-dG7ixemQvQh6BIHLLfgdE9FEvxlVg&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on July 26, 2023, 09:55:29 AM

I think this is worth about  $500 million in damages don't you?

"just to make a point and to prevent such outrage again"

 :roll:

Title: Photo ID in NC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on July 28, 2023, 01:51:48 PM

https://ncnewsline.com/2023/07/25/nc-lurches-toward-elections-with-voter-photo-id/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=c78d5304-63b0-4b51-b387-86e59a3a1a32

Title: 69% of GOP voters don't believe Biden got the votes to win
Post by: DougMacG on August 03, 2023, 06:38:10 PM

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/poll-election-fraud-joe-biden/2023/08/03/id/1129507/
-----
Put another way, fewer than 30% of the opposition party think Biden won the 2020 election.

The country as we know it ends when the side that loses doesn't abide by the result.  The above doubt is unsustainable.

It is the DEMOCRATS IN POWER who should be working to secure the elections if they believe they win with no cheat.  They could govern and control us better if we knew the result was legit.

The status quo leads to civil war if not corrected. That's not good for the ruling party, especially when all the guns are on the other side.  )

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 04, 2023, 07:45:17 AM

Mass mail ballots and ballot harvesting vastly expanded via the Trojan Horse excuse of the Wuhan Virus-- for which they now claim permanence.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on August 04, 2023, 08:21:54 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on August 04, 2023, 07:45:17 AM

Mass mail ballots and ballot harvesting vastly expanded via the Trojan Horse excuse of the Wuhan Virus-- for which they now claim permanence.

They claim permanence and it's our challenge to overcome that.

State and local elections matter. George Soros and the rest of the Left have been targeting key positions like district attorneys and state secretaries of state, and putting real money and effort into it with results to show for it. School boards too and the education regime.  The left has been doing the hard work all the way up and down the ticket for a long time, and our side hasn't.  Money and lots of behind the scenes work, they're doing it, we aren't.

Our side doesn't seem to care, and it's more than frustrating.

It may be a once in a lifetime opportunity  now to reverse this wide open, mail vote harvest season and replace it with one highly regulated election day.

Title: What would a legitimate Democrat win look like to Republicans?
Post by: DougMacG on August 05, 2023, 10:33:25 AM

A leftist author writes a great question - and then doesn't answer it.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/08/what-would-a-legitimate-biden-win-look-like-to-republicans.html?utm_source=msn&utm_medium=f1&utm_campaign=feed-part

What selective amnesia these jerks have, doubting every election they lose and then painting it as a disease when the other side does that. It's only the losing side that matters. The winning side never doubts the outcome.

He gets so close to answering it just by asking the question. A result we would have confidence in would have all those things mentioned recently on these pages. One, in person, election day.  Absentee ballots issued only for good reason. Voter ID. No one but you touches your ballot, again, except only for good reason.  No one touches the balance without multiple election judges present. And so on.

But of course the author only tells us how stupid Republicans are to not trust the result, then suddenly the column ends without answering the question he asked.

My question, if they aren't planning to win by cheating, why not reform the process until both sides have confidence?

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 05, 2023, 06:43:45 PM

"My question, if they aren't planning to win by cheating, why not reform the process until both sides have confidence?"

THIS.

Title: the Left's response wold be
Post by: ccp on August 06, 2023, 08:02:36 AM

"My question, if they aren't planning to win by cheating, why not reform the process until both sides have confidence?"

Shysters respond :

nothing illegal here.

no evidence of cheating

go prove it !

Title: JW's Tom Vitton: Is Election rigged already?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 12, 2023, 07:02:28 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2V6TR2y5pY 

Title: MI AG says 100K fraudulent votes in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 12, 2023, 02:26:54 PM

second

https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1690102049629749248

Title: Up from the Memory Hole with Election Challenges
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 13, 2023, 06:45:19 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XX2Ejqjz6TA

Title: Some interesting history included here
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 15, 2023, 07:23:37 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/aug/10/fake-electors-play-starring-role-jan-6-charges-aga/

, , ,

Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, was called to testify before the grand jury that indicted Mr. Trump over his post-election actions.

Mr. Fitton, who consulted with Mr. Trump following the election, said he testified to the grand jury about his concerns in 2020 when it was reported that a group of top government officials, including Democrat John Podesta, participated in a project called the Transition Integrity Project. The participants played out 2020 election scenarios that would keep Mr. Trump out of office.

Mr. Podesta, who managed Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and is currently a senior adviser in the Biden administration, played the role of Mr. Biden in the enactment.

He acted out a scenario in which Mr. Biden could not concede the election due to alleged voter suppression and instead persuaded the governors of two swing states to send alternative electors to the Electoral College.

Mr. Podesta’s scenario also envisioned three states seceding from the U.S. in protest if Mr. Trump were to win the 2020 contest.

“I told the grand jury that this is something that I was very much concerned about,” Mr. Fitton said. “Because it looked to me like they were threatening civil war if the election didn’t go the way they wanted it.”

Title: 14 IL counties have more voters than citizens of age
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 15, 2023, 07:25:44 AM

second

https://www.judicialwatch.org/14-of-illinois-counties-have-more-voters-than-citizens-of-legal-voting-age/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 15, 2023, 08:26:07 AM

interesting
too bad the rest of the media will ignore this

at least the few of this here are outraged

it may get a quick mention on Waters Ingraham
and then get rinsed down the news drain

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on August 15, 2023, 12:36:24 PM

Speaking of Georgia, here is five straight minutes of Stacey Abrams denying the election result:
https://t.co/oRYMeZR6vQ

And here we have 0 minutes of democrats, media and prosecutors pointing out how wrongful, dangerous and criminal her speech is:
https://youtu.be/K8E_zMLCRNg

Title: 1960 Hawaii sent two slates of electors
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 15, 2023, 06:36:32 PM

https://www.hawaiifreepress.com/Articles-Main/ID/26628/1960-Hawaii-Sends-Two-Slates-to-Electoral-College

Title: Byron York
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 16, 2023, 10:23:25 AM

Trump Indictment Four: Too much
by Byron York,
Chief Political Correspondent
August 15, 2023 05:15 PM

TRUMP INDICTMENT FOUR: TOO MUCH. The MSNBC coverage of Trump Indictment Four, running late Monday night into early Tuesday morning, had an odd undertone. The network's stars had gathered for the Big Event, but something seemed just a little wrong. They seemed like children who had gotten much more than they asked for for Christmas: a little overwhelmed and confused. They were happy, of course, but worried it might be too much.

At about the same time, a liberal Washington Post columnist was expressing misgivings about Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis's indictment alleging a vast conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election. Willis is "well within her legal rights to bring the case under state law,” Ruth Marcus wrote. "Whether that prosecution is advisable, in the wake of federal charges arising out of the same conduct, is a tougher question — one about which I have misgivings."

The headline of Marcus's column was "Is Georgia's case against Trump one case too many?" Marcus certainly approves of indicting former President Donald Trump, even of having multiple indictments as insurance against an unexpected hung jury or acquittal — can't risk Trump getting off! But after the Georgia case, she confessed to a certain "queasiness" and could not see a limiting principle. "There is a concern about piling on here," she wrote. "Why stop at Georgia? The federal indictment sets out conduct in six other states in which Trump and his co-conspirators allegedly sought to overturn the election results. Will he be prosecuted in those states too? At some point, it becomes unfair — yes, even to Trump, to go state by state."


The Georgia indictment appears designed to please hardcore Trump antagonists who believe the other prosecutors, Alvin Bragg in Manhattan and Jack Smith with the Justice Department, have gone too easy on the former president. Willis has thrown everything she can think of at Trump, who is charged with 13 felony counts. His 18 co-defendants, among them Rudy Giuliani, Sidney Powell, Mark Meadows, John Eastman, and Jeffrey Clark, are charged with dozens more. There are 30 unindicted co-conspirators. Even though Willis is the district attorney of one county in Georgia, she has alleged a massive, nationwide conspiracy under the direction of the president of the United States.

Perhaps the newsiest thing about the indictment is that it relies on Georgia's RICO statute, listing 161 "overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy." The counts vary by defendant, but each person faces the main RICO charge, which carries with it a five-year mandatory sentence.

Many of the "overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy" are everyday events that are not illegal. But they must ultimately lead to an illegal act. And that is where the Georgia indictment is likely to cause controversy, particularly in one area — the charges surrounding what prosecutors call the "fake electors" scheme.

Look at one person charged in connection with that matter: David Shafer, who at the time of the 2020 election was head of the state Republican Party. The following is adapted from a newsletter I wrote in January 2022, when criminal charges for this incident seemed remote at best:

In the days and weeks after Nov. 3, 2020, Trump filed a lot of election lawsuits. Nearly all of them failed, some immediately and some over time. Among the lawsuits Trump filed was one challenging the results of the presidential election in Georgia.

Dec. 14, 2020, was an important day in the process. That was the day the Electoral College was required by law to meet in the states and approve slates of electors. Those would then be sent to Washington, where Congress would certify them on Jan. 6, 2021. On Dec. 14, in the states President Joe Biden won, including Georgia, electors for Biden met to formalize their votes.

But at that time, there was still a Trump lawsuit pending in Georgia. Some Trump supporters' thinking went like this: The election is not finally settled. What if Trump were to win the suit and a judge were to throw out Biden's victory? You might view this as a fantasy — indeed, it was — but in some cases, Trump supporters thought they had a strong legal case that would prevail if only a judge would hear it. In the event that a court threw out Biden's victory, Trump would need a slate of electors to cast electoral votes for him. And by law, the electors had to have voted on Dec. 14. If Trump won the case and a state's results were thrown out and Trump had no electors, then the whole election challenge would be a waste.

So in Georgia, as well as a few other states, at the urging of lawyers working in tandem with the Trump campaign, Trump supporters in Georgia decided to choose electors on Dec. 14 on a contingency basis. That is, the electors would be selected, and if, at a later date, Trump prevailed in court and Biden's electors were disqualified, the Trump electors would be presented to Congress on Jan. 6. There was no realistic chance of that happening, but many of the Trump supporters were not ready to give up.

Shafer publicly announced the Republicans' intention. He invited the press to cover the meeting at which "electors" were chosen. He tweeted about it when it happened. There were news accounts of it. "We were told by the lawyers that if the Republican nominees for the Electoral College did not meet on Dec. 14 and cast their votes, then Trump's lawsuit would be mooted because there would be no remedy available to him if he prevailed," Shafer told me in January 2022. "So we met to preserve his remedies if he prevailed."

Shafer's group met in the Georgia State Capitol in Atlanta, the same day the Biden electors were meeting elsewhere in the building. The GOP had invited reporters to come. Some did, from both local and national outlets. You can read this account of the meeting — "As electoral college formalizes Biden's win, Trump backers hold their own vote" — in the Washington Post.

Just to make sure everyone knew what was happening, Shafer posted what had been done within an hour after the meeting's conclusion. "Because the president's lawsuit contesting the Georgia election is still pending, the Republican nominees for presidential elector met today at noon in the State Capitol and cast their votes for president and vice president," Shafer wrote. "Had we not met today and cast our votes, the president's pending election contest would have been effectively mooted. Our action today preserves his rights under Georgia law." Shafer did not claim that the Trump "electors" chosen that day were the real Georgia presidential electors but that they would be ready to step in should Trump win his election lawsuit and the results be overturned.

So that is what David Shafer did. And for his efforts he is now charged with:

1) Violation of the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
2) Impersonating a Public Officer
3) Forgery in the First Degree
4) False Statements and Writings
5) Criminal Attempt to Commit Filing False Documents
6) Three additional counts of forgery and false statements

In the months leading up to the indictment, Shafer's lawyers repeatedly asked prosecutors for a meeting so they could make the case for his innocence. Willis's prosecutors did not grant them a meeting. Shafer then sent long letters outlining his case. Here is part of one letter from March 2023:

Mr. Shafer and the other Republican contingent presidential electors acted with complete transparency. Members of the press attended, observed, recorded and reported on their meeting. In addition to the live television news coverage, WSB-TV's Richard Elliott live tweeted a photograph of the contingent electors taken while the meeting was in progress; Greg Bluestein of The Atlanta Journal Constitution re-tweeted Mr. Elliott's photograph and tweeted [another] photograph of fellow contingent elector Brad Carver casting his vote from inside the room during the meeting; and Jeff Amy and Ben Gray of the Associated Press attended the meeting and took [another] photograph, which has been republished by multiple other media outlets. [Shafer included the photos in his letter.]

The news coverage and Mr. Shafer's tweets (and other contemporaneous evidence) make plain that the Republican electors' meeting was public and that they cast contingent votes on the advice of counsel to preserve a legal remedy and protect the right of Georgia to have its electoral votes counted in the event that the then-pending election contest was adjudicated in President Trump's favor. They made their lawful intent in doing so explicit and unmistakable at the time.

Shafer and the others did not claim to be the genuine electors. They explained at the time that the document they signed was a provisional slate. They did so on the advice of lawyers. They told the public precisely what they were doing. And now, Willis says that is a RICO violation, forgery, false statements, and impersonating a public officer.

Of course, the GOP cause was hopeless, and Shafer should have known it. Trump was not going to win the lawsuit. The hoped-for contingency was never going to happen. But for whatever reason — hope, belief in the cause, pressure from GOP voters, whatever — Shafer signed the slates. It was a useless effort, but it was not a crime.

For a deeper dive into many of the topics covered in the Daily Memo, please listen to my podcast, The Byron York Show — available on Radio America and the Ricochet Audio Network and everywhere else podcasts can be found.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on August 16, 2023, 10:38:42 AM

is the '245 election already rigged by crats

of course,

everything else is . 

Title: List of Dems trying to overturn elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 22, 2023, 09:17:33 AM

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/aug/21/stolen-rigged-and-illegitimate-democrats-long-hist/?utm_source=Boomtrain&utm_medium=subscriber&utm_campaign=morning&utm_term=newsletter&utm_content=morning&bt_ee=VHUURRUgHJtWfjbAAG0s4AthnE6DULEn0WpvR%2BmwGvDcHw09UZl0vE0Xk%2BXgIpfg&bt_ts=1692705657539

Title: PA to start reporting voting machine problems
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 23, 2023, 06:17:55 AM

PENNSYLVANIA

State to start publicly reporting voting machine problems

BY MARC LEVY ASSOCIATED PRESS HARRISBURG, PA. | A legal challenge in Pennsylvania over the viability of a particular manufacturer’s voting system has ended in a settlement that advocates say will boost accountability and transparency by requiring election officials to record and publicly report problems with voting machines.

The election-security advocates who sued say such a requirement will provide a contemporary account of which voting machines are working well and which ones aren’t — information that can benefit every state.

Some election officials also see the potential to help suppress conspiracy theories and misinformation about voting machine malfunctions that can fester on Election Day and in the days after when votes are being counted.

Others worry, though, about the breadth of what must be reported and if it could be used to undermine confidence in elections. Pennsylvania, a key presidential battleground state, was buffeted by conspiracy theories, misinformation and lawsuits in 2020 by Republican Donald Trump and his allies in a bid to overturn Democrat Joseph R. Biden’s victory there.

The federal Election Assistance Commission requires manufacturers to report malfunctions to it, but the groups and advocates who sued Pennsylvania say they were unaware of a similar state-level public reporting requirement.

“You can have rumors swirling around, or you can have facts on the ground and real transparency and real accountability, and that’s why this new requirement is a big advance,” said Rich Garella, who sued Pennsylvania in 2019 along with the National Election Defense Coalition, Citizens for Better Elections and 12 other people.

In a statement, Gov. Josh Shapiro’s top election official, Secretary of State Al Schmidt, said the settlement “will provide additional public transparency” into voting systems used in Pennsylvania.

The settlement was filed in court last week.

The original lawsuit, filed in late 2019, grew out of complaints about the ExpressVote XL touchscreen system made by Omaha, Nebraskabased Election Systems & Software, that had just been bought by three jurisdictions in Pennsylvania, including Philadelphia.

The suit had sought to prevent the use of the systems in Pennsylvania, but state officials defended their certification of the system.

Title: Fed judge cuts down GA and TX laws
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 24, 2023, 11:21:15 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/us/federal-judges-gut-gop-backed-election-integrity-laws-in-georgia-texas-5476838?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-08-21-1&src_cmp=breaking-2023-08-21-1&utm_medium=email&est=JiZO5r%2Fkg7WCAoZ0WQYLU%2FuPiFIoQFbmrLpc1adOSzHOWyJa3TcGJy%2Br0FYbCo7Lcr7I

Title: GA Gov Kemp: Anyone can hack a voting machine
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 28, 2023, 05:43:09 AM

https://www.independentsentinel.com/georgia-gov-kemp-admits-anybody-can-hack-a-voting-machine/

Title: MI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on August 29, 2023, 07:59:54 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/mystery-swirls-over-batch-of-thousands-of-2020-voter-registration-forms-in-michigan-5465266?utm_source=Morningbrief&src_src=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2023-08-29&src_cmp=mb-2023-08-29&utm_medium=email&est=e%2F2OUXO2evXe%2B5Oqmnx5sWBZSXR4pcu3XAR4Fm6ob1rn9CIqacdDNZyN1uARkT3JTUjw

Title: MS fraud in Dem Primary
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 02, 2023, 12:46:34 PM

https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1697738288097108069?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1697738288097108069%7Ctwgr%5E76a9581b0f99ba3b0b529401f8e293fd6300d8cb%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.paragonpride.com%2Fforum%2Fthreads%2Felectoral-integrity-issues.11914%2Fpage-34

Title: Fed court strikes down AL map
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 05, 2023, 09:05:41 AM

https://dailycaller.com/2023/09/05/deeply-troubled-federal-court-alabama-congressional-map-struck-down/?pnespid=pqF6DS8WPbMQweCYtm6mEYCXpRGoUsYqLuij2_c49xBmLgU0f5oQfX2dCncc_wCuLcWJDt2q

Title: AZ: Judge rules on Kari Lake lawsuit
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 06, 2023, 07:30:46 PM

https://resistthemainstream.com/judge-issues-ruling-on-kari-lakes-lawsuit/

Title: AZ: Judge rules mail in ballot process illegal
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 09, 2023, 08:02:38 AM

https://dainikbidyaloy.com/2023/09/08/arizona-judge-rules-current-mail-in-ballot-process-unlawful-violated-the-law-in-both-2020-2022-elections-half-a-million-ballots-fraudulent/

Title: first make automatic anyone who get driver's license in PA registered to vote
Post by: ccp on September 28, 2023, 11:25:57 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/rnc-chair-tries-to-stop-governor-s-last-minute-voting-change/ar-AA1hoCo9?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=370d8fbc63cc489aad88dd7c94fe6524&ei=47

NEXT step
get illegals to get driver's licenses:

https://www.bing.com/search?q=can+illegal+aliens+get+driver+license+in+pa&form=ANNTH1&refig=b4301486f61f4c809ab37b670248b934

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on September 28, 2023, 01:57:39 PM

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1706315811009261943

Title: DeSantis brings this up from the Memory Hole on Bill Maher
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2023, 07:31:50 AM

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/ron-desantis-bill-maher?utm_source=LWCBlasts&utm_medium=email

Title: Goolag burying Rep searches?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2023, 11:32:55 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/google-rigging-2024-election-controversy-over-invisible-republicans?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1865

Title: Trump increases lead after Debate-2
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2023, 11:35:20 AM

second

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/trump-increases-lead-in-support-after-second-gop-presidential-debate-poll-5501693?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-10-01-2&src_cmp=breaking-2023-10-01-2&utm_medium=email&est=%2Bjtd1GJf%2FlIXHN000%2BX9N5bAX%2BB%2FCW8pcx0zclLRTe25odYvALipgiHQP4FOucVBTKb2

Title: Re: Goolag burying Rep searches?
Post by: DougMacG on October 01, 2023, 03:39:03 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on October 01, 2023, 11:32:55 AM

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/google-rigging-2024-election-controversy-over-invisible-republicans?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1865

Yes of course they are.  At the height of the Hillary Clinton email scandal and her run for President, I Google searched "Hillary Clinton emails" and was able to pull up only pages and pages of fluff, nothing even alleging wrongdoing.

They've been doing this from the beginning.  They are evil.  They are only getting worse.  Half the country thinks it's good and our half doesn't care.  Same with Meta Facebook Instagram.  "Oh but they help me connect with family and friends.". Ok, reap what you sow.  We gave up our networks, our newspapers, our late night entertainment, schools, colleges and universities, the ABA, the AMA, NEJM, 'Scientific American', UN, IPCC, WHO, etc etc, our military has more pronouns than sharpshooters, all without the whisper of a fight, why start standing up to anybody now?

WHY?  Because Google proved in China it will help dictatorial totalitarians enforce compliance on their subjects, and here too.  (Does that need an exclamation point?)

Pure evil masquerading as a search engine and an email service.

De-google!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 02, 2023, 06:17:24 AM

Amen on the evils of Goolag!!!

When I was having my current computer set up I insisted that there be no trace of Google anywhere in it.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on October 02, 2023, 06:41:59 AM

"When I was having my current computer set up I insisted that there be no trace of Google anywhere in it."

  - Thumbs up to that. I think it must be phone also because there could be 'synching'.

Time permitting we need to bring our tech threads up to date. I have proton mail but have not cut the cord on Gmail. Need to switch map directions program (wayz?).  I use brave and duck duck go, but not exclusively.  Open office and not Microsoft product. And most critical for me will be the switch to degoogled Android, since I don't use the apple product.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 02, 2023, 08:02:50 AM

I don't do email on my phone.

DuckDuck's privacy is OK but its president bragged of woke motivated search results.  I use Qwant.

I have Apple phone.  What are my issues there, and how do they compare with Android?

Title: Newsom signs bill restricting hand counts
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 06, 2023, 09:00:23 AM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/newsom-signs-bills-to-restrict-hand-counts-in-elections-workers-receive-additional-sick-days/

Title: WSJ: Race and Redistricting at SCOTUS
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 12, 2023, 08:38:12 AM

Race and Redistricting at the Supreme Court
Did South Carolina pass a racial gerrymander or merely a partisan one?
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 10, 2023 6:31 pm ET



The Supreme Court will venture into the gerrymandering thicket again this week, as it tries to distinguish two scenarios: Did South Carolina redo a U.S. House district to include fewer black voters, who happen to be Democrats? Or did it redraw the boundary to include fewer Democrats, who happen to be black? If that sounds confusing, take a peek at Alexander v. S.C. Conf. of NAACP.

The state’s First District hugs Charleston, and it’s historically Republican. But a Democrat won there in 2018, before being ousted two years later by Rep. Nancy Mace. After the 2020 census, legislative leaders decided they wanted to shore up the Republican advantage, as they explain in their brief. By adding GOP areas and subtracting Democratic ones, the revised map managed to raise the Republican vote share to 54%, from 53%. The lawmakers argue this was purely political and not based on race.

The state NAACP challenged the House map, claiming that three of its seven seats were racially gerrymandered. A federal district court rejected that argument for two of the seats. But the three-judge panel said it believed, based on circumstantial evidence, that “race was the predominant factor” in the layout of the First District, despite testimony from its creator that “he relied ‘one hundred percent’ on data regarding ‘the partisan lean of the district.’”

As a separate goal, lawmakers wanted redistricting to eliminate the previous splits of Berkeley and Beaufort Counties. Putting those counties entirely in the First District, however, would have boosted the black population, “imperiling” the GOP edge, the NAACP’s brief argues. “To offset this increase, Defendants expelled a Black Charlestonian from CD1 for virtually every Black person added.”

The NAACP proposes that the state cartographers “could have made Charleston County whole in CD1 along with Beaufort County as a coastal community of interest.” The legislators respond that adding all of Charleston County would have flipped the seat to Democrats. By the way, Charleston County was already divided, since portions of it were in the Sixth District held by Rep. James Clyburn. As of 2011, Mr. Clyburn had half of Charleston County’s black residents, according to the district court. Now it’s 79%.

The legislators say those judges “entangled rather than disentangled race and politics.” The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence on such matters contains multitudes, to put it mildly, including a 5-4 decision this year, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, requiring Alabama to create a second black-majority House district. That case involved the Voting Rights Act, and this one is a claim under the 14th Amendment.

But redistricting in reality is full of trade-offs. Unifying one community of interest might mean splitting another. Is Charleston County better off with two representatives, one from each party, including the influential Mr. Clyburn? These are questions for legislators, not judges.

Partisan gerrymandering is legal, and if it weren’t the Democratic districts in Illinois and California would be barred. Polarized voting patterns make it easy for partisans to claim that some district is racially gerrymandered. Courts should be reluctant to proclaim that the truth, especially with no direct evidence

Title: WSJ: The Dynamics of Duopoly
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 14, 2023, 02:58:05 AM

I found this glib regarding electoral fraud, but nonetheless, I think the analytical framework worth noting.

What Duopoly Economics Tells Us About Politics
Expect elections to be close and disputed and Trump to seem less of an innovator in this regard.
By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
Oct. 13, 2023 4:02 pm ET

Some think it’s statistically or politically meaningful that Joe Biden got seven million more votes than Donald Trump in 2020, or Hillary Clinton got three million more in 2016. But presidential elections aren’t decided by the popular vote. If they were, candidates, parties and voters would all change their behavior.

Even more so when weighed against variability in voters’ decision about whether to vote at all. As Pew Research Center puts it, “Americans are inconsistent voters.” About 41% of Democrats and Democratic leaners voted in none of the last three elections, and 46% of the GOP-inclined. Between one election and the next, the choice of voters of one persuasion or the other to sit out can fluctuate as much as 15 percentage points, swamping any popular vote difference.

The recent gibberish about the House GOP being “ungovernable” is a special case of this delusion. In fact, Kevin McCarthy won 96.2% of his caucus. The problem in the House is the problem of the country at large—not that we’re divided, but that we’re divided at the 50-yard line. Voters provided such a slender GOP majority in 2022 that a mere 3.8% of GOP members, for their own trivial reasons, could join with 100% of Democrats to unhinge the House.

To understand our political dilemma, remember three things: The two major parties are marketing organizations; they are a duopoly; big data makes them increasingly good at doing what duopolies do, dividing the available market down the middle.

The word polarized is misused when we mean our political system has become exquisitely competitive. Even changing the rules of the game, as many progressives want—by eliminating the Electoral College, by altering how the Senate is composed, by relaxing voting requirements—would likely not change the distribution of offices and spoils by the duopoly, which would naturally adjust. Under the technologies that now exist, we may never see again a period like 1930 to 1994, when one party controlled the House in all but four years and the Senate in all but 10.

With the rise of two-party parity, honest and dishonest doubt-mongering becomes a high-leverage way of getting just enough of a party’s giant reserve of nonvoting leaners off the couch to swing a close election. Listen closely: When progressives harp on the alleged unfairness of the Senate or Electoral College to Democrats, they are really complaining about a system that doesn’t accommodate their desire not to modify their policies and rhetoric to win in places they aren’t winning now. You don’t hear them offering to re-enfranchise GOP presidential voters in California or New York by ending winner-take-all distribution of blue-state electoral votes.

Big-data techniques won’t be uninvented. The rise of political hobbyism, also a factor, won’t be reversed, unless Social Security and Medicare collapse and millions of overly energetic seniors with too much time on their hands have to put down Facebook and get a job.

Under the best of circumstances, our elections are a leap of faith. The public can’t see inside a voting machine. We may now be stuck with mail-in voting, but it metastasizes the opportunity for politicians and activists to adopt strategies of sowing plausible doubt.

Donald Trump is the practitioner who took contesting a presidential outcome the furthest, but he’s no innovator. Without Jan. 6, Mr. Trump had exactly the finale he was looking for. He would leave the White House under a narrative of a faulty election to keep his fans supercharged for whatever came next.

This is a time-honored story in American politics. Mrs. Clinton clings to the Russia incubus. “Corrupt bargain” the Jacksonians chanted until they found a chance to redeem their 1824 defeat. “His fraudulency” was the title critics bestowed on Rutherford B. Hayes. Top Democrats busy today denouncing the special iniquity of the Trumpians racked up quite a record of election denial in the George W. Bush years. Richard Nixon didn’t challenge his 1960 defeat but his fans saw 1968 as vindication for a “stolen” election. Teddy Roosevelt rode the claim of a “stolen” nomination to a third-party run in 1912. His would-be assassin during the campaign later justified his act by saying he feared T.R. would claim the general election was stolen too.

The best answer to the Trumpians is to have a serious look at 2020, admitting to ourselves that the election was indeed messy, with late rule changes, with acknowledged ballot harvesting, questionable signature verification practices, unattended drop boxes, etc. As every thinking person comes to realize, being seen strenuously pursuing transparency and fairness is a way of persuading voters that elections are fair. We’re going to find this all the more important if exquisite two-party parity is a fixed feature of the system.

Title: Lindell's monitoring devices rejected as illegal
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 22, 2023, 10:39:02 PM

Not sure I'm following what is going on here:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mike-lindell-suffers-blow-in-election-battle/ar-AA1iELop?ocid=msedgntp&pc=HCTS&cvid=edefc57f5ed0416383ca365b8c17652a&ei=10

Title: On behalf of BBG: WI judicial race and finance fraud?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 24, 2023, 03:48:21 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/the-most-expensive-judicial-race-in-us-history-is-raising-questions-5499794?utm_source=ref_share&utm_campaign=facebook&rs=SHRNCMMW&fbclid=IwAR2mApoNtsw0rr9Od-YzzF2I9Vu2JYutcB3IMqvNKWWoLZdvCpXaEk728aU

Title: No Such Thing as Electoral Fraud … Except when We Claim it
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on October 31, 2023, 02:43:57 PM

24 minutes worth:

https://x.com/rncresearch/status/1686570316833697792?s=61&t=L5uifCqWy8R8rhj_J8HNJw

Title: Eclectoral cheat w illegals is the plan in NY
Post by: Crafty_Dog on October 31, 2023, 07:38:50 PM

https://americanwirenews.com/dont-be-fooled-dems-reported-plan-to-turn-migrants-into-voters-is-already-written-in-the-fine-print/

Title: Judge overturns primary election in CN
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 02, 2023, 11:37:22 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/judge-overturns-primary-election-calling-evidence-of-fraud-shocking-5521743?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2023-11-02-2&src_cmp=breaking-2023-11-02-2&utm_medium=email&est=pkI%2B1UV18JiWGhNlHYWvl6b6S8SPjymHYhrGpMjn%2FUjb4KMZmiPi3%2F%2F2Zp74GjAFkDyl

Title: PA Supreme Court election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2023, 08:20:27 AM

We discussed the political role of this court and SCOTUS deference to it in the 2020 election:

Why Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court Election Matters
A judicial election with significance for 2024 voting and abortion.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Nov. 3, 2023 6:46 pm ET




143

Gift unlocked article

Listen

(4 min)


image
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania chamber at the Capitol in Harrisburg, Pa. PHOTO: MATT ROURKE/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Pennsylvania next week will elect a new Justice to its state Supreme Court, and the race is worth watching well beyond Harrisburg. The winning jurist could be the tiebreaker in litigation over the state’s 2024 voting rules. The result could also show whether the end of Roe v. Wade is still powering Democrats to the polls.

Supreme Court elections in Pennsylvania are partisan affairs, and the Republican candidate is Carolyn Carluccio, President Judge of the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas. She promises to “apply the law as it is written.” She has mentioned concerns that the state Supreme Court’s rulings on mail ballots in recent years have been “conflicting, and sometimes unclear,” while also saying that “our election laws must be applied consistently across all counties.”

The Democrat is Daniel McCaffery, who sits on the state Superior Court. “I would describe my approach to constitutional interpretation as ‘living constitution’—meaning that the constitution was intentionally drafted using broad language to allow its concepts to evolve with changing societal conditions,” he told a newspaper. In his view, “any challenge to voting rights must be viewed in the context of promoting a fair and robust election process.”

Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court is split 4-2, with one vacancy and Democratic jurists in the majority. Tuesday’s election, which will replace the late Justice Max Baer, can’t flip the partisan balance, though it would put the GOP one step closer toward a possible takeover in 2025. For more immediate implications, look at the high court’s most recent mail-ballot blunder, a 3-3 stalemate last fall that was made possible by Baer’s death. Whoever replaces him could cast a pivotal vote.

That 2022 dispute involved whether to count mail ballots with missing dates. State law tells voters to “fill out, date and sign,” but the argument was that tossing undated ballots would violate federal law. Seven days before the November election, the Justices announced they were “evenly divided.” They ordered counties to “segregate and preserve any ballots contained in undated or incorrectly dated outer envelopes.”

That could have prompted a partisan meltdown, if a candidate losing by a hair had begged the judiciary to count disputed votes and give him victory. Pennsylvania is lucky it didn’t become a national recount circus in 2020 or 2022, but it’s still a risk for 2024.

The state Supreme Court outcome also could be a bellwether on abortion. The last time a seat was open, in 2021, it was won by a Republican, now-Justice Kevin Brobson, by less than a percentage point. Pennsylvania permits abortion until the 24th week of pregnancy, and Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro would block new restrictions. Yet Democrats are trying to use the overturning of Roe v. Wade last year to get their guy over the top.

“Majorities on these courts matter,” Judge McCaffery told a rally this summer. “When you elect Democrats, Democrats will stand up and protect women’s reproductive rights.” He added that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is “the policy court.” Judge Carluccio has argued that if this is how her opponent feels, he “should be running for the Legislature or Governor, not for the Supreme Court.”

The fall of Roe energized Democrats, helping them last November and in other races since. The question going into 2024 is whether their enthusiasm is fading, especially in states that aren’t changing their abortion laws.

Title: Fraud in UT
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 04, 2023, 01:28:10 PM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/former-utah-county-clerk-facing-charges-for-mishandling-election-ballots/

Title: WA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 09, 2023, 03:05:37 PM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/4-washington-election-offices-evacuated-after-receiving-suspicious-envelopes-2-containing-fentanyl/

Title: Tucker: Proof of Fraud in GA 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 11, 2023, 10:50:38 AM

 https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1723057416873681020

Tucker Carlson on Duplicated Ballots, Falsified Tally Sheets, and Mail-In Ballot Fraud in Fulton County, Georgia

“It now appears there actually was meaningful voter fraud in Fulton County, Georgia, last November (2020). That is not a conspiracy theory. It’s true.

Surveillance footage obtained by VoterGA shows large numbers of ballots being scanned multiple times. Pay attention to the women wearing yellow at the desk. According to VoterGA, she slides ballots into a scanning machine, removes the ballots, and then reinserts the same ballots. This happens multiple times. The question is, how many times were these ballots counted? Was each vote counted more than once? Fulton County won't answer that question. Now, one way to know that answer would be to check what are called audit tally sheets.

Tellingly, for months after the 2020 election, Fulton County failed to provide more than 100,000 of those tally sheets, including 50,000 of them from mail-in ballots. When VoterGA finally forced Fulton County to turn over the tally sheets, the conclusion was stunning. Here's what the audit found.

Seven falsified audit tally sheets containing fabricated vote totals... For example, a batch containing 59 actual ballot images for Joe Biden and 42 for Donald Trump was reported as 100 for Biden and 0 for Trump. The seven batches of ballot images with 554 votes for Joe Biden, 140 votes for Donald Trump, and 11 votes for Jo Jorgenson had tally sheets in the audit falsified to show 850 votes for Biden, 0 votes for Trump, and 0 votes for Jorgenson.

Wait, did you just follow that? How is that not flat-out criminal fraud?"

Title: Chaffetz: What Reps d n understand about how Biden really wins
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 13, 2023, 03:12:28 PM

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/what-republicans-dont-understand-about-biden-really-wins-elections

Title: Chaffetz on Biden weaponizing all branches of Fed gov to get out Dem votes
Post by: ccp on November 13, 2023, 09:26:53 PM

very upsetting article above.

 :x

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 14, 2023, 01:32:07 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/election-censorship-collusion/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=newslink&utm_term=members

Title: More on Fulton County
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on November 14, 2023, 10:04:01 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/11/holy-moley-video-released-showing-georgias-ruby-freeman/?fbclid=IwAR2XsKnIvZN5Y6d_qhcDGyJ_NjGOxwE-aWaNBWMvETBKwbT7GuYPRIk620k

Title: Oliver Stone doubts 2020 election
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2023, 07:53:18 AM

https://dailycaller.com/2023/11/20/oliver-stone-bill-maher-trump-lost-2020-election/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=29912&pnespid=rrBsEjxOL6VLhqfPqW23A4OS4Bu0CYErPLG12_horExmTvGjURx2CFIGzXaxm8wE4SClZIrr

Title: Re: Oliver Stone doubts 2020 election
Post by: DougMacG on November 21, 2023, 08:32:25 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on November 21, 2023, 07:53:18 AM

https://dailycaller.com/2023/11/20/oliver-stone-bill-maher-trump-lost-2020-election/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=29912&pnespid=rrBsEjxOL6VLhqfPqW23A4OS4Bu0CYErPLG12_horExmTvGjURx2CFIGzXaxm8wE4SClZIrr

Very interesting.  My take exactly.  We don't know.  We just don't know.

That said, Abolishing the electoral college would only make it much worse.

Title: PA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 23, 2023, 05:06:02 AM

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/judge-says-pennsylvania-mail-ballots-still-count-dated-incorrectly-rcna126299

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 26, 2023, 03:00:23 PM

I have not independently verified the assertions here, but this point intrigues:

=========================

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1728526460388770071
What Bill and many other people with negative IQ don't realize is that the majority of the cases were not dismissed after discovery & evidentiary hearings they were dismissed on procedural grounds (such as lack of standing, jurisdiction, mootness, ripeness, etc). In other words, the courts failed the Constitution by refusing to hear the election challenges. Of the cases that were heard on the merits, Republicans and/or Trump prevailed in two-thirds of them.

Since the 2020 election, it's also important to note that many courts have made critical decisions such as the decision from a Wisconsin judge that ruled ballot drop boxes were illegally implemented and used in 2020, the decision from the Georgia Supreme Court that concluded voters had standing to challenge the results of their own elections (duhh).

The fraud in 2020 was rampant and anyone who denies it lacks intelligence.

Title: WSJ: Mail Vote Time Bomb
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 27, 2023, 12:57:16 PM

A Mail-Vote Time Bomb Keeps Ticking
Pennsylvania’s undated ballots might go to the Supreme Court—again.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Nov. 26, 2023 5:05 pm ET


The 2024 election will probably be preceded by another flood of lawsuits over voting rules, especially absentee ballots, and keep an eye on Pennsylvania. Last week a federal judge there ruled that timely mail ballots must be counted even if the voter neglected to write the date, as state law requires. This may go to the Supreme Court, which punted a similar case last year.

The saga of Pennsylvania’s undated ballots since the Covid pandemic is worth unspooling, because it shows how litigation puts indeterminacy into the election system. State law is unambiguous in saying that absentee voters must “fill out, date and sign the declaration printed on such envelope.” This requirement has gone to court repeatedly for three years, with frustratingly inconclusive results.

In 2020 a Republican state Senate candidate, Nicole Ziccarelli, was poised to topple a Democratic incumbent, whom she led by four votes. Eventually she lost by 69, after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered the tallying of some 300 undated mail ballots. Four of the seven Justices agreed such ballots were invalid under state law. But the swing Justice said that given the circumstances, “I would apply my interpretation only prospectively.”

A year later, the question was whether federal law overrides Pennsylvania’s date mandate. A Republican judicial candidate, David Ritter, was up by 71 votes, with about 250 undated mail ballots uncounted. Guess what happened next? Mr. Ritter lost by five, after the federal Third Circuit Appeals Court ordered the extra ballots to be included, citing the Civil Rights Act. Specifically, that law says “the right of any individual to vote” cannot be denied based on a paperwork error that “is not material in determining whether such individual is qualified.”

The Supreme Court refused to grant a stay, over three conservative dissents. “The Third Circuit’s interpretation is very likely wrong,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote. “When a mail-in ballot is not counted because it was not filled out correctly, the voter is not denied ‘the right to vote.’ Rather, that individual’s vote is not counted because he or she did not follow the rules for casting a ballot.” The same is true, Justice Alito added, if a voter goes to the wrong polling site or returns a ballot to a bad address.

After Mr. Ritter’s defeat was certified, he made a final appeal to the Supreme Court, complaining that the state “has ordered all counties to count undated ballots in future elections.” The Justices ordered his case to be dismissed as moot, while also vacating the Third Circuit’s ruling, to prevent it from setting an unreviewable precedent. Then a week before Election Day in 2022, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court split 3-3 on what federal law requires of undated ballots.

Now it’s back to square one, with five Pennsylvanians claiming they were disenfranchised last year. Federal Judge Susan Paradise Baxter, ruling in their favor last week, says hundreds of mail votes in 2022 were rejected for obvious goofs like incorrect years, even though the written date is “irrelevant,” because what matters is whether the ballot was returned on time. But asking voters to date their ballots is a neutral, de minimis rule that could be useful in fraud cases. No law can end mistakes.

The nightmare is that control of the White House or the U.S. Senate could be decided after Election Day by a Supreme Court opinion on missing dates, incomplete witness addresses, or other ballot defects. That’s why the Justices should quit dodging these cases. The time to settle voting rules is when the stakes are low, which is to say, well in advance of Election Day.

Title: Naturalized citizens
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 28, 2023, 01:45:10 PM

https://americanwirenews.com/over-23-million-immigrants-eligible-to-vote-in-2024-report/?utm_campaign=james&utm_content=11-27-23%20Daily%20AM&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=Get%20response&utm_term=email

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on November 28, 2023, 02:52:07 PM

 I agree with previous post about this pointing out it is their beliefs not there status that counts

I would rather have 25 low wage earners who believe in America and self reliance and hard work and not simply accepting benefits
as much as they can and appreciate care for Western civ, capitalism, whites as well as blacks browns etc.

then 100 PhDs MDs JDs or wealthy business types who hate America, white people English speaking people,
capitalism etc. and Conservatives and  Republicans .

immigration is good for us them.

Title: VA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on November 29, 2023, 05:35:37 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/indicted-virginia-election-official-altered-election-results-filing-5537386?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2023-11-28&src_cmp=gv-2023-11-28&utm_medium=email&est=2HJcXEeIDR%2FKtsJo2mo0zQSo4j70%2F5x9b1GDC5ygllVbHSKrGC1MIMB7nvU00lNfo0VV

Title: WI
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 01, 2023, 05:07:25 AM

https://resistthemainstream.com/judge-issues-major-absentee-ballot-ruling-in-wisconsin/?utm_source=newsletter1

Title: AZ: Kari Lake
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 04, 2023, 03:51:05 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/judge-issues-ruling-on-kari-lake-request-to-examine-2022-ballots-5540385?utm_source=Goodevening&src_src=Goodevening&utm_campaign=gv-2023-12-04&src_cmp=gv-2023-12-04&utm_medium=email&est=jq19zkI9z6sdEUc8p4GeznbhQSd41DDv%2Bpv7%2BFQmwPZtZ6W8bH8eYnZk8UoWjkcCb%2BNt

Just skimmed this, but snap reaction is that I am not finding the judge's logic persuasive.

Title: NYC caught working to register illegals
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 05, 2023, 12:17:35 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/house-republican-says-she-uncovered-smoking-gun-proof-nyc-trying-to-register-illegal-immigrants-to-vote/ar-AA1kZx8u?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=020713850dc04f838ee8f815a3623192&ei=52

Title: PA County machines flip votes
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 11, 2023, 03:44:43 PM

https://theleadingreport.com/pennsylvania-county-voting-machines-flipped-constituent-votes-in-race-for-superior-court/

Title: No chain of custody leads to this sort of thing
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 12, 2023, 04:56:19 PM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2023/12/12/rasmussen-one-in-five-mail-in-voters-admit-they-cheated-in-the-2020-election-n2632321

Title: 20% of Mail-In Voters Confess to Voter Fraud?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on December 12, 2023, 11:05:24 PM

If this is for real—I don’t know the source(s) well—then Houston, we have a problem.

https://heartland.org/opinion/heartland-rasmussen-poll-one-in-five-mail-in-voters-admit-to-committing-at-least-one-kind-of-voter-fraud-during-2020-election/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2023, 04:39:53 AM

This is what no ID and no chain of custody lead to.

Title: NY Gerrymander
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 13, 2023, 04:59:18 AM

Democrats Stage a Congressional Map-Making Coup in New York
A state court orders a new House district map that could cost four GOP seats.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
Updated Dec. 12, 2023 6:44 pm ET


Congratulations to Democrats who on Tuesday significantly increased their odds of picking up at least four House seats next November—thanks to New York’s Court of Appeals. A progressive 4-3 majority on the state’s high court bowed to the left and threw out the current court-ordered House map that was the most politically competitive in decades.

The backstory to this coup is that New Yorkers in 2014 passed a constitutional amendment banning partisan gerrymandering and establishing a 10-member bipartisan redistricting commission. But after the commission deadlocked on a new Congressional map, the Democratic Legislature redrew it in a way that would make Elbridge Gerry proud.

The Legislature’s House map gave Democrats an edge in 22 of 26 seats, or 85%—significantly more than Joe Biden’s 61% vote share in 2020. We’ve long argued that proportional representation shouldn’t be required in map-making, but the Legislature’s disfigured districts were an egregious gerrymander that defied traditional redistricting principles.

A 4-3 majority on the state’s Court of Appeals agreed and appointed a special master to redraw the map for the 2022 midterm election. The new map resulted in Republicans winning 11 of 26 seats—giving the GOP a knife-thin majority. Democrats blamed New York’s high court for costing them the House even though their partisan map-makers were at fault.

However, after Chief Judge Janet DiFiore—who wrote the majority opinion striking down the maps—stepped down last year, liberal groups mounted a legal attack on the new map. They argued that the commission should have to redraw districts for the 2024 election even though the result would invariably be another partisan deadlock.

Now a different appellate court majority has sided with Democrats. If the commission can’t agree on a new map, as is likely, the Democratic Legislature could gerrymander one afresh. This is the real partisan end-game. By the time the Legislature adopts a new map, it may be too close to the 2024 election for Republicans to challenge it in court.

“Today’s decision is a win for democracy and particularly the people of New York,” Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Suzan DelBene declared. Anyone notice how democracy seems to prevail only when Democrats do?

Title: Major Vote Fraud Confirmed?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on December 15, 2023, 08:09:48 PM

I sure hope this has legs:

Rob Cunningham | KUWL.show
@KuwlShow
🚨GEORGIA FRAUD CONFIRMED🚨
Georgia Governor
@BrianKempGA
’s Legal Team has formally notified Georgia SOS Brad Raffensperger 
@BradForGASOS
 of Recording and Publishing Factually False Results concerning the 2020 Presidential Election, to include 17,852 INVALID “VOTES” recorded from
@FultonInfo
 County, ALONE!
17,852 INVALID “VOTES” were more than 4,000 “votes” MORE than necessary for
@realDonaldTrump
 to have won the State of Georgia in 2020.
🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️
* NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING *
* Tue/Wed, Dec. 19 & 20, 2023 *
* Georgia State Capitol Building *
ALL interested members of the public are invited to attend.
🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️🔥🏛️
Executive Summary Video of Findings & Evidence is here: https://rumble.com/v4190x7-joe-rossi-on-the-2020-election...…

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 16, 2023, 06:27:19 AM

 :-o :-o :-o

Let's keep a close eye on this!!!

Title: Re: Major Vote Fraud Confirmed?
Post by: DougMacG on December 16, 2023, 07:28:16 AM

Maybe they won't want to go ahead with the Georgia trials - that involve discovery.

Relating to his trial, not only did Trump believe there was fraud when he said find the votes, there was fraud. 

Most relevant now, finding the fraud is the first step in preventing it from continuing.

When they keep cheating, we keep losing.

Title: Daily Caller documentary "Rigged"
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 16, 2023, 11:49:16 AM

https://dailycaller.com/2023/12/15/elections-crisis-daily-caller-rigged-2020-election/?utm_source=piano&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=35725&pnespid=77hkCz5HJb4XhvDD_jKpTY6evEz0D4BpcLGhzvt38QZm4l30M8glZLrZ5d8AS5CvSQL9d5Xu

Title: why ask we need to know what happened when we all know what happened
Post by: ccp on December 16, 2023, 12:59:38 PM

from the article above :

I don't get this end statement:

" That is why it’s so important to uncover the truth — we must find out exactly what happened in 2020 if there is a chance of preventing it again in 2024. Without answers, our elections will never be the same again."

This after listing what happened.
Ballot harvesting reducing ballot requirements, make it easier to cast an absentee ballot, ignore verification,
stretch out the collection window so in some areas more ballots could be harvested even after polls closed,

have DNCers such as Soros and Zuckerberg pay for drop boxes in predominantly Dem majority areas,
control the entire MSM propaganda machine to control the messages going out and stop the conservative ability to get their messages out.
pay for all the door to door and street ballot harvesters to scour the streets, go door to door , nursing homes colleges and everywhere else to get votes from those who were otherwise not voting.
Add a few illegals , dead voters , etc.

Immediately, call anyone who questions this or the election results as crazy , liar, conspiracy theorist, threat to Democracy ,

voter suppressor , white supremacist, racist , white back lash

this is what happened
we know
we all saw it

Can we counter this for the next election
I don't think anyone with a brain is confident we can.

Then you throw into the mix open borders and flood the nation with more DNCers and thats the end of the party.

Title: PS
Post by: ccp on December 16, 2023, 01:03:25 PM

if we still have idiot R's saying we "need to find out what happened"
3 yrs AFTER the FACT
then we are doomed for repeat.

Title: McIntyre Strikes Again
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on December 17, 2023, 11:37:22 AM

Steve McIntyre (SM) is not a household name, but ought to be. Over the years I’ve posted his material, particularly his debunking of the whole “hockey stick” bit of sky-is-falling fun where he and a partner whose name eludes me at the moment, upon being told that NASA prophet of doom James Hansen would not provide the dataset/source code behind spike in world temps claim, backward engineered the code and demonstrate it to be false, a tale well worth looking at his Climate Audit site, where he continues to hold Church of Anthropomorphic Climate Apocalypse feet to the fire, exposing all their dubious CACA tenets.

Well he’s now pointed his gaze toward 2020 voter fraud, with the results being worth following:

https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1324884540624678912

Title: China Russia Cuba increasesed interference in 2022
Post by: Crafty_Dog on December 20, 2023, 03:28:07 AM

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12880013/China-Russia-Iran-Cuba-2022-election-meddling.html

Title: WT: DC prepares for foreigners voting.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 02, 2024, 02:50:50 AM

DISTRICT

D.C. prepares big test of noncitizen voting

Other localities struggle with turnout

BY STEPHEN DINAN THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The District of Columbia is preparing for the country’s biggest experiment yet with noncitizen voting, which has been on the books for nearly a year and will go live in its first election in 2024.

As of mid-December, the city said, three people registered — all showing up in person. Officials hope for more interest when online registration opens to noncitizens this year.

Jurisdictions across the country are testing the waters for allowing noncitizens, including illegal immigrants in many cases, to cast ballots in local elections. Most are finding scant interest.

San Francisco made waves in 2016 when it allowed noncitizens to vote in local school elections.

In 2022, about 300,000 residents cast ballots. Just 72 voted through the noncitizen system.

Maryland has the most jurisdictions practicing noncitizen voting, though all are small cities or villages.

Takoma Park, just across the line from

the District, is the grandfather of the idea. The city has allowed noncitizen voting for 30 years.

Takoma Park had 347 noncitizens on its rolls in 2017 and 72 cast ballots — a turnout of about 20%. That was the last year the city reported the data. It now shrouds the data in a joint figure along with same-day registrants and voters ages 16 and 17, who are also allowed to vote in city affairs.

Winooski, Vermont, adopted noncitizen voting in 2022. An election for City Council seats attracted some turnout from the “all-resident” voter list, but an election deciding a water district bond issue drew no all-resident voters.

City Clerk Jenny Willingham said voters who sign up on the all-resident list must answer two questions: They must affirm they will be 18 by Election Day and are residents on a permanent or indefinite basis.

She estimates 600 noncitizen residents out of about 8,000 people in the city.

“This is an initiative in our city, and I want to encourage people to vote. I’d like to get those numbers up more,” she said. “Right now, there’s 61 and I’m hoping for more.”

The system is supposed to be for legal immigrants, but like so much else in voting, that is left up to the residents to self-certify. Ms. Willingham said she doesn’t have the resources to verify the applications and trusts the voters’ oath that they are qualified.

Her office warns applicants that the voter rolls are public records and available for inspection, including by immigration officials. Ms. Willingham said one group showed up for an information session and backed out after an interpreter read that part of the application.

Noncitizen voting has a lengthy history in the U.S.

In the 19th century, what was known as alien suffrage was common. More than 20 states allowed alien suffrage in the years before 1900. Anti-immigrant sentiment fueled a retrenchment, and Arkansas became the last state to end the practice in 1926.

Nearly a century later, the idea is seeping back as immigrant rights advocates argue that noncitizens often have children in schools, pay taxes and use services and deserve a say in how such decisions are made.

J. Christian Adams, who runs the voter watchdog Public Interest Legal Foundation and is challenging the New York noncitizen voting law, said he figures the low numbers are temporary and advocates downplay registration to try to legitimize the practice.

“The key for them now is to open up the gate before they start cramming the sheep through,” he said. “Don’t be fooled into thinking this isn’t a big deal because only a couple people in Takoma have registered.”

At the state level, ballot proposals to limit voting only to citizens usually pass with strong support. In Louisiana and Ohio, roughly three-fourths of voters in 2022 backed bans on noncitizen voting.

Voters in more liberal cities and towns have usually embraced noncitizen voting. Burlington, Vermont, approved noncitizen voting with two-thirds in favor. Greenbelt, Maryland, adopted noncitizen voting in a referendum in November with more than two-thirds of voters in support.

In Rockville, Maryland, the idea was defeated, with 64% against it. An even larger 69% opposed voting rights for residents ages 16 and 17.

Federal law explicitly bans noncitizens from voting in federal elections, so jurisdictions that allow the practice for their elections must maintain separate lists.

Some cities worry that immigration enforcement officers might scour the noncitizen voter lists for deportation targets, though several local election offi cials said that has not happened.

Still, cities have come up with a defense.

Hyattsville, Maryland, pointedly corrects those who call its list a noncitizen voting roll. The term it uses is “city-only.”

Clerk Laura Reams said some citizens may be eligible to vote in all elections but, for whatever reason, don’t want to register with the state and choose to register and vote in the city contests. She said their names could appear alongside noncitizens on the city-only list.

Hyattsville, which like Takoma Park is just across the border from the District, said about 230 voters are on the city-only list. Some 17%, or about 40 voters, turned out in the city elections last year with a total turnout of 667.

Takoma Park also burrows its noncitizen voting figures inside its same-day registrant and younger voter data.

The District of Columbia election will be a major test for advocates.

The city will allow anyone who has been a resident for at least 30 days to register and cast a ballot.

Critics say that could include illegal immigrants and foreign diplomats for adversary governments. They will be voting only on city issues.

An attempt to derail the effort was launched last year in Congress, which has veto power over the capital city’s legislation. It cleared the House on a 260-162 vote, with 42 Democrats joining Republicans in support.

That suggested a real chance to block the city, but senators never took up the issue to allow the ordinance to take effect.

The Center for Immigration Studies calculated that 42,000 noncitizens, including perhaps 20,000 illegal immigrants, would be eligible

Title: Trump hired me to find vote fraud
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 02, 2024, 02:48:56 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/trump-paid-me-to-find-voter-fraud-then-he-lied-after-i-found-2020-election-wasn-t-stolen/ar-AA1mlxuJ?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=567a1519fc574050b92a18f45caae4a8&ei=13

Title: Re: Trump hired me to find vote fraud
Post by: DougMacG on January 03, 2024, 03:55:40 AM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on January 02, 2024, 02:48:56 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/trump-paid-me-to-find-voter-fraud-then-he-lied-after-i-found-2020-election-wasn-t-stolen/ar-AA1mlxuJ?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=567a1519fc574050b92a18f45caae4a8&ei=13

This fellow looked and found no vote fraud and therefore all claims of fraud are lies?

I wonder if he personally authenticated 71 million mail in ballots and what handwriting samples and forensic techniques he used.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/01/cheaters_shouldnt_win_and_winners_shouldnt_cheat.html

If there was no cheat,  Democrats sure wasted a lot of effort openining up the opportunities to do so.

My last vote, first thing they said, 'you can put your ID away, we won't be using that here."

Trump hired you to find vote fraud?  He should get his money back.

'Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2024, 06:53:46 AM

"If there was no cheat,  Democrats sure wasted a lot of effort opening up the opportunities to do so."

Very well said.

"My last vote, first thing they said, 'you can put your ID away, we won't be using that here."

We had the same experience two elections ago here in NC.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 03, 2024, 07:34:56 AM

I can't remember if I had to show my ID here in Jersey.  I think I did.

I know they had my name on a list and check it off (or did I sign it) though.

My voting station is 3 blocks from my house.   Never crowded.

Title: Up from the Memory Hole: Peter Navarro
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 03, 2024, 05:43:36 PM

https://www.larslarson.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20.pdf

Title: NM AG says Trump electors cannot be prosecuted
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 06, 2024, 07:49:53 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/new-mexico-attorney-general-says-fake-gop-electors-can-t-be-prosecuted-recommends-changes/ar-AA1mwQup?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=8bc49c52108042caa8d072c552c52d5a&ei=26

Title: WSJ: A solution to the Trump Ballot Conundrum
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 06, 2024, 09:31:59 AM

second

A Solution to the Trump Ballot Conundrum
An 1869 case points the way for the U.S. Supreme Court.
By Jed Rubenfeld
Jan. 4, 2024 6:20 pm ET





The Colorado Supreme Court didn’t exactly get the law wrong when it ordered election officials to strike Donald Trump from the ballot. The problem is there was no law to get right.

Almost no case law exists on Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. On a clean judicial slate, judges are asked to decide whether the provision applies to the presidency, who has standing to sue, what counts as “engaging” in an insurrection, what kind of process is due and, most important, what counts as an “insurrection” in the first place. The Colorado justices themselves described the case as “uncharted.”


When judges decide issues on which there are no precedents to guide them—known as matters of first impression—they have wide discretion to make law. Whatever your views of Mr. Trump, it’s not a good look for four judges appointed by Democrats to target the leading Republican’s candidacy based on law they had to make up for that case. Judges are human. If they are invited to make up rules to decide which presidential candidates can run, there’s a risk of result-driven outcomes that will be seen as lawless because, in an important sense, they are.

Supporters of the Colorado decision will say Mr. Trump shouldn’t be allowed to profit from having engaged in unprecedented wrongdoing. That’s a coherent position, but it begs the question. We don’t know if Mr. Trump engaged in constitutional wrongdoing. We don’t even know if, legally speaking, what he did was unprecedented. One of the problems with cases like Colorado’s is the danger of a double standard in which the rules used to kill off one party’s candidate have never been and aren’t being applied to the other party.

If the Jan. 6 riot was an “insurrection,” what about the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots? In the middle of those riots, Rep. Ayanna Pressley said: “There needs to be unrest in the streets.” Sen. Kamala Harris said: “Everyone beware, because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not gonna stop after Election Day . . . and they should not. And we should not.” Rep. Maxine Waters even called the 1992 Los Angeles riots an “insurrection” as she egged them on. Ms. Pressley and Ms. Waters are still in Congress, and Ms. Harris went on to higher office.

There’s a way out for the U.S. Supreme Court. It should reverse the Colorado decision on grounds requiring Section 3 cases to be decided under a pre-established set of rules.

In In re Griffin (1869), Chief Justice Salmon Chase decided that a person could be disqualified from office under Section 3 only if Congress so provides in a statute and only under the procedures laid out in that statute. This case isn’t a Supreme Court precedent, since Chase was “riding circuit” at the time, hearing the controversy for a lower court. That’s why the Colorado justices were able to ignore it—but the U.S. Supreme Court is under no obligation to do so.

Congress enacted an insurrection statute in 1870 and has amended it since. It allows people to be prosecuted for engaging in an insurrection and disqualifies them from office if convicted. Section 3 itself doesn’t require a criminal conviction; Congress could lower the standard if it chose. But the crucial point, which the justices could achieve by following Griffin, is to preserve democracy by preventing judges—including the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court—from deciding presidential elections on the basis of rules they make up on the fly.

Mr. Rubenfeld is a professor at Yale Law School and a First Amendment lawyer.

Title: Coming Jan 26: Rigged
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 06, 2024, 01:53:21 PM

Third

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-6jGxcKziQ

Title: William Doyle PhD on Bill O'Reilly on election cheating ala Zuckerberg
Post by: ccp on January 07, 2024, 08:57:24 AM

Suggest begin the podcast at ~ minute 9:25 and Doyle begins around 14:45 marker

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/2024-election-coverage-begins-desantis-vs-haley-2020/id1126543994?i=1000640379803

Good chance Zuck bucks singlehandedly financed turning the election to Biden in '20.

Title: WI: Judge rules mobile vans violate state election law
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 11, 2024, 12:50:21 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/wisconsin-judge-rules-use-of-mobile-vans-in-absentee-voting-violates-state-election-law-5562951?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2024-01-11-1&src_cmp=breaking-2024-01-11-1&utm_medium=email&est=23XPoEtCkE%2FyjWuledXZgN%2BmzVt%2FG%2B7%2B%2ByVPS4Ix%2B0zmXstDr4yc%2FeJnbwCPfsCS0SLC

Title: Worth remembering and some biting sarcasm
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 23, 2024, 07:47:22 AM

Helluva coincidence!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749439952843161744   

Sarcasm with serious bite:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1749450647743701213

Title: Amorally Amok Repost
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 28, 2024, 06:33:02 AM

Stop what you are doing and read this. It lays out why we are at where we are at: ruthless efforts to limit options for the American voting public. This really isn’t the place for this piece, but I can’t find a better one and hence am tempted to start an “American Oligarchy” thread.

https://www.racket.news/p/the-anti-democratic-movement-targeted?r=1qo1e&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&fbclid=IwAR2x9941xaT_8AhmtjiGoICHv_fkbsHBqUONy2NNQGURC3UiyN1LbYaOcRg

Title: Re: Amorally Amok Repost
Post by: DougMacG on January 28, 2024, 08:47:56 AM

Quote from: Body-by-Guinness on January 28, 2024, 06:33:02 AM

Stop what you are doing and read this. It lays out why we are at where we are at: ruthless efforts to limit options for the American voting public. This really isn’t the place for this piece, but I can’t find a better one and hence am tempted to start an “American Oligarchy” thread.

https://www.racket.news/p/the-anti-democratic-movement-targeted?r=1qo1e&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&fbclid=IwAR2x9941xaT_8AhmtjiGoICHv_fkbsHBqUONy2NNQGURC3UiyN1LbYaOcRg

Matt Taibi has become a hero.

"...no one goes into politics to lose, but if you don’t believe in letting voters decide, and winning becomes about something other than making the best argument or boasting the best record, you got lost somewhere along the line."


Interesting that Democrats admit nearly all these third-party choices hurt them.

Scary the way they project. Everybody else is being "undemocratic" while they work tirelessly behind the scenes and in front of the camera to remove every candidate against them, even the Republican from the ballot.

I recall Saddam Hussein used to win "elections" with 99.9% of the vote. That is the "democratic" America they envision. I'm still stuck on the idea in the quote above, you 'make the best argument or boast the best record', and let the voters decide - on Election Day (singular).

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on January 28, 2024, 09:04:19 AM

yup

good old fashioned corruption is the biggest threat to Democracy.

and the Dems are masters of it.

Title: Newsom Notes the Kettle is Black
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 28, 2024, 10:39:04 AM

Given my previous post and the fact Newsom, near as I can tell, is a party hack through and through, his warblings here strike me as preemptive chutzpah.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4434091-newsom-democrats-should-be-worried-about-third-party-candidates/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on January 28, 2024, 10:51:10 AM

2nd (or perhaps 3rd) post: this piece riffs on the Taibbi piece above. And yes, if Trump is reelected 12:02 is spot on.

https://amgreatness.com/2024/01/28/our-democracy-a-deep-dive-into-democratic-weaponization-and-the-need-for-decentralization/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 28, 2024, 03:47:34 PM

"This really isn’t the place for this piece, but I can’t find a better one and hence am tempted to start an “American Oligarchy” thread."

Nope, this thread is exactly the right place for it  8-)

Title: Rigged, the Documentary
Post by: Crafty_Dog on January 28, 2024, 04:26:45 PM

Haven't watched this yet:

https://rigged.dailycaller.com/watchnow?pnespid=5ug7ES9YM.gYgfDco2_wTZuAvg7xUol1Lum_2O5xvxRmVmFaRhLnoP0MK9XLJbARC4x0lQjG&sl=riggedemail&utm_campaign=36312&utm_medium=email&utm_source=piano

Title: Election Integrity Green Bay, celebrate one small win
Post by: DougMacG on February 01, 2024, 05:41:55 AM

https://www.wispolitics.com/2024/matt-batzel-big-win-for-election-integrity-in-green-bay/

Title: Republican lawsuits to enforce election laws
Post by: DougMacG on February 01, 2024, 05:47:18 AM

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/politics/republican-lawsuits-challenge-mail-ballot-deadlines-could-they-upend-voting-across-the-country/ar-BB1hAvY8

Title: State by State Election Rules Site
Post by: ccp on February 01, 2024, 07:11:02 AM

Good morning Doug et al,

Here is a site that has state by state election rules though I don't see the mention of what vote collection stops:

https://www.vote411.org/voting-rules

out of state absentee voting by state:

https://www.findlaw.com/voting/my-voting-guide/vote-by-mail-states.html

CLEARLY BALLOT HARVESTING IS HERE TO STAY -  obviously we are late and behind in that "game".

some states do require valid reason for absentee ballots such as Indiana .  most it seems do not.


not finding on quick search how long after the election can absentee ballots be counted though.

Title: Voter Fraud Counterpoint
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 02, 2024, 10:36:36 PM

Extensively sourced paper examining voter fraud claims in 2020, finding those claims are false. Paper does not conclude there was no fraud, but does state it wasn’t sufficient to alter the outcome of the election. Curiously it neither examines or even mentions the fraud claims in Atlanta where poll watcher were forced to leave the tally room as Biden votes spiked.

One author is from the Hoover Institute, a generally scholarly conservative Republican think tank, though there are certainly a few neocon names associated with it. As that may be, though I suspect there was significant fraud in 2020, I figure a well sourced piece arguing it didn’t impact the outcome is worth sharing.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qfvavvua3g6dksnzl9ils/TrumpClaims.pdf?rlkey=rnig91049e5js1hprelig4ij9&dl=0

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 03, 2024, 05:29:45 AM

Fair enough, and not the first I have seen of this sort.

That said and in additon to the missing points you mentioned IMHO such pieces, such arguments miss the point about categories of votes that should not have been counted (e.g. hundreds of thousands in PA) Zuckbux and related ways of rigging, mass mail ballots and ballot harvesting, etc.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on February 03, 2024, 07:02:36 AM

Good points made.

In the first sentence, they are analyzing claims, not scrutinizing ballots and voters.

"Absence of evidence" equals what?. What I would call a deplorable lack of curiosity on the part of the investigating agencies starting with then-AG Bill Barr who declared early no fraud and didn't want resources wasted looking into it.

Absence of evidence means Trump's claims will never be proven true and some were proven false. Does that prove no fraud or not enough fraud to swing the election? No.

Separate from evidence is that we know the States increased the opportunity for fraud exponentially in 2020. And we know from previous elections they already have proven motive, opportunity and wllingness, eagerness to commit fraud at every opportunity, and to turn their back on it when it rears its ugly head with thousands of examples. cf. Chicago 1960 and every other year. cf. Sen Al Franken and the trunkful of ballots that swung the 60th Senate vote that passed the unrepealable Obamacare. Link to ABC affiliate documentary on that in this thread.

If they don't think fraud occurs, why do the challenge every close election they lose. . Hillary Clinton, "He is not a legitimate President."

These cities, neighborhoods and precincts that are 90%+ and close to 100% one sided, Democrat, offer endless opportunities to cheat. Rural, small town Republican areas don't. People know each other in small towns and know who lives on every property.

Two personal stories, I was mailed 6 registrations to vote in Minneapolis by the City of Minneapolis in 2020 and my mailing address they sent to is NOT in the city of Minneapolis. All anyone would have to do is fill out and mail in and ballots would come. Secondly, I voted in person and the first thing they said before good morning was "put that away, we won't be using it", regarding my ID.

With 30-50 million illegals here, where is the citizenship check when we don't even check photos, and we issue ID and utility bills to non citizens anyway. Sanctuary city means illegal equals legal.

Separate issue in the lawfare mess is whether Trump knew there was no cheat and pursued his protest anyway. Totally absurd. He isn't going to be caught behind the scenes saying I know there was no fraud because we all know there was. We're only arguing over how much, how and where.

But the extent of it will never be proven.

All that said, it's important we see the 'studies' the other side is citing.

Title: 2020 RIGGED
Post by: ccp on February 03, 2024, 07:58:43 AM

agree

can ignore word stolen and replace with *rigged*. We all know it is true though MSM will never talk about it except maybe "every vote counts" or attempt to turn it around and call otherwise is "voter suppression"

VDH characterizes it as ballot harvesting though legal.

https://dailycaller.com/2024/02/02/daily-caller-rigged-democrats-election-2020-donald-trump-joe-biden/

https://www.amazon.com/Rigged-Media-Democrats-Seized-Elections/dp/B09PMHYVQ4

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 03, 2024, 08:37:19 AM

Absence of Evidence is precisely the purpose of Mass Mail Ballots and Ballot Harvesting!!!

Worth noting is having more time to investigate claims was the purpose of Trump and his attorney Eastman on January 6.

Title: Michigan Voter Fraud Evidence & Claims Ignored by DOJ
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 04, 2024, 02:07:41 PM

Gateway Pundit says more to come:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/2-6-5/

Title: One More State Where Voter Rolls Ruled Part of the Public Record
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 06, 2024, 05:55:12 PM

Jeepers, isn't it awful that voter rolls can now be audited in several states? Here's hoping this trend expands:

https://pjmedia.com/lincolnbrown/2024/02/06/first-circuit-court-of-appeals-rules-voter-rolls-are-a-matter-of-public-record-n4926182

Title: Biden Confirms The Replacement Theory
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 07, 2024, 06:04:29 AM

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2024/02/06/https-www-breitbart-com-politics-2024-02-06-exclusive-rep-bob-goods-alert-act-to-weaken-unelected-bureaucrats-gone-wild-passes-committee/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 07, 2024, 06:29:34 AM

Mark Levin

gave a lot of details about the border bill
on Monday's radio / podcast

The entire thing is a shyster scam
would do nothing to slow let alone stop illegals flooding out borders.
basically a phony pittance to building the wall which has loopholes in it that would make it so that nothing on it gets done a perhaps a few miles so Dems can run around claiming they are building the wall
has 5,000 per month intake ok at which point myorkas or biden can start emergency closures (why at 5,000 when it should be zero) but this and all the entire bill is filled with loopholes so Biden or Myorkas can ignore even these absurd restrictions

provides money to help get illegals into the interior get them jobs fast track citizenship (would take 5 yrs - just in time for 2028)
pay for more shysters provide them for free to illegals
allow anyone to claim asylum etc
give border protection people a 15 % raise in effect bribing them to jump on board with promoting this.

off the top of my head this is part of it.

McConnel is that dumb or just a "f'in" liar.
Either way (I don't know which is worse) he is a disgrace
I did not hear anything in the bill that we would want that is favorable to Repubs
and tying it to Ukraine and Israel aid was a scam from day one.

Of course the WSJ thinks it a good bill
Since when did WSJ ever really look out for America or middle class?!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 07, 2024, 10:09:42 AM

Levin of course is great, but this is not the right thread for that.

Title: Vote Fraud Documented, is Significant, Affected 2020 Outcome
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 07, 2024, 12:10:46 PM

Heartland released a major report re voter fraud. Key findings include:

The results of our analysis are outlined below.
• 28.2 percent fraud
o Trump wins Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
o Trump wins the Electoral College 311-227.
• 27 percent fraud through 14 percent fraud
o From 27 percent fraud down through 14 percent, the overall results are identical to the 28.2 percent fraud scenario (though Trump’s margin of victory in each state shrinks as the overall mail-in ballot fraud integer shrinks).
• 13 percent fraud through 6 percent fraud
o Trump wins Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, but loses to Biden in Michigan and Nevada.
o Trump wins the Electoral College 289-249. • 5 percent fraud and 4 percent fraud
o Trump wins Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, but loses to Biden in Michigan, Nevada, and Pennsylvania.
o Trump and Biden tie the Electoral College 269-269. As described in more detail
in the paper, Trump would likely have won the resulting vote in the House of Representatives, because Republicans controlled more state delegations in the wake of the 2020 election.

• 3 percent fraud
o Trump wins Arizona and Georgia, but loses to Biden in Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
o Biden wins the Electoral College 279-259. • 2 percent fraud and 1 percent fraud
o Trump does not win any states. Biden wins Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
o Biden wins the Electoral College 306-232.


https://heartland.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Feb-24-2020-Election-Analysis-vWeb_Final.pdf?vgo_ee=Q9YcOA3RfV8YRbot67Y51X03pDep80QNTrt9XgA7Hg%3D%3D%3Axx7GVWKL5awx451uDTpJOWtgcS55zOS5&fbclid=IwAR119f3xFerlBQSJhvhTe4-vOSb-YPHleRvcKgqbyxxnv1PmA4MPeUT3F-M

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 07, 2024, 01:04:45 PM

interesting that only 4 to 5 % fraud would have given Trump the election

we know the LEFT response :

however,

there is No proof of fraud.

I admit we have not met the bar of proof other then irregularities.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 07, 2024, 01:35:19 PM

The whole point of not having a chain of custody is as a practical matter to make have proof of fraud impossible.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 07, 2024, 02:30:44 PM

right !

and mail in ballots or drop box ballots makes a real chain of custody control near impossible.

Title: Re: Vote Fraud Documented, is Significant, Affected 2020 Outcome
Post by: DougMacG on February 07, 2024, 05:41:05 PM

Quote from: Body-by-Guinness on February 07, 2024, 12:10:46 PM

Heartland released a major report re voter fraud. Key findings include:
...
https://heartland.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Feb-24-2020-Election-Analysis-vWeb_Final.pdf?vgo_ee=Q9YcOA3RfV8YRbot67Y51X03pDep80QNTrt9XgA7Hg%3D%3D%3Axx7GVWKL5awx451uDTpJOWtgcS55zOS5&fbclid=IwAR119f3xFerlBQSJhvhTe4-vOSb-YPHleRvcKgqbyxxnv1PmA4MPeUT3F-M

• 21 percent of mail-in voters admitted that in
2020 they voted in a state where they are “no longer a permanent resident.”

• 21 percent of mail-in voters admitted that they
filled out a ballot for a friend or family member

• 17 percent of mail-in voters said they signed
a ballot for a friend or family member “with or
without his or her permission.”

• 19 percent of mail-in voters said that a friend or
family member filled out their ballot, in part or in
full, on their behalf.

"After analyzing the raw survey data, we were also
able to conclude that 28.2 percent of respondents
who voted by mail admitted to committing at least
one kind of voter fraud. This means that more than
one-in-four ballots cast by mail in 2020 were likely
cast fraudulently, and thus should not have been
counted.

Because Joe Biden received significantly more mail-in votes than Donald Trump, we conclude that the 2020 election outcome would have been different in the key swing states that Donald Trump lost  by razor thin margins."

[Doug]  That portion seems high, 28% of mail-in was fraud.  Only 6% needs to "proven" - and apparently it won't be.

Title: JW vs. MS
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 08, 2024, 04:27:51 AM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/counting-ballots-after-election/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=corruption+chronicles&utm_term=members

Title: Zuck & his Fellow Travelers are Attacking American Governance
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 09, 2024, 05:50:57 PM

Mollie Hemingway is a good writer, reporter, and thinker. She lays out much of what was wrong with the 2020 election, pulls few punches while naming name:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2024/02/07/mollie_hemingway_at_zuckerbucks_hearing_the_american_system_of_self-governance_is_under_attack.html

Title: JW on the job!
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 13, 2024, 02:52:58 PM

https://www.judicialwatch.org/keep-elections-honest/?utm_source=deployer&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=tipsheet&utm_term=members

Title: Illegal Aliens account for up to 22 seats in Congress thnx to Biden EO
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 15, 2024, 03:46:52 PM

We spotted this at the time.

Nice to see it coming back to the surface.

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2024/02/15/illegal-immigrants-account-for-up-to-22-seats-in-the-house-thanks-to-bidens-exec-order-experts-warn-1437228/?utm_campaign=bizpac&utm_content=Newsletter&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_source=Get%20Response&utm_term=EMAIL

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on February 15, 2024, 08:13:08 PM

This could account for a lot of what we have been seeing.

Title: election integrity measures failing
Post by: ccp on February 17, 2024, 04:14:17 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/scant-election-reforms-since-2020-forebode-a-repeat-in-november-5581772?utm_source=Morningbrief&src_src=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2024-02-17&src_cmp=mb-2024-02-17&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYuw4IktV6djJ5LwB8GZWBu1axachNqyXsy29F2zjSh8%3D

Title: Yes Virginia, there Really are Non-Citizens that are Voting
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 20, 2024, 12:49:58 PM

Among other points this piece makes is that there if little funding available to study the question, a feature rather than a bug, methinks:

Why would a president running for reelection refuse to meet with the Speaker of the House to discuss a national crisis that most voters blame on the president himself? This would be regarded as bizarre behavior under any circumstances, but it’s particularly perverse considering that the crisis in question is illegal immigration — the signature issue of Biden’s probable challenger in November. Moreover, according to the RealClearPolitics polling average, 63 percent of the voters disapprove of the way he has handled immigration. Yet Biden refuses to discuss the problem. It’s almost as if he thinks it somehow works to his advantage.

Democrats may well have reached the conclusion that they can’t stay in power with legal votes by natural born or naturalized citizens.
What benefit would Biden gain by letting millions of illegal immigrants into the country? House speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) provided the answer during a recent appearance on Fox Business Network’s Mornings with Maria Bartiromo: “I genuinely believe that originally the idea was to bring people in, open the border, have the flow come in and turn them into voters, there’s no other reason that seems to make sense.” This has been dismissed as a conspiracy theory by the White House and its allies in the media. Yet Biden has often made public statements that suggest Johnson is right. In 2016, when he was Vice President, he put it thus:

You know, 11 million people live in the shadows. I believe they’re already American citizens. Teddy Roosevelt said it better: “Americanism is not a question of birthplace or creed or a line of descent. It’s a question of principles, idealism, and character.” These people are just waiting for a chance to contribute fully. And by that standard, 11 million undocumented aliens are already Americans, in my view. All they want — they just want a decent life for their kids, a chance to contribute to a free society, a chance to put down roots and help build the next great American century.

Setting aside Biden’s implausibly low estimate of the “undocumented alien” population (researchers from Yale and MIT estimate the actual 2016 figure was more like 22.1 million), the key words that relate to voting are “contribute fully.” It will come as no surprise that serious research into how many of Biden’s “citizens” vote is very much discouraged in academia. In 2014, for example, a peer-reviewed article authored by Jesse T. Richman and Gushan A. Chattha, both of Old Dominion University, and David C. Earnest of George Mason University estimated that about 25 percent of non-citizens were registered to vote in 2008 and 2010. Moreover, they suggest that as many as 2.8 million of them actually voted. (READ MORE from David Catron: Biden’s Sound and Fury)

Inevitably, the “vote fraud is rare” crowd descended on the authors of the study like so many flying monkeys. Their criticisms predictably focus on when and why they published their study rather than its findings. They suggest the study was purposely produced to provide fuel to “conspiracy theorists.” They also accuse the authors of timing it to affect the 2014 midterms. The article was published in the online version of Electoral Studies on September 21 — about five weeks before Election Day. It’s unlikely that this publication is included in the regular reading of your average voter. Richman and Earnest wrote a lengthy response to their critics in the Washington Post. Its general thrust is captured in the following passage:

Our blog post and article on non-citizen voting have reached a wide audience, and have motivated several efforts to dispute our methods and conclusions … Although our estimates of non-citizen registration and voting are higher than previous estimates, this should not be surprising. To our knowledge, ours is the first study to use survey data to estimate non-citizen voting, while other studies have relied upon incidents of detected vote fraud. Estimates of illegal behavior based upon survey data are frequently higher than estimates based upon detection rates.

This final point is driven home by the known level of detection rates for illegal voting. The Heritage Foundation maintains an Election Fraud Database that presents a sampling of recent instances of election fraud cases that have resulted in convictions. It does not purport to be exhaustive but it does contain the details of 1,276 criminal convictions many involving large scale ballot harvesting operations, vote buying schemes, and ineligible voting by non-citizens. However, because academic grant money for major research into any kind of election fraud is all but nonexistent, serious studies like the one discussed above are rarely conducted, leaving most American voters in the dark about how many illegal immigrants vote. (READ MORE: Trump’s Swing State Challenge)

All of which brings us back to President Biden’s refusal to meet with House Speaker Mike Johnson about the border crisis. In May of 2023, the Republican House passed H.R. 2, the “Secure the Border Act,” which would codify the mechanisms used by former President Trump to successfully control the border. It has been collecting dust in the Democrat-controlled Senate for nine months. Meanwhile, the Senate has produced an alternative bill that would make the current border crisis permanent. This is the legislation Biden supports. Typically, the President would meet with the House Speaker and work out a compromise. The White House, however, says there is nothing to negotiate. It’s Biden’s way or the highway. (READ MORE: Is This What Biden Meant By ‘Unity’?)

Or is it Biden’s way? During the Fox interview discussed above, House Speaker Mike Johnson said, “I don’t think he’s allowed to do it. I’m not sure Biden’s actually making these decisions.” This may be true, but it is by no means inconsistent with his past positions. Biden and the Democrats may well have reached the conclusion that they can’t stay in power with legal votes by natural born or naturalized citizens. If so, it means they see uncontrolled illegal immigration as a feature rather than a bug of the Biden administration’s border policy. In the end, they couldn’t care less who votes as long as they remain in power.

https://spectator.org/non-citizens-have-been-voting-since-2008/?lh_aid=6961640&lh_cid=ofggh4fs9q&lh_em=crfdc%40yahoo.com&di=8f991a1afe1e97a78dc6b188871e8a1e&fbclid=IwAR1xE9Ymmi0aM2Cin3BE4w3RRpz0R3BfWoDcNa2frMdondl5iGYVlPH0aOA

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 20, 2024, 01:15:38 PM

"Yale and MIT estimate the actual 2016 figure was more like 22.1 million)"

This was the study whose authors slipped my mind.   A serious study.   Let's find the link for proper citation!

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 20, 2024, 01:25:00 PM

Quote from: Crafty_Dog on February 20, 2024, 01:15:38 PM

"Yale and MIT estimate the actual 2016 figure was more like 22.1 million)"

This was the study whose authors slipped my mind.   A serious study.   Let's find the link for proper citation!

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201193

Title: If Dems take the House, they plot to deny certifying Trump
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 24, 2024, 08:25:29 AM

https://electionlawblog.org/?p=141613

Title: Why no uproar?!?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 24, 2024, 08:26:50 AM

second:

From January.  Why no uproar?!?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748886063299383496

Title: The Coming One Sided Anti-Deep Fake Tools
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 26, 2024, 03:59:57 PM

Oh my, we’d best be ready for a serious emergent hall of mirrors:

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2024/02/the-evolution-of-electoral-fraud.php?fbclid=IwAR1dc8Mvqy3TyWnVVTMKArKFY5lxg7ClQRERQIjqi5OZvQQo6xF3PVt0SUM

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 27, 2024, 05:00:05 AM

 :-o :-o :-o

Title: 2020 Chicanery involving Ukraine
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 27, 2024, 05:22:35 AM

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/03/10/how_ukraine_conspired_with_dems_against_trump_to_prevent_the_kind_of_war_happening_now_under_biden_820873.html?fbclid=IwAR0XQHu4Jojy8qn25j57LX3YFGiMpfhFKYfcEjoJLcb-Iu9biqzK9aC77yo

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/03/10/election_overseer_found_dnc_chalupa_broke_rules_over_ukraine_then_reversed_its_finding_after_jan_6_820892.html

Title: 2019 Chicanery -Lawrence ODonnell
Post by: Crafty_Dog on February 27, 2024, 05:24:25 AM

https://amgreatness.com/2019/09/02/lawrence-odonnells-cross-dressing-goat-wrestling-helium-huffing-ways/

Title: Electoral Fraud Studies Practicum
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 27, 2024, 03:09:48 PM

Earn college credit and money while padding your resumé in pursuit of your future career with the DNC:

RNC Research
@RNCResearch
Kamala Harris announces the Biden administration will "now allow students to get paid through federal work study to register people" to vote in an effort to "activate them"

Title: Fani’s Follies on the Stand
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on February 28, 2024, 11:37:16 AM

This could go a lot of places, but given its impact on Trump’s (egregious to my mind) prosecution, I’m dropping it here. These guys are great, and go out of their way to divorce the politics from their analysis of behavior. They’ve got one up about the Carlson/Putin interview I’m scoping out next:

https://youtu.be/7eWtla_p0VI?si=J0SgASEfrMt8HX2D

Title: Fed judge upholds AZ law requiring proof of citizenship
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 01, 2024, 06:23:33 PM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/federal-judge-upholds-ariz-law-requiring-voters-to-provide-proof-of-citizenship/

Title: Pay No Attention to the Fraud Behind the Curtain
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 02, 2024, 08:03:08 AM

An US NGO fraud report oblivious to its own ironies emerges:

https://chroniclesmagazine.org/web/u-s-flunks-its-own-election-standards/?fbclid=IwAR3oMeP3ZFwpGGfIP0vXYcMTehN6bMdhxDIV_CdJGL9Mpr3cxqX_RNggFxE

Title: The fix is in of course again
Post by: ccp on March 03, 2024, 06:12:43 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ag-garland-pledges-to-fight-voter-id-laws-election-integrity-measures/ar-BB1jh30Q?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=95134235f39e4757a6d79bd847f7be4d&ei=14

so identification of a voter is *suppression*...... :x

Garland just another Jewish race hustler

Title: what a joke
Post by: ccp on March 03, 2024, 07:34:55 PM

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/kamala-harris-leads-bloody-sunday-memorial-as-marchers-voices-ring-out-for-voting-rights/ar-BB1jeX82?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=636c6f060bfb4430be931d8baa74d0dd&ei=22\

commemorating 1965 ok, but this is not 1965.
near *60* yrs ago we saw pictures like in this article.

So asking for a photo ID from a minority is akin to beating that person over the head with baton

got it:    wink:

race race race race ad nauseum....

Sharpton making lots of money selling hotdogs at this event .....

Title: AZ House of Representative passes bill ending no excuse mail ballots and
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 04, 2024, 08:49:53 AM

(4) ARIZONA PASSES BILL TO ROLL BACK NO-EXCUSE MAIL-IN BALLOTS: The Arizona House of Representatives passed House Bill 2876, which will end no-excuse mail-in ballots and reestablish voting precincts, by a 31-28 party-line vote.
Arizona Rep. Michael Carbone (R) said the bill will make Arizona’s election system more like Florida and Illinois and ensure election results are released in a timely manner.
Why It Matters: The Arizona GOP is attempting to curtail electoral strategies like ballot harvesting by rolling back COVID-era election laws passed in other key battleground states, and likely helped the Biden campaign win in 2020. The Arizona GOP has lost previous efforts to change election laws through the courts, which say federal law blocks states from enforcing “documentary citizenship” for federal elections. While Trump is ahead of Biden in national and battleground state polling, these COVID-era election laws are very likely a deciding factor in the 2024 election and increase the chances of a Biden victory. – R.C.

Title: Institutionalizing Electoral Fraud
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 06, 2024, 12:18:16 AM

“Bidenbucks” used to underwrite Democratic Party get out the vote effort guised as a non-partisan voter drive:

https://thefederalist.com/2024/02/29/9-ways-the-feds-are-using-bidenbucks-to-rig-the-2024-election/?fbclid=IwAR3GjW-sugUIDjmf4eDHr5SJsxxJlaOt2g3dbm86K6l_W84QASKJ119j_gA

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 06, 2024, 05:38:37 AM

And this is what worries us.
Yes Trump is up a few % in the polls, but it is election rigging as above that we all know can erase his lead
over the election voting period which used to be one day but in many areas is not a lot longer.

And using our money to pay for it.   :x

Title: Re: Institutionalizing Electoral Fraud
Post by: DougMacG on March 06, 2024, 08:41:17 AM

Quote from: Body-by-Guinness on March 06, 2024, 12:18:16 AM

“Bidenbucks” used to underwrite Democratic Party get out the vote effort guised as a non-partisan voter drive:

https://thefederalist.com/2024/02/29/9-ways-the-feds-are-using-bidenbucks-to-rig-the-2024-election/?fbclid=IwAR3GjW-sugUIDjmf4eDHr5SJsxxJlaOt2g3dbm86K6l_W84QASKJ119j_gA

We will need to win under their rules in order to reset the rules to normal.

That's why I've been harping on finding and sticking to 60-40 issues. 50.1 - 49.9 isn't going to do it.

I voted yesterday.  No ID. No photo.  I brought in nothing but my car key and scribbled something on the screen that said I understood the rules and consequences.  In mid-afternoon I was the 100th to vote out of 1200 eligible.

If I (someone else) did that in 10 other precincts, who would know.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 06, 2024, 09:27:10 AM

https://patriotpost.us/articles/104942-extremists-attack-the-integrity-of-free-and-fair-elections-2024-03-05?mailing_id=8171&subscription_uuid=36e3d4d4-c349-40fa-9856-d1504ff07188&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.8171&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on March 06, 2024, 10:49:06 AM

Dirty Dems gotta keep playing on the emotions of minorities rather then honest sensibilities

to keep them in the fold.  They are goin to put ya all back in chains etc.

Logic, honesty, truth will not work .

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: DougMacG on March 06, 2024, 12:48:50 PM

Quote from: ccp on March 06, 2024, 10:49:06 AM

Dirty Dems gotta keep playing on the emotions of minorities rather then honest sensibilities to keep them in the fold.  They are goin to put ya all back in chains etc.
Logic, honesty, truth will not work .

I've watched the get-out-the-vote operation in the inner city.  They assume a) people are too lazy (and ambivalent) to get out and vote on their own, and b) that if they could get them out they would all vote Democrat.

That's changing:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-worst-nightmare-blacks-and-hispanics-for-trump-economy-2024-presidential-election-fbbe674c

Today your stereotyped Dem voter is the academic elite, the black lives matter rabble rouser, and Doug's friends and their wives with their MSNBC and NYT taking it all in.  Point is, they already vote.  And they aren't excited about the current direction.  Even lesbians know they are getting screwed by Leftism (pardon the terminology) with the destruction going on of women's sports. 

Inner city blacks haven't been excited about Democrats since Barack Obama was a Senator running against entrenched powers.  He proved it didn't matter. Nothing in their lives improved. It improved more under Trump. Now Hispanics are trending Trump and Republican. The working people of Wisc, Mich, Ohio, Pennsylvania are all trending R.  Farmers, all R.  Tradesmen like plumbers etc: Republican.  The battleground is the college educated suburbs. (And they already know how to vote.) 

The activists go around and say to the welfare recipients, vote for us or Republicans will take away your benefits.  And poor people who actually do work a part time job or two can say back to them, you're making it so we can't afford to eat, drive or get housing.

Title: Local TX DA, a Dem, fuct out of voting and loses her job
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 07, 2024, 07:19:41 AM

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2024/03/06/a-local-texas-da-had-a-serious-problem-when-she-tried-to-vote-in-her-primary-last-night-n2636191

Title: The electoral structure of CA primaries and a proffered alternative
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 09, 2024, 08:38:56 AM

I quite disagree with the proffered solution here-- IIRC this was used in Alaska and showed it to be unsound-- but the larger question remains-- how to structure and conduct elections in what effectively one party states?



https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/opinion-steve-garvey-s-strange-win-is-a-loss-for-california-election-reform-here-s-the-solution/ar-BB1jzEsu?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=60bb32904e0843bea7e055433b931a49&ei=14

Title: Are Reps getting ready for the big cheat?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 11, 2024, 10:53:43 AM

Trump blew this last time , , ,

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2024/03/11/are-the-republicans-getting-ready-for-the-election-legal-fight-or-are-they-blowing-it-again-n2636306

Title: Huntington Beach, CA
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 12, 2024, 04:25:26 AM

https://www.oann.com/newsroom/calif-huntington-beach-approves-election-voter-id-requirement/

Title: Dems in Congress will refuse to certify Trump
Post by: ccp on March 12, 2024, 09:56:56 AM

They scream about peaceful transfer of power then are planning on refusing to do just that:

https://pjmedia.com/rick-moran/2024/03/12/majority-of-democrats-would-oppose-congress-certifying-a-trump-victory-n4927221

Title: NJ: The Gov's wife
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 12, 2024, 10:51:03 AM

Fighting New Jersey’s Ballot Bosses
The race to replace Sen. Bob Menendez shouldn’t involve skewed ballots.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
March 11, 2024 6:16 pm ET




Resize
113

Gift unlocked article

Listen

(3 min)


image
Rep. Andy Kim speaks to delegates during the Bergen County Democratic convention in Paramus, N.J., Monday, March 4. PHOTO: SETH WENIG/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Sometimes election meddling takes place in plain view. Consider New Jersey’s “party line” ballots, which let county bosses put their favored primary candidates front and center, relegating the rest to the periphery. A lawsuit in this year’s Senate race is asking for ballots based on fairness, instead of orders from the local heavy.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
WSJ Opinion Potomac Watch
Biden and Netanyahu Clash Over Israel's Next Move


SUBSCRIBE
Add to Queue
Explore Audio Center
Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez, who is under indictment for an alleged bribe, might still seek re-election, but his support has collapsed, and he faces a bevy of challengers in the June primary. One candidate is Tammy Murphy, who enjoys strong relationships with county leaders, thanks to her even stronger relationship with the state’s Governor, who happens to be her husband, Phil Murphy.

That made her the favorite to win prime ballot placement. In 19 of the state’s 21 counties, party committees endorse a slate of candidates for office that are grouped together on the ballot, often in the same column. That usually includes current officeholders and other insiders. The rest are printed in other columns that can run to the edge of the ballot, giving voters the impression that they’re fringe candidates.

That’s why Rep. Andy Kim, who’s also running for the Senate, has filed a federal lawsuit against the counties. His complaint says that party-line ballots violate the First and 14th Amendments by denying candidates “equal protection” in seeking office, while denying citizens their right to a fair choice in the voting booth. New Jersey’s system of preferential treatment, he argues, doesn’t “belong anywhere near a government-sponsored ballot.”

Mr. Kim can point to plenty of evidence of the party line’s distorting effects. A researcher at Rutgers reviewed election results from 2002 to 2022 and found 45 primaries where county endorsements diverged. Candidates gained at least 13 additional percentage points when they were on the party line, with an average bump of 38 points.

New Jersey’s system is an outlier, even among ballot designs being disputed in court. In Mecinas v. Hobbs (2022), a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel found that the Democratic National Committee had standing to challenge an Arizona ballot that sorted candidates based on their parties’ previous vote tallies. The effect of New Jersey’s skewed ballots is worse than that, with names positioned based on local leaders’ whims.

The irony of Mr. Kim’s suit is that he’s no longer an underdog. A Monmouth University poll last week found that 48% of Democrats have a favorable view of him, compared with 24% for Ms. Murphy. He’s even winning over some of those party bosses. Committees in six counties have endorsed him, compared with four for Ms. Murphy. His fairness campaign has caught on with the public, yet it might be shaming party leaders into picking him instead of fixing the problem.

The first hearing in the lawsuit is set for March 18, about a month before early ballots will be mailed for the June 4 primary. Even if Mr. Kim’s suit doesn’t help him, it could benefit voters if it ensures they someday get ballots that lay out the choices without a firm suggestion from the local party.

Title: lack of voter integrity in Maryland
Post by: ccp on March 12, 2024, 01:29:00 PM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/03/challenging_election_irregularities_in_maryland.html

Title: WV Candidate for Gov Lays Out the Case for Electoral Fraud in 2020
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 13, 2024, 12:50:06 AM

WV Secretary of State & candidate for governor lays it all out re electoral interference, “progressive” orgs that underwrite it, and the federal government—including spooks—that stole the last election:

The secretary of state has tightened election security in West Virginia and condemned federal intelligence agencies’ election meddling.
Author M.D. Kittle profile
M.D. KITTLE

Ensuring the integrity of West Virginia’s elections is part of Mac Warner’s job, but the secretary of state has been just as zealous about protecting national elections from unfair meddling.

Now in his second term as the Mountain State’s top election official, Warner has cleaned up West Virginia’s bloated voter rolls and severed the state’s ties with leftist-linked voter roll groups. Even political opponents have credited Warner, who is running for governor as a Republican, with being “vigilant” to make West Virginia elections “very secure.”

Warner, 69, has also crusaded against federal intelligence agencies’ meddling in the controversial 2020 presidential election — an election the conservative unabashedly asserts was “stolen by the CIA.” Such statements have earned him the ire of corporate media outlets, which, as dutiful public-relations agents for the Democrat Party, have dubbed the secretary of state an “election denier.”

“Secretary Warner’s work on election integrity and security has set the example for what is needed right now across this entire country,” Ret. Lt. General Michael Flynn, war hero and former national security adviser for President Donald Trump, said in endorsing Warner in West Virginia’s 2024 GOP primary race for governor. Flynn, in case you’re scoring along at home, had his life and reputation ripped apart by Democrats and their allies in the deep state and accomplice media as part of their Russia-collusion hoax. 

Calling Out the ‘Worst Election Interference’ in U.S. History

Warner has been the rare voice among his peers in vehemently calling out the Big Brother censorship operation known as the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

“When we have our own federal agencies lying to the American people, that’s the most insidious thing that we can do in elections,” Warner told officials from the FBI and CISA on a panel at the February meeting of the National Association of Secretaries of State (NASS) in Washington, D.C., according to Wired’s Eric Geller. While Geller did his best to defend the federal agency — under the suggestive headline, “How a Right-Wing Controversy Could Sabotage US Election Security” — its history of censorship and election interference validate Warner’s concern.

CISA, as The Federalist has extensively reported, was established in 2018 to ostensibly “protect ‘critical infrastructure’ and guard against cybersecurity threats.” It moved into the nefarious business of information management by partnering with Big Tech to silence speech that it deemed to be “disinformation,” “misinformation,” or the Orwellian-sounding “malinformation.” CISA labored behind the scenes to censor those who questioned everything from the administration of the 2020 elections to the government’s iron-fisted handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Warner spoke out against the agency and the federal intelligence apparatus in late December during a West Virginia Republican gubernatorial candidates debate. He was, of course, vilified by the usual suspects for asserting the Covid-tainted 2020 election was “rigged.”

“The election was stolen,” Warner said, “and it was stolen by the CIA.”

To explain what he meant, Warner cited forming Acting CIA Director Michael Morell’s testimony under oath to the House Judiciary Committee that then-Biden campaign adviser Antony Blinken had “reached out” to Morell after a damning story sourced to Hunter Biden’s laptop broke. Blinken’s outreach, Morell testified, “set in motion the events that led to the issuance of” a letter attempting to discredit the laptop story.

“Yes, [Morell] colluded with [now-Secretary of State] Antony Blinken to sell a lie to the American people two weeks before the election for the very purpose of throwing the presidential election,” Warner explained. “And the FBI covers it up. And Mark Zuckerberg pays $400 million to put his thumb on the scales. That’s not fair.”

Morrell told the Judiciary Committee that he pushed the letter, which was signed by 51 former intelligence officials, to help then-presidential candidate Joe Biden, “because I wanted him to win the election.” The letter, released not long before the 2020 general election, falsely claimed that the New York Post’s bombshell report exposing the damning contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop appeared to be “Russian disinformation.”

Warner also noted the unprecedented use of Zuckbucks — hundreds of millions of dollars in donations to leftist groups by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg — to infiltrate swing state elections offices in 2020.

The West Virginia secretary of state has courageously spoken out against such alarming practices and other forms of election interference.

“Folks, this was the worst election interference in the history of the United States, when our own 3-letter agencies lied to the people of America with the expressed intent of throwing a presidential election. It doesn’t get any worse than that,” Warner said during a press conference last summer on the U.S. Capitol steps in support of the American Confidence in Elections Act. The legislative package “equips states with election integrity tools, implements key reforms in D.C., and protects political speech,” according to a press release from House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, a Wisconsin Republican.

Cleanup at the State Level

Warner hasn’t just made election integrity a priority on the national scale. Since he was elected in 2016, West Virginia has cleaned up its voter rolls, removing more than 400,000 names of voters who died, moved, were convicted felons, or showed up multiple times in voter registration records, Warner told the West Virginia Record’s readers. When he entered office, Warner said, he heard from county clerks about the bloated voter rolls, including four counties where the number of registered voters was greater than the number of eligible voters who lived in those counties.

Last year, West Virginia joined a growing list of states in rejecting the controversial Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC). The interstate voter list “maintenance” organization has come under fire for its mission creep voter registration efforts and its leftist leadership, including ERIC founder and Democrat operative David Becker. In his column for the West Virginia Record last June, Warner noted ERIC’s usefulness has “significantly decease[d].” Data-sharing agreements with bordering states will “prove more effective,” he wrote.

One of Warner’s opponents in the governor’s race praised the secretary of state’s leadership on securing the state’s elections.

“I believe that if every state would conduct their elections like we do here, we wouldn’t be having this discussion,” Moore Capito, son of U.S. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, said during a December debate in which the moderator demanded the Republican candidates answer whether they believe the 2020 election was “stolen.”

Attorney and election law expert Cleta Mitchell called Warner a “national hero and a treasure.”

“He speaks the truth — he is a true patriot and I only wish we had 50 state election officials just like him,” Mitchell told The Federalist.

Warner appreciates the kind words, but he says he’s just doing his job.

“I just want good and fair elections,” he recently told The Federalist.

Matt Kittle is a senior elections correspondent for The Federalist. An award-winning investigative reporter and 30-year veteran of print, broadcast, and online journalism, Kittle previously served as the executive director of Empower Wisconsin.

https://thefederalist.com/2024/03/12/how-west-virginias-mac-warner-is-fighting-the-worst-election-interference-in-u-s-history/?fbclid=IwAR1-KuphkD46KFaPCgEQGxjPrcwh57eJPNUpmWORkxduN-szThtUbaZtACk

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 13, 2024, 12:17:32 PM

Sounds like we should keep our eye on this guy.

Title: Forward Observer: Serious danger lurking in the Congressional weeds
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 14, 2024, 08:06:40 AM

(1) DEMOCRATS MOVE TO TAKE FEDERAL CONTROL OF ELECTIONS: Senate Democrats are pushing to pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act, which passed the House in 2021, if Democrats take control of the Senate in 2025.
Senator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) said the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act is an attempt to “rewrite federal law in a fashion that would make it harder for states to implement voter verification.”
Public Interest Legal Foundation litigation counsel Maureen Riordan said the act would “take the state’s rights from them” and give “tremendous power to partisan bureaucrats” over elections.
Why It Matters: House Republicans do not have an avenue to rescind passage of the bill in the House. Senate Democrats have pushed to kill the legislative filibuster, allowing Senate bills to pass with a simple majority vote. Meanwhile, the new Judicial Conference rule on venue shopping seems to bring conservative political challenges to this law and other federal election regulations into more friendly courts to the DOJ Voting Section. – R.C.

Title: Biden “Voter Participation” Executive Order …
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 16, 2024, 03:57:47 PM

… is on double secret probation or something that has the DOJ ignoring FOIA requests:

https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/03/11/doj-keeps-plan-secret-for-bidens-election-executive-order/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Top5&mkt_tok=ODI0LU1IVC0zMDQAAAGR4aEpRNq5bYRzQzlpqWcY4lNXfdMWbY0LwN1BM8vqBLnRaVjr1NoTDNQMwPjBK948tvoXRcii5qQn0PeO91CCM-RfSkWDJKb_s_qamQtoCulNhLE

Title: Election Watchdog Arrested for Sharing Dominion Emails ...
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 19, 2024, 12:31:04 PM

... that showed Dominion was engaged in illegal and deeply troubling electoral practices:

https://thepoliticsbrief.com/election-integrity-attorney-arrested-for-revealing-sensitive-emails-from-dominion-voting-systems/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 19, 2024, 01:47:06 PM

Let's keep an eye on this!!!

Title: Barry County MI sheriff sends evidence to Jim Jordan
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 19, 2024, 02:00:16 PM

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/03/barry-county-sheriff-sends-evidence-rep-jim-jordan/

Sheriff Dar Leaf Announces Investigation into Michigan 2020 Election: Claims Possession of “Sensitive Documents” Tied to Dominion Employees and High-Profile Figures Including Jocelyn Benson and Dana Nessel — Accuses Muskegon County Prosecutor of Attempting to Usurp His Ongoing Investigation
By Jim Hᴏft Mar. 10, 2024 8:00 am

Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf announced that he has launched an investigation into the handling of the Michigan 2020 election, implicating Dominion Voting Systems officials, Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, Attorney General Dana Nessel, computer scientist J. Alex Halderman, and others in potential misconduct.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported in 2022 that Sheriff Dar Leaf filed a lawsuit against the lawless and obstructive actions of Attorney General Dana Nessel, who regularly mocks and threatens her political opponents, together with Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who’s blocked the efforts of citizens and law enforcement to investigate voter fraud and voter irregularities related to the 2020 election.

The Barry County Sheriff is also suing MI Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s henchman, Jonathan Brater.

Jonathan Brater is Michigan’s Director of Elections, a member of the executive branch of state government, and an employee of the state. As director of elections, Mr. Brater is “vested with the powers and shall perform the duties of the secretary of state under his or her supervision, with respect to the supervision and administration of the election laws.”

The lawsuit states that Attorney General Nessel, who has no accountability to the Barry County Electorate, and even less authority to encroach upon the law enforcement functions of a constitutional sheriff, has committed a flagrant violation of constitutional and statutory laws by usurping the power of Sheriff Dar Leaf by obstructing, impeding, prejudging the ability of a duly elected official to conduct a criminal investigation into allegations of criminal acts related to the 2020 election and voting.

Critical Medications Every American Can Have On Hand (Including Ivermectin) – And How To Get Them Prescribed

Defendants, without authority, encroached upon Sheriff Dar Leaf’s duties by obstructing and interfering with his lawful investigation, obstructing justice in the process, and covering up evidence and crimes, including those that they themselves were involved in and conspired with others to commit.

Defendants usurped and otherwise obstructed an elected constitutional officer and prevented him from performing his constitutional, statutory, and common-law duties as County Sheriff in accordance with the Michigan Constitution, and state and federal laws.

Defendants, without legitimate authority, also unconstitutionally and unlawfully confiscated property, documents, and information (including voting machines with its attendant software, programs, and data), all of which was required to be sealed, preserved, protected, and retained by federal law.

Defendants acted in concert or individually to transfer and reallocate the duties and powers of the Plaintiff, usurping his power and removing from him or otherwise preventing his ability to perform his constitutional and statutory duties.

Defendants acts included but are not limited to threatening, harassing, and interfering with witnesses, local government officials (including township clerks), deputies, agents, and experts, and interfering with, obstructing, and otherwise defiling investigative works and the results of such works; confiscating and/or destroying confidential files and information pertaining to an ongoing investigation; unconstitutionally and unlawfully (and without the proper procedure) usurping Plaintiff’s law enforcement functions and authorities, which are exclusively reserved to him under Michigan common law and statutory law; stepping in to quell an ongoing legitimate investigation, confiscating confidential files and documents related thereto; obstructing, harassing, and/or threatening his deputies and agents conducting the law enforcement function on his behalf as they are allowed to do exclusively and with immunity under Michigan law, confiscating voting equipment and information and data that is required by federal law to be protected and preserved.

On or about November 3, 2020, Plaintiff Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf received information that election fraud and voting machine fraud was taking place in Barry County, Michigan, before, during, and after the November 2020 election.

Pursuant to his exclusive common-law and statutory duties to investigate and ferret out criminal activity occurring within his county, Sheriff Leaf opened an investigation.



On Thursday, Sheriff Leaf received a subpoena from the office of Muskegon County Prosecutor D.J. Hilson, ordering him to present his law enforcement files at the Oakland County courthouse with less than 24 hours’ notice.

Leaf has expressed reluctance to comply fully with the subpoena, citing concerns over compromising his department’s ongoing investigation.

Sheriff Leaf asserts that his department possesses sensitive documents, including email communications that suggest Dominion employees directed Serbian foreign nationals to remotely access Michigan’s election system before the certification of the 2020 election results.

These documents include emails that allegedly corroborate evidence contained in expert reports of foreign access to Michigan election equipment.

In addition to the allegations against Dominion, Sheriff Leaf’s files reportedly contain communications from J. Alex Halderman, a University of Michigan Professor of Computer Science and Engineering, who offered assistance to Dominion employees implicated in the investigation.

Halderman is accused of failing to disclose significant security breaches in Michigan’s election equipment and of concealing evidence pertinent to the case.


Recall that Halderman was the same person who was able to HACK A DOMINION VOTING MACHINE to change the tabulation In Front Of U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg in the courtroom! Halderman USED ONLY A PEN TO CHANGE VOTE TOTALS!

Also, Sheriff Leaf disclosed that his office and central dispatch experienced a network outage on the day of the subpoena, leading to suspicions of an attempt to obstruct the investigation.

The Gateway Pundit spoke with Sheriff Dar Leaf who confirmed to us that the letter was his and is accurate.

Transcript of the affidavit by Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf:
On March 7th 2024, at approximately 10:45 AM, I, sheriff Dar Leaf, received a subpoena for my law enforcement file no 21-2216 from DJ Hilson’s office.

This subpoena demanded that I appear at 1200 N Telegraph Rd. Pontiac MI with my law enforcement files with less than 24 hour notice and not time to appear.

Trending: BREAKING: Trump Unable to Secure Bond for $454 Million Judgment in NYC Fraud Case as Marxist Tyrant Letitia James Threatens to Seize Assets

My office currently has an ongoing investigation as it relates to dominion CEO John Poulos, Dominion employees and contractors, Jocelyn Benson, Dana Nessle, J. Alex Halderman, and others.

My department is in possession of sensitive documents that are part of an ongoing investigation involving Dominion employees. These Dominion employees directed, and tasks Serbian foreign nationals to remotely access the Michigan election system. I am not willing to compromise my investigation by providing my entire file. I am attaching to this affidavit several emails to demonstrate to this Honorable Court that this is a very serious ongoing investigation.

The emails in my file cooperate evidence contained in expert reports in my possession. These expert reports prove foreign access to Michigan election equipment prior to certification of the November 3rd 2020 election.

In addition to Dominion emails, I’m in possession of emails from J. Alex Halderman, SOS Jocelyn Benson’s expert witness on the Antrim County civil litigation. The e-mail from J. Alex Halderman offers to help the Dominion employees, the same ones tasking the foreign nationals to enter the Michigan election system prior to certification, by rebutting statements made by president trump on television.

J. Alex Halderman failed to report and disclose the serious remote security breaches to the election equipment identified by expert experts on the Antrim County case, and he concealed and hid significant evidence that is addressed in the “Halderman Rebuttal” expert reports. Further, he incorrectly dismissed the vote shifting that occurred in Antrim blaming the local clerk for “human error” when in fact the correct, and corroborating vote shifting explanation as explained in the “Rebuttal Report” and corroborated with Dominion emails. [exhibit 1].

I intend to file a motion to Quash the subpoena attached as well as a civil lawsuit against the Muskegon County prosecutor D. J. Hilson for attempting to usurp my investigation. D. J. Hilson worked with AG Dana Nessel and successfully buried the Muskegon County fraud that is now under investigation by the FBI. The Muskegon County Prosecutor failed to appropriately prosecute as requested by the Muskegon Police Department.

Moreover, this court should know that my office and our central dispatch had our network line go down on March 7th 2024 at about 4:00 AM through March 7th 2024 until approximately 5:23 PM. Attorney Lambert has been working for me, and my office, since December of 2020, and I believe this subpoena is an attempt to obstruct delay my very serious investigation.


Affidavit of Sheriff Dar Leaf (Credit: @xAlphaWarriorx/X
BREAKING: Sheriff Dar Leaf reveals he has been investigating key players in the Michigan 2020 election including Dominion CEO John Poulos, Dominion employees and contractors, Jocelyn Benson, AG Dana Nessel, and others.

“My department is in possession of sensitive documents that… pic.twitter.com/ZhlqW4kMSz

— George (@BehizyTweets) March 9, 2024

Title: Nevada gearing up for Democrat fraud
Post by: ccp on March 21, 2024, 10:21:01 AM

unlimited mail in and no ID required  :x

in 5 of 17 counties more people registered then there are adults in those counties
and of course Nevada officials deny everything

https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2024/03/20/are-democrats-trying-to-steal-nevada-from-trump-n4927473

Title: New Dominion in AZ Voter Fraud Evidence?
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 21, 2024, 11:39:36 AM

Kari Lake is petitioning the SCOTUS to review new voter fraud evidence:

Patrick Byrne
@PatrickByrne
UPPERCUT DELIVERED AT SCOTUS!!

(Please retweet)

Kari Lake‘s case against machines in 2024 was dismissed by a federal court in Arizona on the grounds that it was “too speculative“. Ninth circuit upheld that absurd decision on appeal.

Last week Kari Lake/Kurt Olsen filed at SCOTUS an appeal.

Last NIGHT they filed the appendix with stunning new evidence. (found in the links below).

Here are some key points:

1. Maricopa County’s election software used in the 2020 and 2022 elections has been altered with respect to the machine behavior settings that govern how ballots are read and tabulated.

2.  The EAC never approved this altered software, and Maricopa’s many previous representations that this election software is EAC certified, including to the AZ Senate, are false.

3. Knowingly modifying election software without approval or certification pursuant to 16-442 is a felony under AZ law. See 16–1004(B).

4.  Dominion’s operative contract with Maricopa states “Data generated by the Democracy Suite Platform, including results reporting, is protected by the deployment of FIPS approved symmetric AES encryption.”

5. But, Dominion placed the master cryptographic keys in plain text and unprotected on the election database except for Windows-login, which are easily bypassed. Leaving these highly sensitive cryptographic keys in this state violates all cyber security protocols and allows a malicious actor to take control of the machine and change results without detection.

6.  As Mr. Cotton stated in his declaration “It is like a bank having the most secure vault in the world, touting how secure it is to the public and then taping the combination in large font type on the wall next to the vault door.”

7.  Given all of these findings, none of these machines can be trusted to give reliable results in 2024.

https://x.com/PatrickByrne/status/1770690645826376029?s=20

This appendix is supposed to contain the new evidence. I haven't been able to view yet as it requries Telegram to be installed and I already have a bunch of apps in queue to DL:

https://t.me/PatrickMByrne/7529

Title: Non-Citizens to Vote in DC
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2024, 04:18:49 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/judge-tosses-challenge-upholds-law-allowing-noncitizens-to-vote-in-dc-5612616?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2024-03-22-2&src_cmp=breaking-2024-03-22-2&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYvAqcwcVzc7PzLYPrHFRB710wA0AIj31kx5JTWZu9FddhEg4S8RP

Title: AZ filings with SCOTUS
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 22, 2024, 04:29:13 PM

https://twitchy.com/samj/2024/03/21/scotus-findings-include-three-bombshell-developments-that-show-elections-can-be-rigged-n2394219

Title: Massive irregularities uncovered in Ohio
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 23, 2024, 07:07:53 PM

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/03/ohio_volunteers_uncover_massive_irregularities_in_voter_database.html

Title: From above post
Post by: ccp on March 24, 2024, 07:26:40 AM

" The day after certification in 2022, the Ohio statewide voter roll database showed:

58,209 resided in an apartment or in a mobile home lot but had no unit number as required on their voter registration application to ensure proper delivery of mail, including mail-in ballot material.
4,143 were older than the oldest person in the U.S. at the time or were too young to legally register.
6,348 had a date of birth that was different in 2022 than it was in 2020.
253,486 voters supposedly registered on January 1st, 84,221 voters registered on another Federal holiday and 201,693 voters registered on Sunday -- all times when Ohio boards of elections and state offices are closed.
120,094 had registration dates in the 2022 state voter file that were earlier than their registration date in the 2020 file. 59,025 people were listed as registering to vote before they were born.
243,583 had state identification numbers that had changed since 2020, even though federal laws require each voter be issued “a unique state identifier.” 34,233 had 2 to 5 registration records with different state identification numbers, making it possible for them to vote more than once."

The official response:

"The Secretary of State office’s response placed responsibility on shortcomings in county boards’ “staffing, IT expertise and database technology,” and claimed “the core problem is almost always human data entry.” It also asserted, contrary to Ohio law, that the county-maintained voter registration list is the official list. In actual fact, Ohio Revised Code § 3503.15 establishes: “The statewide voter registration database shall be the official list of registered electors for all elections conducted in this state.”

:x :x :x

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 24, 2024, 07:54:25 AM

Thank you CCP for taking to time to make that entry.

Title: Chicago: Vote Early, Vote Often, & Keep Doing So After You’re Dead
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 25, 2024, 05:09:03 PM

My old stompin’ grounds. The favored candidate was behind so, lo and behold, uncounted mail in ballots were found & the Machine’s candidate is now ahead as we learn, gasp, the other candidate was supported by WHITE MEN!!!

I’m so glad Illinois and I parted ways….

https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/03/cook-county-il-states-attorney-democratic-primary-race-a-mess-after-10000-mistakenly-left-out/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=cook-county-il-states-attorney-democratic-primary-race-a-mess-after-10000-mistakenly-left-out

Title: 9,000 mail in ballots "found" in Chicago Primary
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 28, 2024, 02:59:13 PM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/epochtv/9000-mail-in-ballots-suddenly-found-in-illinois-election-facts-matter-5616534?utm_source=News&src_src=News&utm_campaign=breaking-2024-03-28-2&src_cmp=breaking-2024-03-28-2&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYvAqcwcVzc7PzLYPrHFRB710wA0AIj31kx5JTWZu9FddhEg4S8RP

Title: Returned Ballots: A Recipe for Electoral Fraud
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on March 28, 2024, 08:22:00 PM

Returned ballots are harvested, perhaps via postal workers, completed for the preferred (Dem) candidate, and then remained as valid, among other tidbits found here:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/03/leading-milwaukee-democrat-kimberly-zapata-found-guilty-all/

Title: Federal agencies told to provide mail in ballots.
Post by: ccp on March 29, 2024, 05:32:14 AM

https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/mail-in-ballots-for-inmates-how-the-federal-government-is-targeting-new-voters-5578741?utm_source=Morningbrief&src_src=Morningbrief&utm_campaign=mb-2024-03-29&src_cmp=mb-2024-03-29&utm_medium=email&est=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYuw4IktV6djJ5LwB8GZWBu1axachNqyXsy29F2zjSh8%3D

Title: Third Circuit ruling on PA mail-in ballots
Post by: Crafty_Dog on March 29, 2024, 03:59:13 PM

Is This the End for Pennsylvania’s Undated Ballots?
A Third Circuit ruling could stabilize 2024 voting, right on time.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
March 29, 2024 5:47 pm ET




Resize
21

Gift unlocked article

Listen

(4 min)


image
A Delaware County secured drop box for the return of vote-by-mail ballots is pictured, May 2, 2022, in Newtown Square, Pa. PHOTO: MATT ROURKE/ASSOCIATED PRESS
Judges in Pennsylvania have been arguing for four years about whether election officials must count undated mail ballots, since some voters always fail to fill in the required date field. The latest answer, issued by a federal appeals court on Wednesday, is no. The good news is that this could help stabilize a wild 2024 election that is now only months away.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
WSJ Opinion Potomac Watch
Undated Mail Ballots Are No Longer Valid in Pennsylvania


SUBSCRIBE
Add to Queue
Explore Audio Center
Pennsylvania’s election law, upheld by the state Supreme Court, clearly tells mail voters to “fill out, date and sign the declaration.” Last year, though, a federal judge ruled that the date field was effectively optional, citing the Civil Rights Act. That law prohibits states from denying a person the right to vote based on a nonmaterial “error or omission” on paperwork that is “related to any application, registration, or other act requisite to voting.”

But if that interpretation is correct, where does it stop? States have all kinds of neutral, de minimis rules for voting. Pennsylvania also rejects unsigned mail votes, as well as “naked ballots” that are returned without their mandatory “secrecy” envelopes. Other states require absentee ballots to have witness signatures and addresses. What else might judges deem to be immaterial, if Donald Trump leads President Biden by 1,000 votes in one state, or vice versa? That’s the national nightmare.

A panel of the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 this week that the lower judge’s view is wrong. Her position, the majority says, “cannot be reconciled with the text and historic backdrop of the statute, nor cabined to the date requirement while leaving intact other vote-casting rules that serve valid state interests.” All three of the judges on this panel are Democratic appointees.

The majority argues that the Civil Rights Act provisions in question were aimed at ending literacy tests and other Jim Crow efforts to keep black citizens off the voting rolls in the South. “No longer could States block ballot box access to an applicant who misspelled a State’s name or failed to calculate correctly his birthday to the day,” the ruling says. This obviously isn’t what Pennsylvania is doing.

“Once inside the voting place (where, in the 1960s, nearly all voting took place), all voters must follow the same rules for casting a valid ballot,” the majority opinion adds. A mail ballot in Pennsylvania might be void if it’s filled out half in pencil and half in pen. But a state that sets aside defective ballots isn’t denying the right to vote. “We find it implausible,” the majority says, “that federal law bars a State from enforcing vote-casting rules that it has deemed necessary to administer its elections.”

Justice Samuel Alito, joined by two conservative colleagues, said much the same in 2022, when a separate dispute over Pennsylvania’s undated ballots reached the Supreme Court on the emergency docket. In that case, a different Third Circuit panel went the opposite direction, saying such votes must be tallied. But its ruling was eventually vacated as moot, setting up this week’s heartening correction.

The dissenting judge says that two years ago “10,000 timely-received ballots” were rejected under Pennsylvania’s date rule. Such errors are regrettable, and the possibility of making one is a reason to prefer voting in person. But the way to build trust in the fairness of elections is to run them by the book.

After Election Day, losing candidates will always plead to count a few more invalid votes. Judges shouldn’t be standing by to rewrite state law to do it.

Title: Eight Months to Stack the Electoral Deck
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on April 01, 2024, 10:28:53 PM

I came up north of Chicago where vote fraud was a given. Mayor Daley swung Illinois to Kennedy, beating Nixon with a vast wave of Chicago votes drummed up by ward healers, aldermen, and Democratic Party machine politics as practiced in the big cities they controlled. Claims the dead voted in Chicago? Duh, what else were the dead gonna do? Fraud was just a give and the Party machine in control of every lever of power to the point there was no agency or state organ that had the desire, let alone the ability, to do anything about it.

These days the tools are different, but the results the same. The once cynical media that would occasionally try to strike a blow against the status quo is these days fully co-opted to the cause, while ward healers drumming up votes in bars and grave yards no longer have to transport drunks from ward to ward to vote a numerous times under dozens of names, many of which were no longer in use by the decedents save for on their tombstones. Swiping a postal flat full of mail in votes is instead the preferred method these days, as this piece points out:

Two Weeks to Flatten Became Eight Months to Change the Election

BY Brownstone InstituteBROWNSTONE INSTITUTE   APRIL 1, 2024   GOVERNMENT, HISTORY   15 MINUTE READ

In 1845, Congress established Election Day as the Tuesday after the first Monday of November. The Act sought “to establish a uniform time” for Americans to cast their ballots for president. Historically, voters needed to provide a valid reason – such as illness or military service – to qualify for absentee ballots.

But Covid served as a pretext to overturn that tradition. Just 25% of votes in 2020 occurred at the polls on Election Day. Mail-in voting more than doubled. Key swing states eliminated the need to provide a valid reason to cast absentee ballots. The virus and racial justice became justifications to disregard verification methods like signature requirements.

Rejection rates for absentee ballots plummeted by more than 80% in some states as the Covid regime welcomed an unprecedented increase in mail-in voting. Politicians and media outlets ignored rampant voter fraud in the months leading up to the election. They treated concerns surrounding absentee voting as obscure conspiracy theories despite a bipartisan commission describing it as “the largest source of potential voter fraud” just a decade earlier.

It is now clear that the overhaul of our election system was a deliberate initiative from the outset of the pandemic response. In March 2020, when the Government’s official policy was still “two weeks to flatten the curve,” the administrative state began instituting the infrastructure to hijack the November presidential election, more than 30 weeks beyond when the Covid response was supposed to end.

March 2020: The CDC and the CARES Act Meddle in the Election

On March 12, 2020, the CDC issued a recommendation for states and localities to “encourage voters to use voting methods that minimize direct contact with other people,” including “mail-in methods of voting.”

Two weeks later, President Trump signed the $2 trillion CARES Act, which offered states $400 million to re-engineer their election processes for that November.

At the time, proponents of the CARES Act argued it was necessary to reopen the country. For example, the New York Times argued it was “critical to fund and implement the safety measures necessary to let Americans get back to work, school and play without a recurrence of the virus.”

But political actors immediately plotted ways to use the funds to entrench their power long past the proposed two-week lockdowns. Nearly every swing state announced plans to promote mail-in voting and reduce electoral safeguards in a Congressional report.

“Michigan will use the funds to bolster vote by mail,” the report announced. Governor Gretchen Whitmer received $11.3 million from the CARES Act to change election procedures in her state. In November, 57% of Michigan voters (over 3 million people) cast their ballot by mail. For the first time, the state did not require a reason for absentee voting, and mail-in ballots more than doubled. President Trump would go on to lose Michigan by just 150,000 votes.

When Trump signed the CARES Act, just 0.05% of Michigan residents had tested positive for Covid. The state’s political leaders later boasted that their agenda had not been focused on public health. “Even when there’s not a pandemic, once people begin using the absentee ballot process, they’re much more likely to continue to do so in the future,” said Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson after Election Day.

Pennsylvania received $14.2 million from the CARES Act to address its election process. At the time, the infection rate in the Keystone State was 1 in 6,000 (0.017%). Democratic Governor Tom Wolf’s administration told the federal government it would use its plans to increase absentee voting. In November, 2.5 million Pennsylvanians voted by mail. President Biden won 75% of those votes – a difference of 1.4 million. President Trump lost the state by under 100,000 votes.

The CARES Act provided Wisconsin with over $7 million for election matters. Democratic Governor Tom Evers said the state would use funds to provide “absentee ballot envelopes,” to develop “the statewide voter registration system and online absentee ballot request portal,” and “to account for additional costs” related to mail-in voting.

Governor Evers explained, “Having as many absentee ballots as possible is absolutely a top priority [and] always has been given the emergency we’re in.” Eight months later, 1.9 million of the state’s 3.3 million voters cast their ballot by mail. The rejection rate for absentee ballots plummeted from 1.4% in 2016 to 0.2%. President Biden won Wisconsin by just 20,000 votes.

Democratic activists were unsatisfied with the $400 million added to the national debt to reshape the elections. Mark Zuckerberg’s foundation offered an additional $300 million. In Time, Molly Ball celebrated the “shadow campaign that saved the 2020 election.” She quoted Amber McReynolds, the president of “nonpartisan National Vote at Home Institute,” who called the government’s reluctance to provide additional funding “a failure at the federal level.” Despite her professed “non-partisanship,” President Biden rewarded her service by appointing her to the Board of the US Postal Service.

In Time, Ball hailed the mail-in activists’ efforts, which included targeting “Black voters” who may have otherwise “preferred to exercise their franchise in person.” They focused on social media outreach to try to convince people that a “prolonged [vote] count wasn’t a sign of problems.” Their informational warfare may have changed Americans’ perception on mail-in voting, but it could not eradicate the predictable controversies that it created.

April and May 2020: Voter Fraud Skyrockets

In May 2020, New Jersey held municipal elections and required all voting take place via mail. The State’s third largest city, Paterson, held its election for city council. The results should have been a national scandal that ended the push for mail-in voting.

Shortly after the election, the Postal Service discovered “hundreds of mail-in ballots” in one town mailbox. A Snapchat video showed a man named Abu Razyen illegally handling a stack of ballots he said was for candidate Shanin Khalique. Khalique initially defeated his opponent by just eight votes. A recount found their vote was tied.

Paterson resident Ramona Javier never received her mail-in ballot for the election. Neither did eight of her family members and neighbors, yet they were all listed as having voted. “We did not receive vote-by-mail ballots and thus we did not vote,” she told the press. “This is corruption. This is fraud.”

Election officials rejected 19% of the ballots from Paterson, a city with over 150,000 residents. While Paterson’s election was particularly troublesome, mail-in ballots were problematic across the state. Thirty other New Jersey municipalities held vote-by-mail elections that day, and the average disqualification rate was 9.6%.

New Jersey brought voting fraud charges against City Councilman Michael Jackson, Councilman-Elect Alex Mendez, and two other men for their “criminal conduct involving mail-in ballots during the election.” All four were charged with illegally collecting, procuring, and submitting mail-in ballots.

A state judge later ordered a new vote, finding that the May election “was not the fair, free and full expression of the intent of the voters. It was rife with mail in vote procedural violations constituting nonfeasance and malfeasance.”

Politicians refused to concede that the incident revealed the vulnerability of absentee balloting. Instead, Governor Phil Murphy told the press that the scandal was a good sign. “I view that as a positive data point,” he argued. “Some guys tried to screw around with the system. They got caught by law enforcement. They’ve been indicted. They’ll pay a price.”

Murphy and other allies of Joe Biden ignored the threat, presuming the forces would not hurt their hopes that November.

In Wisconsin, the April 2020 primary election offered further evidence of the challenges and corruption surrounding mail-in voting. Following the primary, a postal center outside Milwaukee discovered three tubs of absentee ballots that never reached their intended recipients. Fox Point, a village outside Milwaukee, has a population of under 7,000 people.

Beginning in March, Fox Point received between 20 and 50 undelivered absentee ballots per day. In the weeks leading up to the election, the village manager said that increased to between 100 and 150 ballots per day. On election day, the town received a plastic mail bin with 175 unmailed ballots. “We’re not sure why this happened,” said the village manager. “Nobody seems to be able to tell me why.”

Democrats admitted the system threatened election integrity. “This has all the makings of a Florida 2000 if we have a close race,” said Gordon Hintz, the Democratic minority leader in the Wisconsin State Assembly. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo went further. “It’s a harder system to administer, and obviously it’s a harder system to police writ large,” he said. Cuomo continued, “People showing up, people actually showing ID, is still the easiest system to assure total integrity.”

The Wisconsin primary also featured special elections for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. A liberal judge upset the incumbent conservative justice, and partisans embraced their overhaul of the electoral system. The New York Times reported: “Wisconsin Democrats are working to export their template for success – intense digital outreach and a well-coordinated vote-by-mail operation – to other states in the hope that it will improve the party’s chances in local and statewide elections and in the quest to unseat President Trump in November.”

Despite the corruption, the lost ballots, and the admissions of threats to electoral integrity, the process had been a success in political terms; their candidate had won. The ends had justified the means. Citizens lost faith in their election process, and political leaders readily admitted that their concerns were justified; but the professional politicos and their mouthpiece, the New York Times, characterized the disaster as a “template for success.”

Controversies continued to emerge surrounding mail-in ballots.

In September 2020, a government contractor threw Trump mail-in ballots in the trash in Pennsylvania. ABC News reported that “ballots had been found in a dumpster next to the elections building.” A week later, three trays of mail with absentee ballots were found in a ditch in Wisconsin.

In Nevada, the Reno-Sparks Indian Colony offered gifts, including gift cards, jewelry, and clothing to Native Americans who showed up to vote. Activist Bethany Sam organized the event, where she donned a Biden-Harris mask and stood in front of the Biden-Harris campaign bus.

Voters in California received ballots with no place to vote for president, over 20% of ballots mailed to voters in Teaneck, New Jersey, had the wrong Congressional districts listed, and Franklin County, Ohio reported sending over 100,000 absentee ballots to the wrong address due to an “envelope stuffing error.”

In October, Texas police arrested Carrollton Mayoral Candidate Zul Mirza Mohamed on 109 counts of fraud for forging mail-in ballots. Authorities discovered fraudulent ballots at Mohamed’s residence with fictitious licenses. That same month, a Pennsylvania district attorney charged Lehigh County Elections Judge Everett “Erika” Bickford with “prying into ballots” and altering the entries from a local election that June. That election was decided by just 55 votes.

Reports continued to emerge after the election. The New York Post uncovered election records that showed dead people had cast absentee ballots that November.

California law enforcement arrested two men with a 41-count criminal complaint for allegedly submitting over 8,000 fraudulent voter registration applications on behalf of homeless people. Their goal was to get Carlos Montenegro, one of the defendants, elected Mayor of Hawthorne, a city in Los Angeles County. The state also alleged that Montenegro committed perjury by falsifying names and signatures in his paperwork for his mayoral campaign.

In 2022, a Georgia investigation found more than 1,000 absentee ballots that never left the Cobb County government facility. Two months earlier, mail-in ballots from the 2020 election were discovered in a Baltimore USPS facility. In 2023, Michigan police found hundreds of mail-in ballots from the 2020 election in a township clerk’s storage unit.

All of this was entirely predictable, but perhaps that was the point. From the outset, the Covid regime sought to abolish the safeguards of our election system despite well-known concerns regarding election integrity.

The United States of Amnesia: Voter Fraud Was Nothing New

Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.

The Covid regime’s messaging was clear: only conspiratorial lunatics would question the integrity of an election system that more than doubles its mail-in voting. FBI Director Christopher Wray testified, “We have not seen, historically, any kind of coordinated national voter fraud effort in a major election, whether it’s by mail or otherwise.”

But this wasn’t true. It contradicted long-standing conclusions regarding electoral integrity. Just as the public health apparatus abandoned thousands of years of epidemiological practice to implement lockdowns, the media and elected officials abandoned principles that until that moment had been common sense.

Following the controversy of the 2000 Presidential election, the United States formed a bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform. President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and former Secretary of State James Baker, a Republican, chaired the group.

After five years of research, the group published its final report – “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections.” It offered a series of recommendations to reduce voter fraud, including enacting voter-ID laws and limiting absentee voting. The commission was unequivocal: “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.”

The report continued: “Citizens who vote at home, at nursing homes, at the workplace, or in church are more susceptible to pressure, overt and subtle, or to intimidation. Vote buying schemes are far more difficult to detect when citizens vote by mail.”

The findings were reinforced by subsequent election scandals.

A 2012 New York Times headline read: “Error and Fraud at Issue as Absentee Voting Rises.” The article made the front page of the paper and echoed the concerns of the Carter-Baker Commission. “Fraud Easier via Mail,” the paper explained.

“You could steal some absentee ballots or stuff a ballot box or bribe an election administrator or fiddle with an electronic voting machine,” said Yale Law professor Heather Gerken. That explains, she said, “why all the evidence of stolen elections involves absentee ballots and the like.”

The Times continued the potential corruption of mail-in ballots. “On the most basic level, absentee voting replaces the oversight that exists at polling places with something akin to an honor system,” the author wrote. The Times then cited US Circuit Court Judge Richard A. Posner: “Absentee voting is to voting in person as a take-home exam is to a proctored one.”

The report went on: “Voters in nursing homes can be subjected to subtle pressure, outright intimidation or fraud. The secrecy of their voting is easily compromised. And their ballots can be intercepted both coming and going.”

Historic controversies supported this consensus. The 1997 Miami mayoral election resulted in 36 arrests for absentee-ballot fraud. A judge voided the results and ordered the city to hold a new election due to “a pattern of fraudulent, intentional, and criminal conduct.” The results were reversed in the subsequent election.

Following Dallas’s 2017 City Council race, authorities sequestered 700 mail-in ballots signed “Jose Rodriguez.” Elderly voters alleged that party activists had forged their signatures on their mail-in ballots. Miguel Hernandez later pled guilty to the crime of forging their signatures after collecting unfilled ballots, and using them to support his candidate of choice.

The following year, it appeared that Republic Mark Harris defeated Democrat Dan McCready in a North Carolina congressional race. Election officials noticed irregularities in the mail-in votes and refused to certify the election, citing evidence and “claims of…concerted fraudulent activities.” The state ordered a special election the following year.

In 2018, the Democratic National Commission challenged an Arizona law that set safeguards around absentee voting, including limiting who could handle mail-in ballots. US District Judge Douglas L. Rayes, an Obama appointee, upheld the law. “Indeed, mail-in ballots by their very nature are less secure than ballots cast in person at polling locations,” he wrote. He found that “the prevention of voter fraud and preservation of public confidence in election integrity” were important state interests and cited the Carter-Baker Commission’s finding that “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.”

The rest of the world recognized the obvious threat that mail-in voting poses to election integrity. In 1975, France banned postal ballots after rampant voter fraud. Ballots were cast with the names of dead Frenchmen, and political activists in Corsica stole ballots and bribed voters.

In 1991, Mexico mandated voter photo IDs and banned absentee ballots after the Institutional Revolutionary Party repeatedly committed fraud to maintain power. In Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, and the United Kingdom, photo ID is required to get an absentee ballot.

In August 2020, economist John Lott analyzed how Covid was being used as a pretext to overhaul electoral standards in the United States. He wrote:

Thirty-seven states have so far changed their mail-in voting procedures this year in response to the Coronavirus. Despite frequent claims that President Trump’s warning about vote fraud/voting buying with mail-in ballots is “baselessly” or “without evidence” about mail-in vote fraud, there are numerous examples of vote fraud and vote buying with mail-in ballots in the United States and across the world. Indeed, concerns over vote fraud and vote buying with mail-in ballots causes the vast majority of countries to ban mail-in voting unless the citizen is living abroad.

There are fraud problems with mail-in absentee ballots but the problems with universal mail-in ballots are much more significant. Still most countries ban even absentee ballots for people living in their countries.

Most developed countries ban absentee ballots unless the citizen is living abroad or require Photo-IDs to obtain those ballots. Even higher percentages of European Union or other European countries ban absentee for in country voters.

Political actors treated opposition to absentee balloting with scorn while ignoring its history of corruption. Mail-in voting may have been the decisive factor in the 2020 election, but Trump and his allies searched for other explanations to avoid his complicity in signing the CARES Act.

The Trump campaign promised to produce “irrefutable” evidence that proved Trump won the election “in a landslide.” “I’m going to release the Kraken,” one Trump election lawyer told Lou Dobbs in November 2020. President Trump and Rudy Giuliani tweeted blame at Dominion voting machines. Sean Hannity said privately that Giuliani was “acting like an insane person.”

Two days later, he told viewers about a “software error” from Dominion that “wrongfully awarded Joe Biden thousands of ballots that were cast for President Trump, until the problem was amazingly fixed.” In August 2023, Trump announced that he would release an “irrefutable report” demonstrating voter fraud in Georgia. He canceled the announcement two days later.

In the process, they ignored a far more obvious explanation.

Presidential elections in the 21st century have been decided by an average of 44 electoral votes. Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin offer a combined 62 votes in the Electoral College.

Under the pretext of Covid, states abolished their electoral safeguards. They turned Election Day into a month of voting. After prominent Democrats refused to certify the 2000, 2004, and 2016 elections, the victors chastised any concerns for electoral integrity as attacks on democracy.

This is all theater. From the outset of the pandemic response, the liberalization of voting rules was integral, all justified based on nonscientific grounds while invoking the cover of science. It wasn’t stopping disease spread that drove the dramatic upheaval in the American system of voting that has caused such widespread distrust. It was the drive for a result different from one that swept the country four years earlier.

https://brownstone.org/articles/two-weeks-to-flatten-became-eight-months-to-change-the-election/?fbclid=IwAR2Ekgy90PGBl9IMRNfO7AHfDj-ZZc973VAip2VOP-KvgkaJY0_RDonwzT8

Title: This is what is infuriating
Post by: ccp on April 02, 2024, 06:18:27 AM

From BBG's previous post:

Thirty-seven states have so far changed their mail-in voting procedures this year in response to the Coronavirus. Despite frequent claims that President Trump’s warning about vote fraud/voting buying with mail-in ballots is “baselessly” or “without evidence” about mail-in vote fraud, there are numerous examples of vote fraud and vote buying with mail-in ballots in the United States and across the world. Indeed, concerns over vote fraud and vote buying with mail-in ballots causes the vast majority of countries to ban mail-in voting unless the citizen is living abroad.

There are fraud problems with mail-in absentee ballots but the problems with universal mail-in ballots are much more significant. Still most countries ban even absentee ballots for people living in their countries.

OF COURSE WE WERE ALL SUSPICIOUS FOR ELECTION FRAUD WHEN  THIS TOOK PLACE and changes were always in the advantage going to Democrats

But the LEFT yells screams out anyone who says this as an election denier - with the implication they are Nazi threats to Democracy

so infuriating!

Title: If you don't recognize what happened in 2020
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 02, 2024, 07:33:29 AM

https://thefederalist.com/2024/03/28/the-rnc-is-right-anyone-who-cant-recognize-flaws-in-2020-is-unfit-to-help-republicans-win/

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on April 02, 2024, 08:17:47 AM

paywalled.

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 02, 2024, 11:12:32 AM

Here ya go:

The RNC Is Right: Anyone Who Can’t Recognize Flaws In 2020 Is Unfit To Help Republicans Win
BY: BRIANNA LYMAN
MARCH 28, 2024

Winning requires first acknowledging past and existing problems.


The Republican National Committee (RNC) is reportedly asking prospective employees what they think about the 2020 election — as they should.

Citing unnamed sources, The Washington Post reported that job applicants at the RNC have been asked about whether they believe the 2020 election was “stolen,” although the Post acknowledged the questions were “open-ended.”

The Post tried to spin the story as the RNC “demanding fealty” to former President Donald Trump, using the words of President Joe Biden’s rapid response director. But beating Democrats — who showed in 2020 that they are willing to ignore the rule of law in order to change how elections are fundamentally run, to their advantage — starts by acknowledging what happened in 2020.

“Potential staffers who worked on the front line in battleground states or are currently in states where fraud allegations have been prevalent were asked about their work experience,” RNC and Trump spokeswoman Danielle Alvarez said in a statement to The Federalist. “We want experienced staff with meaningful views on how elections are won and lost and real experience-based opinions about what happens in the trenches.”

[READ NEXT: Leftists Bragged About ‘Fortifying’ The 2020 Election. Now They’re Flaunting Plans To Do It Again In 2024]

So what did happen in the “trenches”?

For one, unelected officials usurped the authority of the legislature to unilaterally change election laws and fundamentally alter the electoral process.

Then-Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth Kathy Boockvar serves as a prime example, having bucked not only the legislature but guidance from the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court declined to expedite Pennsylvania Republicans’ challenge to a state supreme court order that permitted ballots that were postmarked by Election Day but received during the three days following Election Day — and also ballots lacking a postmark but received during the same period — to be counted, based on the understanding that Boockvar would segregate ballots received during the three day extension.

Republicans argued the state supreme court’s decision violated state law that stipulates ballots must arrive by Election Day. Any move to extend the deadline for accepting ballots, they contended, should belong to lawmakers.

Boockvar initially issued guidance on Oct. 28 ordering all ballots received after Election Day be kept separate in the event the high court ruled the ballot extension unconstitutional. Justice Samuel Alito noted that guidance the same day, in a statement on the court’s decision not to take the case. But just days before the election, Boockvar issued updated guidance ordering the segregated late ballots be counted “as soon as possible upon receipt of the ballots.”

Boockvar was later rebuked by a state court for additional guidance she put out that allowed voters missing proof of identification to “cure” their mail-in ballots until Nov. 12, nine days after the election. Trump’s campaign and the RNC argued Boockvar lacked the authority to change the law and only the legislature had power to legislate election changes.

“[T]he Court concludes that Respondent Kathy Boockvar, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth, lacked statutory authority to issue the November 1, 2020, guidance to Respondents County Boards of Elections insofar as that guidance purported to change the deadline … for certain electors to verify proof of identification,” Judge Mary Hannah Leavitt wrote.

[READ NEXT: 3 Fishy Things In Pennsylvania Voter Data The State Has Yet To Explain]

Other battleground states had issues that undoubtedly affected the election, such as Georgia, which saw Democrats sneak in a major change to mail-in voting months before Election Day. As part of an agreement with the Georgia Democratic Party, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, state election officials agreed to permit “ballot curing.”

Ballot curing allows voters whose ballots were rejected a chance to “cure” or correct the issue on their absentee ballot so that it can be counted. But as The Federalist’s John Davidson pointed out, there was a less-publicized provision of the agreement that had consequences for the election. Prior to the agreement, the signature on an absentee ballot had to match the signature in Georgia’s voter registration database. Ballots were rejected if the signatures did not match.

But the new agreement made sure that an absentee ballot signature simply had to match the signature on the absentee ballot application. This means if someone filled out an application fraudulently, that same person could then sign the ballot itself and both signatures would match.

Or take a state like Wisconsin, where two years after Trump lost by roughly 20,000 votes, the state Supreme Court ruled unelected officials did not have authority to usurp the legislature the way it did when it issued guidance permitting the use of ballot drop boxes in direct contradiction of state law. Milwaukee, like other left-leaning cities in the state, had more than a dozen of these illegal drop boxes. President Joe Biden beat Trump by more than 100,000 votes in the city.

Unlawful changes to election laws were only one of the ways the 2020 election was rigged — or “fortified,” as leftists would say. From Big Tech censorship of conservative speech and bombshell news (like the Hunter Biden laptop story), to media interference, to the infiltration of election offices by private donors via “Zuckbucks,” the 2020 election was rife with alarming issues that Republicans would be foolish not to learn from.

“Allowing just one of these attacks to infect our electoral system would be a crisis,” Federalist Editor-in-Chief Mollie Hemingway told the House Administration Committee last month. “Allowing all of them at the same time is an existential threat to our system of self-government.”

Title: It’s a Coincidence, Honest
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on April 02, 2024, 05:12:22 PM

Someone I follow posted this link showing voter registrations by week as collected by the Social Security Administration. Check out the spiking registrations in states likely to be battlegrounds this fall. Why do you suppose this is?

https://www.ssa.gov/open/havv/havv-weekly-2024-01-13.html?fbclid=IwAR1gLQa9hS8xeksFiHU9vI06xK6ESq8K4mi6x3kMD4piaSi-8SRD34HEJ0k

One would think someone interested in committing an act of serious journalism might follow this trail of bolder sized breadcrumbs, though of course they’d be at risk of discovering malfeasance we are assured does not exist.

Sweet bleeding Jesus, I wish the Republicans had a legal ground game half the size of what the Dems regularly field as this data suggests something very fishy is afoot on a very large scale.

Title: 2020 Georgia
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2024, 03:23:58 PM

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2024/04/02/frankly-floored-me-bombshell-testimony-in-trump-related-rico-hearing-reignites-2020-election-concerns-1449549/?utm_campaign=bizpac&utm_content=Newsletter&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_source=Get%20Response&utm_term=EMAIL

Title: WI ballot measure to clean up Nov. elections
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 03, 2024, 03:59:55 PM

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2024/04/02/wisconsin-voters-approve-gop-led-election-integrity-ballot-measures-ahead-of-november-1449692/?utm_campaign=bizpac&utm_content=Newsletter&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_source=Get%20Response&utm_term=EMAIL

Title: WI: No Zuckbucks here
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 04, 2024, 08:10:13 AM

Wisconsin Bans Zuckerbucks
More voters reject the use of private funds to administer elections.
By
The Editorial Board
Follow
April 3, 2024 5:45 pm ET

Restoring trust in elections should be a bipartisan cause, and Wisconsin voters taught the professionals a lesson on Tuesday by approving two state constitutional amendments that increase safeguards for election integrity.

More than 54% approved a referendum banning the use of private grants in election administration. And more than 58% backed a second measure requiring that only public officials “designated by law” can handle election administration.

This is a welcome response to the infusion of so-called Zuckerbucks in the 2020 election. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan handed out cash grants through the nonprofit Center for Tech and Civic Life to state and local officials who run elections and count ballots.

A 2021 report by the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty (WILL) found that more than 86% of the $10 million from the Center for Tech and Civic Life went to the cities of Madison, Milwaukee, Racine, Kenosha and Green Bay. “The private money served to increase voter turnout for Joe Biden, but not Donald Trump,” WILL found.

Green Bay received more than $1.2 million and had access to consultants from outside groups. Republicans objected in particular to a consultant from the National Vote at Home Institute who they said was given access to areas containing ballots, a privilege that should have been reserved for government workers.

Green Bay city attorney Vanessa Chavez said the allegations of meddling were “unfounded,” but the mess became fodder for Donald Trump supporters who claimed it was part of a conspiracy to rig the election. That was overblown: Mr. Trump lost Wisconsin by more than 20,000 votes mainly because he received 63,000 fewer votes than Republicans running for Congress. But the appearance of outside meddling was damaging enough to persuade Wisconsin voters to endorse the ban.

Twenty-seven other states have restricted private funding, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Tuesday’s amendments are useful correctives, and they’ll remove one argument from those who want to cast doubt on election results.

Title: Colleges Share FERPA Protected Student Data w/ Dem Funded Voter Org
Post by: Body-by-Guinness on April 04, 2024, 12:13:13 PM

At my institution it's difficult to look up student email addresses and phone numbers as they are FERPA protected, yet colleges share this info with a voter org funded by Democrats with nary an issue? I'm sure the MSM will get on this unfair and illegal relationship any day now. Yep ... any ... day:

https://verityvote.us/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/national-student-data-sharing_VerityVote.pdf

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: ccp on April 04, 2024, 12:32:45 PM

"University officials may have been duped into
authorizing disclosure of highly sensitive private student data to a partisan private
corporation that works exclusively with Democrats and progressives under the guise of a
dubious “study exception” to FERPA’s prohibitions against sharing of the data. "

I highly doubt they were "duped":

"Politically active non-profits funded by Democrat donors have been encouraging
university officials to sign an agreement allowing National Student Clearinghouse to
circumvent the FERPA protections and share students’ private data with IDHE and an
unnamed “third party vendor” in order to increase registration and election turnout of
students. "

what else does increase registration and election turnout mean other then Dem Party ballot harvesting?

Title: Electoral College
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 13, 2024, 05:47:01 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EJwpGXDj1Q

Title: Re: The electoral process, vote fraud, SEIU/ACORN et al, etc.
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 17, 2024, 08:22:51 AM

https://committeetounleashprosperity.com/hotlines/even-liberals-admit-big-problems-with-mail-in-voting/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR2sk99mxwxCN4txi_eoXggcOnTcTCf6PE58MF9osIM8g0AjzSNSgFfHdJs_aem_Acg31WDRWrFqqnjTw1weX1j8s9FQ8fY8sGVzrWekH3MtT-Lcegmr-iyXBBN3TBydfnP7QUoFS8_BAR_4BZym9K8y

Title: Citizens only bill
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 18, 2024, 01:18:34 PM

https://washingtonstand.com/news/election-integrity-trump-mike-johnson-back-bill-assuring-only-us-citizens-vote-in-elections

Title: Chinese Penetration of American electoral databases
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 18, 2024, 04:20:31 PM

Hat tip BBG



This could go a number of places, but given that the FBI is threatening the people revealing this apparent Chinese penetration into electoral databases and research center I'm dropping it in. Could this, perchance, reflect a quid for Biden's numerous Chinese pro quos?

Note: these X posts are graphics heavy and hence this piece should be viewed in the oringal, which starts here:

https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1666490357469822976

KanekoaTheGreat

@KanekoaTheGreat

KONNECH #1🚨: Evidence shockingly suggests that the FBI is shielding two firms closely tied to the Chinese government, which have financed and developed an American election software company for the past 15 years, all while transferring confidential election data back to China.

2) Konnech has provided election administration and logistics software to many prominent cities and counties in the United States, including:

•Alameda County, California
•Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
•Contra Costa County, California
•Denver, Colorado
•Detroit, Michigan
•Fairfax County, Virginia
•Hillsborough County, Florida
•Maron County, Indiana
•Los Angeles, California
•San Francisco, California
•Santa Clara County, California
•St. Louis County, Missouri
•Travis County, Texas
•Washington, D.C.

3) On August 13, 2022, Catherine Engelbrecht (
@truethevote
) and Gregg Phillips (
@onwardsocial
) convened a group of researchers to discuss how the FBI's headquarters had betrayed them following a 15-month investigation into Konnech's storage of American election data on Chinese servers. The data involved various sensitive information, including:

•Name, DOB, SSN, Address
•Phone, Email, Bank Account
•Voting Machine Passwords
•Thumb Drive Passwords
•Voter Registration Rolls
•Provisional Ballot Serial Numbers
•RFID Tags On Voting Equipment
•Election Building Schematics
•And More...

"You'd be startled to know that this server lives on the main Unicom backbone in China. And it's in a Chinese University in Wuhan, China. I'm not talking about this just being a storage place for data process here.

The app server for this particular application was in China... We're confronted with the fact that everything there was to know about elections in America, and in key counties in key cities, was in this server in Wuhan, China... So what do you do with this information?

Well, we went to the FBI because this was a matter of national security. And, they agreed. So, we started working with the local FBI community. From January of 2021 until April of 2022, the FBI opened up a significant counterintelligence operation on this.

The problem with it was that it wasn't just American information. It was Australian information. It was Canadian information, it was Mexican information. And we ultimately found out that the CCPs own elections are on this same server set in that university...

Everyone involved on the counter intelligence teams at the Bureau agreed on one thing, this software, this penetration, and this opening was a significant national security threat...

So two weeks before the 2000 Mules movie came out, I get a call from an agent and he says this has risen now to the level of a national security threat and headquarters has gotten involved. I don't know who he was referring to, but he said two women saw the case differently, and felt as though we were the criminals.

They had instructed the Detroit FBI office to notify Konnech that we had breached their firewalls, none of which is true... We later found out they were accusing me of stealing three servers from the Chinese Unicom backbone and having illegal possession of American private information.

And they were shopping that around to the other agencies that would be involved NSA, CIA and others. Trying to get somebody to pick up on this so that they could come Roger Stone me...

But the challenge we all have is this software is still in place... When you dig into Konnech's CEO Eugene Yu, in particular the other URLs that he owns, it will take you to the underlying URL that runs the Chinese Communist Party's elections.

It lives on that server, on that same URL address and that URL is owned by Eugene Yu."

https://open.ink/konnech

4) In 2002, Konnech CEO Eugene Yu was an "officer" on the "finance committee" of a Chinese foundation that flew Professor Charles Lieber, the head of Harvard’s Chemistry Department, to Zhejiang University to give a speech on “Nanotech in Today’s World.”

This discovery was made in a Chinese magazine entitled "Overseas Scholars," written by the China Association for Science and Technology in the United States (CAST-USA) and the American Zhu Kezhen Education Foundation (AZKEF).

CAST is a transnational organization and constituent member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), whose stated mission is to “maintain close ties with millions of Chinese scientists, engineers and other people working in the fields of science and technology” and to operate as “the bridge linking Chinese science and technology community with the Communist Party of China and the Chinese government,” according to organization’s archived “About Us” webpage.

In 2003, CAST established the Help Our Motherland through Elite Intellectual Resources from Overseas Program (HOME) in concert with the Organization Department of the Chinese Communist Party to recruit overseas science and technology talent to transfer technology and intellectual property back to China.

The CPPCC’s role in channeling overseas science and technology knowledge toward China’s development has grown since a 2013 directive from General Secretary Xi Jinping to focus on incentivizing overseas Chinese to contribute their technical skills and expertise to China’s national rejuvenation.

By 2020, a United States congressional body warned that the Chinese government has built a “sprawling ecosystem of structures, programs, and incentives to coopt and exploit overseas experts for the science and technology they acquire abroad.”

“Chinese leaders have long viewed advanced science and technology (S&T) as key to China’s comprehensive national power and sought to acquire it through licit and illicit means from developed countries like the United States,” the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) said in the report.

“This ecosystem sponsors promising Chinese students and scholars at the U.S. and other foreign universities, incentivizes their return to China for the long term, and employs transnational organizations to channel S&T know-how from those remaining abroad back to mainland China.”

The U.S. Senate report continues:

“Many programs associated with Beijing’s S&T transfer ecosystem—including scholarships to study abroad, talent recruitment plans, and entrepreneurship parks—contribute to China’s military-civil fusion strategy by collecting specific technologies and know-how that improve the capabilities of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and advance the goals” of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).”

“This ecosystem sponsors promising Chinese students and scholars to study at foreign universities, incentivizes or requires their return to China in exchange for this support, and recruits researchers via hundreds of talent programs. Moreover, it integrates Chinese students and scholars remaining abroad with organizations that facilitate the transfer of S&T back to the Mainland, where it can be exploited by the PLA, government ministries, state-owned enterprises (SOEs), state-run laboratories, and startups.”

“Even when overseas Chinese students and scholars do stay in the United States after graduation, China’s transnational technology transfer organizations and talent recruitment plans provide a means to contribute to China’s national rejuvenation by transferring technology and know-how without requiring physical return.”

In the magazine, CAST-USA refers to Eugene Yu by his Chinese name YU Jianwei (于建伟), and says that he is an “officer” on the “finance committee” of the American Zhu Kezhen Education Foundation. The foundation’s mission is “to promote exchange and cooperation between Zhejiang University and universities in the United States” and “invite United States professors or scientists to Zhejiang University.”

In 2020, Prof. Charles Lieber was arrested for concealing his funding from the Wuhan University of Technology and participating in China’s Thousand Talents Program.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Bill Priestap, the former Assistant Director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division, stated that China’s talent recruitment plans are effective “brain gain programs” that “encourage theft of intellectual property from U.S. institutions.”

Priestap continued, “For example, China’s talent recruitment plans, such as the Thousand Talents Program, offer competitive salaries, state-of-the-art research facilities, and honorific titles, luring both Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts alike to bring their knowledge and experience to China, even if that means stealing proprietary information or violating export controls to do so.”

Eugene Yu was an “officer” on the “finance committee” of a Chinese foundation in the United States tasked with flying professors like Charles Lieber to China. This discovery was made in a China Association for Science and Technology in the United States magazine entitled “Overseas Scholars.”

Similarly to how the U.S. congressional report described CAST’s overseas science and technology acquisition efforts, AZKEF keeps a list of talented overseas Chinese students, offers incentives for prominent scientists to fly to China, and focuses on bridging Zhejiang University with universities in the United States.

https://archive.ph/OFVCf

https://web.archive.org/web/20011119103624/http://www.azkef.org/

https://web.archive.org/web/20031220030107/http://azkef.org:80/programs.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20030402092120/http://azkef.org:80/lecture2002.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20140206035502/http://english.cast.org.cn/n1181872/n1257426/47099.html
https://uscc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-10/Overseas_Chinese_Students_and_Scholars_in_Chinas_Drive_for_Innovation.pdf

5) On November 29, 2005, Eugene Yu, also known as YU Jianwei (于建伟), established a shadow subsidiary named Jinhua Yulian Network Technology Co., Ltd. (金华宇联网络科技有限公司) in Jinhua City, Zhejiang Province, China, two years after founding Konnech in the United States.

6) On January 25, 2006, Jinhua Yulian Network was accepted into the Entrepreneurship Service Center at the Chinese Academy of Sciences Jinhua Science and Technology Park.

The Chinese government has funded and overseen the development of Konnech's American election software ever since.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090413172501/http://www.jhcy.cn/yqqy.asp?page=3

7) On February 25, 2006, Eugene Yu registered the website domain "http://yu-lian.cn" for Jinhua Yulian Network with the email address eyu@konnech.com.

https://archive.is/YaRv1#

8) On http://yu-lian.cn, Eugene Yu wrote in Chinese that he provides election software "with Chinese characteristics" to various levels of the Chinese government, including the National People’s Congress and the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.

https://web.archive.org/web/20131207150515/http://yu-lian.cn/Services.html

9) On http://yu-lian.cn, Eugene Yu praised "Comrade Jiang Zemin" and emphasized Konnech's philosophy of prioritizing "political tasks first, and economic benefits second."

He highlighted his success stories of "Election Management, Detroit" and "US Overseas Voters."

The entire website was written in Chinese.

https://web.archive.org/web/20131207151051/http://yu-lian.cn/Case.html

10) In December 2006, Konnech announced on Facebook that they had partnered with Michigan State University and the Confucius Institute to build, http://ChineseBrief.com, an "interactive communication platform and Chinese language learning tool."

https://web.archive.org/web/20120729201212/http://www.confucius.msu.edu/news.htm

11) On July 18, 2007, Eugene Yu posted an ad on the Chinese Academy of Sciences Jinhua Science and Technology Park's website, offering "5 million yuan" for developing "software packages" for Jinhua Yulian Network and http://konnech.com.

In 2007, 5 million yuan was worth around $700,000 and was the prize money offered by the Chinese government to members of the Thousand Talents Program and other elite overseas entrepreneurs.

https://web.archive.org/web/20131019061139/http://www.jhcy.cn/jsnt_detail.asp?id=16

12) The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) is a national think tank with extensive research facilities and over 50,000 researchers. CAS has been linked to Chinese military, nuclear, and cyber espionage programs.

The U.S. Department of Defense acknowledges the CAS as China's leading academic institution for comprehensive research and development.

CAS and its affiliated companies are involved in developing AI initiatives, hypersonic spaceplanes, robotic submarines, and missile technology for the Chinese military.

The Justice Department has indicted several individuals associated with CAS for their roles in transferring trade secrets and military technology from U.S. companies through Chinese overseas talent programs.

In October 2002, the Jinhua Science and Technology Park became the first collaboration between the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and a prefecture-level government.

The Chinese government has built more than 150 "Overseas Chinese scholar pioneering parks" in the hearts of 54 "National New and High Technology Development Zones."

These ultra-modern facilities were designed for returning specialists to "incubate" (find commercial or military applications for) technologies acquired overseas as part of China's strategy of "serving in place" that allows Chinese scholars to stay abroad while transferring foreign technology back home.

https://uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/Interos_Supply%20Chain%20Vulnerabilities%20from%20China%20in%20U.S.%20Federal%20ICT_final.pdf

https://media.defense.gov/2019/May/02/2002127082/-1/-1/1/2019_CHINA_MILITARY_POWER_REPORT.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20100628161736/http://www.jhkjy.ac.cn/about/index.asp

13) Jinhua Yulian Network's initial address was located at No. 988 Shuanglong South Street, Jinhua City, Zhejiang Province, China, which is situated 500 meters away from the Jinhua People's Government building (No. 801 Shuanglong South Street) and across the street from the Jinhua Science and Technology Bureau (No. 828 Shuanglong South Street).

14) The Jinhua Science and Technology Park (JHTP) offers Chinese government-funded support to domestic and overseas enterprises, including financial assistance, living facilities, server hosting, internet access, university partnerships, technology transfers, research assistance, and patent support.

In 1988, the State Council launched the Ministry of Science and Technology’s national Torch Program to speed up the nation’s “science and technological industrialization.”

In 2005, the Ministry of Science and Technology awarded JHTP the distinction of a national-level technology business incubator.

In 2006, JHTP was granted 3 million yuan by the Ministry of Science and Technology through China's national Torch Program to establish the Park's Internet Data Center, where Jinhua Yulian Network would develop, test, and maintain Konnech's American election software.

https://web.archive.org/web/20091017113128/http://www.jhcy.cn/yqgk_01.asp?flag=%B7%FE%CE%F1%B9%A6%C4%DC&lmbm=2405&lmmc=%B7%FE%CE%F1%B9%A6%C4%DC&url=yqgk_01.asp

https://web.archive.org/web/20090413171900/http://www.jhcy.cn/cxzt_01.asp

http://jhcy.cn/jhkjy/town_details/28.html

http://jhcy.cn/jhkjy/town_details/50.html

15) A 2008 Chinese document titled "International Elite Entrepreneurship Modern Service Outsourcing" reveals that Eugene Yu worked for the Chinese government as a Project Manager of the Guangzhou Economic and Technological Development Zone (GETDZ) from 1983 until 1985.

The document features 46 Chinese high-tech companies operating overseas and describes Konnech as an "Intelligent Web Communications" company with the mission of becoming "one of the top 50 e-commerce service providers for schools and government in the United States within 10 years.”

The document mentions Konnech's Chinese venture fund and describes the company's goal of developing advanced technology in cooperation with Zhejiang University:

“The company will enter a phase of rapid development after the implementation of the venture fund in Wuzhong.”

"In terms of specialized technology, we have been developing and hiring technical personnel with expertise in the field in a rapid manner by utilizing the role of corporate and university professors and graduate classes for project development, with the aim of receiving advanced applied technology."

"... it is an indisputable fact that many cutting-edge products come from American university campuses. We must take the corresponding path and cooperate with American universities and Zhejiang University and other domestic institutions to focus on the development of applied technologies and the application-oriented development of specialized technologies."

The document describes the problems facing the U.S. market, citing “expensive software programming fees and talent shortages” and reduced “funding for IT projects” before concluding, “In this environment, the role of our China branch is fully demonstrated.”

When Eugene Yu’s attorneys filed a motion to dismiss his criminal case in California, they included a section entitled FACTUAL BACKGROUND that says he “worked in various locations” after he graduated from Zhejiang University and before he was accepted into Wake Forest University.

However, it failed to mention his prior employment as a Project Manager in the Guangzhou Economic and Technological Development Zone, where he worked in the Industrial Project Negotiation Department and "completed the introduction of several major projects":

"Eugene Yu was born and raised in Jinhua City, Zhejiang Province, China. In 1974, as part of China’s cultural revolution, Mr. Yu was sent to a communal farm where he labored for four years in squalor conditions. In 1977, after Chairman Mao died, Mr. Yu scored high on a nationwide test, qualifying him for admission to study engineering at Zhejiang University.

After graduating from college, he was sent to work in various locations in China. Mr. Yu then met and married his wife Donna Wang. In 1986, Mr. Yu and Dr. Wang were accepted to graduate school programs at Wake Forest University, where Mr. Yu obtained his MBA degree."

Since the launch of the GETDZ in 1984, China has established 219 national-level Economic and Technological Development Zones (ETDZs), which helped launch China’s rise to a global economic superpower.

In order to promote science and technology-intensive industries, ETDZs offer financial incentives and preferential policies that target domestic and overseas enterprises focused on manufacturing, scientific, and technological industries.

Two decades later, Eugene Yu would return to China to launch his company Jinhua Yulian Network Technology Co., Ltd. (金华宇联网络科技有限公司) in the Jinhua Economic and Technological Development Zone (JETDZ).

https://max.book118.com/html/2012/0222/1126480.shtm

https://cbbc.org/sites/default/files/2021-01/China-Britain%20Business%20Council%20-%20In%20the%20Zone%20-%20A%20Comprehensive%20Guide%20to%20China%E2%80%99s%20Economic%20and%20Technological%20Development%20Zones%20-%20October%202020.pdf

https://documentcloud.org/documents/2317

16) On January 4, 2011, Lin Yu, a managing supervisor at Jinhua Yulian Network, established Jinhua Red Date Software Co., Ltd., also known as Jinhua Jujube Software Co., Ltd.

On January 16, 2011, Konnech registered the domain reddatesoft[.]com with the email eyu@konnech.com.

Jinhua Red Date Software and Jinhua Yulian Network shared the same address at No. 1583 Binhong Road, Jinhua City, Zhejiang Province.

Jinhua Yulian Network's website included "Jinhua Red Date Software Co., Ltd." and "reddatesoft[.]com" in its copyright statement.

Peter McCallister, the General Manager of Konnech Australia, later affirmed in an affidavit that Lin Yu is Eugene Yu's older brother and a Chinese national.

(Note: The modified domain URL "reddatesoft[.]com" is used because of safety concerns with the URL raised by Twitter.)

https://web.archive.org/web/20220822014930/https://www.11467.com/jinhua/co/273669.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20130718125224/http://yu-lian.cn/

17) On April 13, 2015, Lin Yu established Jinhua Hongzheng Technology Co., Ltd. (金华鸿正科技有限公司) in Jinhua, Zhejiang Province, China.

Lin Yu (Eugene Yu's brother) owned 99.4% of the company.

Jun Yu (Eugene Yu's nephew) and Guojun Shao, who co-invented a Konnech patent with Eugene Yu, were among the other equity holders.

Jinhua Yulian Network later transferred a voting patent, co-invented with a Zhejiang University professor, to Jinhua Hongzheng Technology.  In a future thread, there will be a detailed discussion about Konnech's patents, employees, and the involvement of this professor.

18) Jinhua Hongzheng Technology provides election administration software, including web and mobile applications, to more than 430 National People's Congresses across over 20 provinces.

The company has established partnerships with Huawei, Lenovo, China Telecom, China Mobile, China Unicom, and the highest levels of the Chinese government.

19) On July 31, 2015, Eugene Yu registered the website domain "hongzhengtech[.]cn" for Jinhua Hongzheng Technology using the email address admin@konnech.com.

As a result, Konnech held significant control over a company that provides election administration software to the highest levels of the Chinese government.

Shortly after Catherine Engelbrecht (
@truethevote
) and Gregg Phillips (
@onwardsocial
) exposed Konnech's connection to China's National People's Congress, the domain registration email address was changed to jiadeng@hongzhengtech.com.

(Note: The modified domain URL "hongzhengtech[.]cn" is used because of safety concerns with the URL raised by Twitter.)

https://web.archive.org/web/20220824173140/https://whois-history.whoisxmlapi.com/lookup-report/AVkvG34MR7

20) In a September 1, 2022, live chat, Catherine Engelbrecht (
@truethevote
) and Gregg Phillips (
@onwardsocial
) discussed the FBI's betrayal, Konnech programming software for China's National People's Congress, and the company's storage of U.S. election data on Chinese servers.

In January 2021, Phillips said that the cyber analyst he had been working with encountered an “oddity in some of the URLs” such as http://vote4la.com, http://vote4detroit.com, and http://vote4boston.com, which Konnech’s “PollChief” software application used to gather personally-identifying information about poll workers.

Using Binary Edge, a software product companies use to identify and assess the risk of cyber breaches, “We began to look at where these URLs resolve to.

We found that most of them resolve to one I.P. address and that I.P. address — the URL resolved in China,” Phillips said. “What we also learned in our review, http://apps.konnech.net, resolved into this same URL in China, meaning that the application itself was residing in China,” he continued.

“In Binary Edge, you can figure out what type of database they are using, their database port, and all the different services offered by ports in this particular application living in China. It turned out that not only did it live there, but they left the database open.”

This database “stored the personally identifying information of over a million Americans,” he emphasized. Engelbrecht and Phillips decided that “this was a major national security risk” and immediately took the information to the FBI.

When Engelbrecht and Phillips took this information to the FBI, the FBI “said the information was forwarded to their counter-intelligence operation, and a counter-intelligence op was opened up in January or February of 2021,” Phillips said.

Phillips described how he and Engelbrecht played an active role in the FBI’s operation, “They engaged us in the operation, they were communicating with us on a regular basis. They were communicating with Catherine regarding communications with the target and this went on for approximately 15 months.”

Phillips and Engelbrecht noted that the field office they worked with for those 15 months was “legitimate” and not “political law enforcement.”

“These were legitimate people who believed that this software posed a national security risk to the United States of America and they were working with us closely to try to stop this from being in place during the midterms,” Phillips said.

“The focus point was always we needed to remove this software from the election, but taking a step further, there were a lot of other concerns that the bureau had.”

In April 2022, Engelbrecht received a call from one of the FBI agents, who informed her that the FBI’s “Washington D.C. headquarters” was now involved in the investigation.

Engelbrecht described how everything changed after this call, “There was no more goodwill, there was no more let's work together, the script had been flipped, and now we were the target,” she said. “That was a very disturbing call.”

The agent informed Engelbrecht that “two women” at the FBI’s headquarters believed that Phillips and Engelbrecht were “in the wrong for doing this” and that the D.C. office was now trying “to figure out how you guys broke the law to find all of this.”

Engelbrecht added, “which of course we didn't, but that was kind of their Modus Operandi, they were going to try to pin something on us, and today you can pick your headlines about how the FBI has done this time and again.”

Phillips remarked, “The problem is they know about this, and they chose to do nothing. They chose to investigate it, and in the end, they chose to blame us, but this is China. These are Chinese operatives in the United States; these are Chinese citizens who are programming this.”

Engelbrecht explained how the FBI agents initially hoped they could persuade the Washington D.C. office to do the right thing, “Our contacts were saying we are going to try and smooth this out, but as the days clicked on, they re-contacted us and one of them said you may need to be ready to — his term was to use the nuclear option and go to the press,” she said.

With the FBI no longer interested in pursuing Konnech, Englebrecht and Phillips organized an event for Saturday, August 13th in Arizona called “the Pit” where they brought together about two hundred “researchers, independent journalists, and big thinkers” to share their story.

“We asked the people in attendance for help, we didn't know what the FBI's plans were for us, we didn't know if we didn't speak this publicly if we would ever have the chance to, but we felt like our best chance was to share this with people we trusted who had the wherewithal to get the word out,” Englebrecht said.

She continued, “There have been so many great things that have happened since that event, but one of the greatest, was this community that came out shoulder to shoulder saying let’s dig this, let's see how much more information we can find.”

“The quality of research that has been done to supplement what we already had and to corroborate what we already had has been incredible.”

Phillips added, “This is some of the best research I have ever seen. The quality of it, the depth of it, we were with a prosecutor the other day and we had an opportunity to share some of this information with them.”

He continued, “There's likely going to be a grand jury convened here in the next week or so. It's supported by not just the research that my team OPSEC did for Catherine and True the Vote, but by the research of one of the best research teams I've ever seen come together.”

“The data and research all stand on their own.”

https://truethevote.locals.com/post/2664780/the-tiger-project

21) On September 12, 2022, Konnech filed a defamation lawsuit against Catherine Engelbrecht (
@truethevote
) and Gregg Phillips (
@onwardsocial
), accusing them of spreading baseless "conspiracy theories" and engaging in "racism and xenophobia."   

Konnech denied any affiliation with the Communist Party of China and stated that they had never stored American election data on servers in China.

The legacy media echoed Konnech's claims against
@TrueTheVote
 and
@onwardsocial
 without conducting any examination of the company's connections to Jinhua Yulian Network, Jinhua Hongzheng Technology, or China's National People's Congress.

22) In an unusual move, U.S. District Court Judge Kenneth Hoyt issued an ex-parte temporary restraining order in favor of Konnech without providing an opportunity for
@TrueTheVote
 and
@OnwardSocial
 to respond to the complaint.

Furthermore, Judge Hoyt immediately ordered them to disclose the identities of all individuals involved in their investigation of Konnech at the outset of the trial, prior to the discovery phase.

Failure to comply would result in the imprisonment of Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips for contempt of court.

23) On October 4, 2022, Eugene Yu, the CEO of Konnech, was arrested by the Los Angeles District Attorney's office for storing the data of American election workers on servers in China.

Deputy District Attorney Eric Neff described the scale of the data breach as "astounding," suggesting that it could be "the largest data breach in United States history."

Prosecutors alleged that Konnech employees shared the personal information of Los Angeles election workers with third-party software developers in China, who were involved in creating and fixing Konnech's software called PollChief.

Furthermore, software developers in China had "super administration access" to PollChief software and confidential election data from the United States.

https://truethevote.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/eugene-yu-complaint-101322.pdf

24) On October 5, 2022, during Eugene Yu's bond hearing, his attorney contended that he posed no risk of fleeing as he had been actively cooperating with the FBI for the preceding month, and his arrest had taken the agency by surprise.

However, the Los Angeles District Attorney's office argued that Yu presented a substantial flight risk due to his strong business ties in China.

Additionally, the prosecution raised concerns about the suspicious nature of Yu's arrest, noting that he was taken into custody without his cell phone while on his way to the airport.

25) On October 28, 2022,
@TrueTheVote
 and
@OnwardSocial
 submitted an affidavit containing approximately 10% of their text messages exchanged with FBI Agents in Detroit and San Antonio, supporting their claim of working with the FBI on a 15-month "counter-intelligence operation" against Eugene Yu, prior to the involvement of FBI headquarters in Washington D.C.

The text messages included conversations with the following individuals:

-Special Agent Bruce Fowler, Detroit
-SA Huy Nguyen, San Antonio
-SA Kevin McKenna, San Antonio
-SA Kristina Spindel, San Antonio

In one text message exchange, Fowler provided his FBI email address and mentioned receiving three thumb drives from the San Antonio office. He asked Engelbrecht to guide him on where to find information on those drives.

In another text message exchange, Engelbrecht asked for the name of an agent in Georgia. Nguyen responded that he would provide the name later, but “in the meantime, you can tell them that you filed the complaint with SA Huy Nguyen and SA Kevin McKenna with San Antonio Division.”

In another exchange, Engelbrecht texted Nguyen, stating:

"I wanted to let you know that we took the nuclear option and went public (in a very limited way, but nonetheless we did it). Konnech quickly filed a civil suit against us in Houston federal court and got an ex parte [temporary restraining order].

Part of the TRO required that we name who we’d gotten the election worker data from, same person who’d provided it to you. We gave the court the name under seal. Our attorney also notified the Houston FBI office, where the case was filed.

I’m very concerned about everyone’s safety at this point. Please do whatever possible to help ensure that name never comes out. I can provide you with whatever you may need."

Nguyen did not respond to Engelbrecht’s text. According to further texts provided by Engelbrecht, she reached out to “KayKay,” saying she hoped to talk, in person, if possible.

“KayKay” replied that she was on a temporary assignment out of state until January and asked if Engelbrecht still had Nguyen’s number. Engelbrecht then explained that she had “called and written him but no response.”

The text then explained: “We have been drug into a vicious lawsuit filed against us by Konnech.” “Our attorneys have contacted the FBI and been told that the Bureau has no interest in engaging with the court in order to maintain confidentiality.”

Engelbrecht added that she, Phillips, and “the researcher who originally provided us the data” are being “doxed,” and that it’s “a very serious situation and we’ve been left to hang.”

Engelbrecht then noted, “Yu has already been indicted by a Grand Jury and arrested,” but they “continue to hear chatter that the FBI is working with Konnech, against us, and still trying to accuse us of crimes we did not commit.”

The True the Vote founder then noted that “what Bobby said on the phone that day in April 22 (when you were reading the yearly CI disclaimer to me) has gone into full overdrive.” She added: “I also now believe Gregg and I have been set up. It’s appalling, heartbreaking, and wrong.”

https://thefederalist.com/2022/11/18/in-this-untold-story-of-poll-worker-data-chinese-servers-and-scandal-only-the-fbi-knows-the-truth/

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1888133/gov.uscourts.txsd.1888133.46.2.pdf

26) On October 31, 2022, Catherine Engelbrecht (
@truethevote
) and Gregg Phillips (
@onwardsocial
) were imprisoned for contempt of court as they refused to disclose the identity of a researcher who provided information to the LADA that resulted in the indictment of Eugene Yu:

Despite Eugene Yu's arrest by the Los Angeles District Attorney based on the allegations he had previously denied in his defamation lawsuit, Judge Kenneth Hoyt refused to admit any evidence from the criminal proceedings against Konnech in his courtroom.

Furthermore, Judge Hoyt declined to respond to a phone call from the Los Angeles District Attorney's office and asserted that the criminal case against Eugene Yu was unrelated to the civil case involving Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips.

27) On November 5, 2022, Tucker Carlson discussed Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips being arrested for refusing to reveal the identity of a researcher who provided information to the LADA that resulted in criminal charges against Eugene Yu, the CEO of Konnech:

"George Gascon actually indicted Eugene Yu for exfiltrating the personal records of American poll workers, including their social security numbers and home addresses, out of the country to servers in China. These researchers developed that information.   

Catherine attempted to give it to law enforcement at the FBI and elsewhere and was sued by Konnech for doing that. When Konnech sued them, they got a restraining order, ordering Catherine to turn over the names of these researchers.   

Catherine and Gregg, who are very courageous people, simply refused to do it, and as a result, while Yu is home on bail, Catherine and Gregg are in jail tonight...

The civil libertarians and the mainstream press are basically a flock of sheep that are each bleeding the exact same tune, and all they want to do is deny any conversation about the possibility of fraud in elections."

28) On November 7, 2022,
@TrueTheVote
 and
@OnwardSocial
 were released from prison following a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which overturned Judge Kenneth Hoyt's order to unjustly detain them for contempt of court in a civil defamation case.

Two week later, the appeals court vacated the contempt order and wrote, "the record does not reveal what sort of emergency justified the district court's demand for that information before the parties could file Rule 12 motions before the defendants could file an answer, before the parties could file their initial disclosures, or before discovery could begin let alone conclude in the ordinary course."

"Much less did the district court explain what sort of emergency could warrant jailing the petitioner-defendants for not making such immediate disclosures. Rather, the district court made clear that it was imposing its disclosure requirements because it—the district court—wanted to add defendants to the lawsuit. Resp. 13; App. 188. That is not how the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure work."

Furthermore, the appeals court criticized Judge Kenneth Hoyt for "using a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, and a civil-contempt order to litigate the case on Konnech's behalf."

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txsd.1888133/gov.uscourts.txsd.1888133.62.0.pdf

@gatewaypundit
 about their arrest and subsequent solitary confinement and provided information about the Konnech data breach that occurred in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, or Allegheny County.

The breach involved the unauthorized exposure of sensitive information belonging to election workers, election judges, the complete Pennsylvania voting registration file, voting machine serial numbers, passwords, and "everything that one would need to cheat."

"This isn't software, guys. This is malware. This is spyware. They are sucking data from the United States, storing it in China, and then using it to create a Chinese-style social credit system where we're all scored.   

United States citizens are scored to manipulate votes, manipulate thought, manipulate pretty much everything you can imagine in our lives. And these people are the tip of the spear for that. They're not the only ones but they're there."

30) On November 9, 2022, the Los Angeles District Attorney's office dropped charges against Konnech and its CEO, Eugene Yu.

District Attorney George Gascon cited concerns over “potential bias” and the “pace of the investigation” as his reasons for the decision.

"We are concerned about both the pace of the investigation and the potential bias in the presentation and investigation of the evidence," Gascon said in a statement.

"We currently have an immense volume of digital data that will define this case, but the processing of that data will take months. We would not be able to fairly and accurately process and present all of that evidence within the statutory timeframes."

"As a result, we have decided to ask the court to dismiss the current case and alert the public in order to ensure transparency."

A few weeks later, Gascon placed Deputy District Attorney Eric Neff, who alleged in court that this was potentially "the largest data breach in United States history," on administrative leave.

31) On December 22, 2022, Grant Bradley, a former employee of Konnech, filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the company that stated he personally “witnessed customer’s data (specifically poll watcher information) being made accessible to foreign nationals from China.”

Additionally, Bradley stated that Konnech used “developers, designers, and coders” who “are all Chinese nationals based out of Wuhan, China.”

https://thefederalist.com/2023/01/20/whistleblower-yes-election-data-company-gave-u-s-poll-workers-personal-info-to-china/

https://scribd.com/document/620894361/22-12-22-Verified-Complaint-1#

32) On February 24, 2023, cybersecurity expert Harry Haury, who forensically imaged Konnech's devices for the Los Angeles District Attorney's office, signed an affidavit stating that he witnessed Konnech storing the personal data of U.S. election workers on servers in China.

Furthermore, the affidavit stated that Konnech's software was developed, tested, and maintained in China, and metadata indicated that Eugene Yu was involved in developing election software for the Chinese government.

Haury, who is the CEO of Cain & Associates, stated that his company assisted the Los Angeles District Attorney's office by following FBI and Justice Department protocols to forensically image servers, computers, cell phones, and other electronic storage devices belonging to Konnech and Eugene Yu.

Haury, who has over 28 years of experience working as a cybersecurity expert for prominent organizations such as the Department of Defense, NSA, CIA, U.S. Treasury, NorthCOM, Sandia National Laboratories, more than a dozen top American banks, and the U.S. Justice Department stated that Konnech's data security system, "amounted to by far the worst example of complete disregard or negligence regarding the protection of PII and sensitive data I have ever seen. We discovered a data breach of U.S. data, which is classified as a total loss of control.”

Substantial evidence was reportedly discovered on Konnech's seized devices, including:

• confirmed multiple instances of Konnech hosting, on servers based in China, U.S. citizens’ personally identifiable information (PII);
• found evidence in private company messages that software code was being developed, tested, and maintained in China;
• confirmed that Konnech was providing administrative credentials to Chinese developers;
• PollChief software suffered from a security vulnerability that allowed any PollChief or Konnech worker to gain "super user" status, giving him or her broad access to information on all U.S. poll workers in the system;
• has evidence that Konnech employees have shared election-related data through, from, and on Chinese servers and applications;
• has evidence in metadata pulled from relevant files indicating Eugene Yu was involved in developing Chinese government (i.e., Wucheng District People’s Congress) election software; and
• has evidence showing Konnech is associated with several companies based in mainland China that appear to be associated with if not subsidized by the Chinese government.

Haury stated, "We concluded that this incident is a very high risk indicator of an intrusion by a foreign intelligence into the U.S. strategic infrastructure, and as obliged by law, we informed the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) and other pertinent law enforcement agencies of this contact."

https://truethevote.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/2023.02.24-Konnech-Dkt.-87-Motion-to-Inspect-Property.pdf

33) On March 24, 2023, Peter McCallister, the former General Manager of Konnech Australia, signed an affidavit stating that he believed Konnech's software development was done in China by Jinhua Hongzheng Technology, a company owned by "Mr. Yu's older brother" and "Jun Yu, Mr. Yu's nephew, was the person responsible for depositing the data onto the server in China."

Additionally, McCallister stated that after Eugene Yu's arrest, Konnech employees in China attempted to hack Konnech's CTO, Luis Nabergoi, and deleted "all conversations referencing or involving Eugene's nephew, Jun Yu."

Lastly, McCallister believed that Jinhua Hongzheng Technology was "the main provider of election software products to the Communist Party of China" and that Eugene Yu had asked him to sell the same "meeting administration and voting software" to the Australian government.

34) On April 5, 2023, Grant Bradley, the former Konnech employee, signed another affidavit stating "Konnech provided programmers in China private data of U.S.-based election workers, to include social security numbers and other identifying information."

"Konnech appeared to employ at least 80 and perhaps around 100 Chinese nationals to work on its elections software for American clients."

"I witnessed customers' data (specifically poll-watcher information) being made accessible to foreign nationals in China."

"Konnech's election logistics software was (and may still be) substantially developed by developers, designers, and coders who (to the best of my knowledge, information and belief), are all Chinese nationals based out of Wuhan, China."

"The standard process Konnech used to onboard China-based programmers was to create customer environments for the programmers by uploading files containing all of the American customers' poll workers' information, polling locations, and other data to DingTalk or Jira, where the leaders from the Chinese team would have access to Jira, and the entire Chinese team would have access to DingTalk."

"During my employment, on or after October 4, 2022 I was instructed by my superiors to say outwardly to customers that poll worker data was not stored overseas, was not available to foreign nationals, and that we had no idea why Eugene Yu had been arrested... My superiors who instructed me in these regards, and I, knew these statements were false."

https://truethevote.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023.04.07-Konnech-Dkt.-94-1-Exhibit-H-Affidavit-of-Grant-Bradley.pdf

https://truethevote.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/2023.03.24-Konnech-Dkt.-91-Reply-ISO-Motion-to-Inspect.pdf

35) On April 14, 2023, cybersecurity expert Nate Cain (
@cain_nate
), who forensically imaged Konnech's devices for the Los Angeles District Attorney's office, stated that Konnech stored the personal data of U.S. election workers and judges on servers in China.

Furthermore, Cain stated that a "Chinese company that has ties to the CCP" did Konnech's "software development and maintenance," and a Defense Counterintelligence Security Agency (DCSA) analyst reviewed their report, verified that it was accurate, and forwarded it to the FBI.

However, Cain mentioned that he had provided evidence of a major Konnech data breach to the police superintendent of a prominent U.S. county, who subsequently took the information to the FBI, and the FBI had declined to provide assistance, informing the superintendent that they were not interested in pursuing the matter.

Additionally, Cain stated that Los Angeles County had refused to inform several other counties that their data had also been breached.

Cain, who has over 25 years of experience working as a cybersecurity expert for the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, DISA, and the FBI, received his cybersecurity training from the NSA as a member of the U.S. Marine Corps Forces Cyberspace Command (MARFORCYBER).

"We found that there was voter poll worker data, as well as election judge data, and election inventory system data found on Chinese servers."

"We weren't expecting to see what we saw, which was that there was a Chinese company that was essentially doing the software development and all of the software maintenance for this company.

And what we discovered was that we got behind the Chinese firewall, and we found documents that showed that this Chinese company actually had ties to the CCP.

And then at that point, I had no choice but to take that information, package it up and provide it to the Defense Counterintelligence Security Agency (DCSA) because as a cleared contractor, I have a sworn obligation to provide them that information that this could be a potential Chinese espionage or intelligence operation working against the United States and our critical infrastructure.

So, I provided that information to them, and now, we're in a difficult situation because I don't think that George Gascon was very happy about that."

36) On April 20, 2023, Konnech and Eugene Yu retracted their defamation case against Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips, a day after
@truethevote
 and
@onwardsocial
 unveiled a website (http://openink.com/konnech) containing much of the information discussed in this Twitter thread.

37) In conclusion, Eugene Yu develops election administration software for the Chinese government in partnership with Huawei, China Telecom, China Unicom, China Mobile, and Lenovo.

Two of his former employees have signed affidavits stating that he stored confidential U.S. election data on servers in China, where his software was developed, tested, and maintained.

Two cybersecurity experts, who forensically imaged Konnech's devices for the LADA, have stated that he stored confidential U.S. election data on servers in China, where he developed election administration software for the Chinese government.

This information is publicly available on the internet.

So, why is the FBI still allowing Konnech's election administration software to be used across the country?

38) On April 14, 2016, Jinhua Hongzheng Technology announced on Weibo that it provides election administration software to China's National People's Congress, Detroit,  Michigan, St. Louis, Missouri, and Washington, D.C.

Its predecessor is Jinhua Yulian Network and "Konnech."

https://archive.ph/8xIqe

39) So, why is the FBI shielding two firms closely tied to the Chinese government, which have financed and developed an American election software company for the past 15 years, all while transferring election data back to China?

40) And lastly, why is the FBI headquarters in Washington D.C., targeting Catherine (
@truethevote
) and Gregg (
@onwardsocial
) for exposing this while seemingly protecting Jianwei Yu (于建伟)?

41) If you would like Congress to hold the FBI accountable for betraying Catherine, Gregg, and their commitment to preserving the integrity of our election system, please visit
@TrueTheVote
's website, http://stopccpelectionfraud.com, and follow these three simple steps:

1. Sign the petition
2. Contact your representatives
3. Review these articles

42) In all of my interactions with Catherine and Gregg, despite facing lawsuits, wrongful arrests, and solitary confinement, their main concern has always been the removal of this national security threat from our election system.

If you would like to support their election integrity efforts, you can donate at:
https://truethevote.org/donate/

43) Finally, if you'd like to support my journalism, please consider becoming a member of my Twitter subscriber community.

By joining, you'll gain exclusive access to my reporting, including:

• Exclusive Konnech threads
• Content creation tips
• OSINT research tools
• Monthly Q&A sessions

Thank you for your time!

Title: Maine joins movement to abolish electoral college
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 19, 2024, 06:13:43 PM

https://gellerreport.com/2024/04/democrats-one-step-closer-to-mob-rule-maine-joins-blue-states-to-abolishing-electoral-college.html/?lctg=91526300

Title: X censors group claiming illegal aliens registering to vote
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 23, 2024, 04:55:08 AM

https://washingtontimes-dc.newsmemory.com/?token=a363029918ec080eaf226611394cc505_6627b2d2_6d25b5f&selDate=20240423

Title: LA DA Gascon stuffed case about vote data stored on Chinese servers?
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 24, 2024, 03:39:07 AM

https://rumble.com/v4qwqii-gascn-allegedly-backed-off-election-case-because-evidence-helped-trump-tipp.html?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=One%20America%20News%20Network

Title: WT
Post by: Crafty_Dog on April 26, 2024, 01:13:43 PM

Courts push back against Democrats’ fringe legal assaults on honest, fair elections

Radically reshaping state election integrity through litigation rather than legislation

By Trevor Stanley

Recent court rulings against the Democrats’ legal assaults on fair, honest and open elections could spell trouble for Democrats’ master strategy to use lawfare for political advantage.

In 2017, when control of the Virginia General Assembly was at stake, Marc Elias — the partisan Democratic lawyer sanctioned by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for violations of the ethical guidelines covering a lawyer’s conduct — sued to overturn the result of a valid election, used political operatives to pressure the state board not to certify election results, and deployed lawyers seeking to prevent the counting of a single legal vote that could sway the outcome of the pivotal election. Mr. Elias’ unhinged legal assault resulted in a strong rebuke from a panel of judges objecting to the legal strategy.

When the court finally stopped these partisan tactics and ruled in favor of the Republican candidate, it wrote: “The right of a citizen to cast a free vote has been secured to us by the blood of patriots shed from Lexington and Concord to Selma, Alabama. The manifest injustice against which we must always guard is the chance that a single vote may not be counted.”

Instead of taking the court’s message to heart, Mr. Elias, the lead counsel in those matters, doubled down on shaky legal theories to do whatever he could to tilt the electoral playing field so Democrats could have an advantage at the ballot box.

Although lower courts sometimes acquiesce to pressure from the media and lawyers on the left, appellate courts — often led by judges appointed by Democrats — are pushing back against these fringe legal arguments that threaten state election administration regimes. Most recently, this fight came to Pennsylvania.

The legal battle in Pennsylvania revolved around an

expansive reading of the Materiality Provision of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 pushed by national Democrats. Congress enacted the provision to outlaw tactics used by Southern Democrats through the mid-1960s to prevent minorities — mostly African Americans — from registering to vote.

For example, the Materiality Provision prevented states from requiring that a person interested in voting list the exact number of months and days in his age or be prevented from registering. Put another way, the Materiality Provision prevents unduly restrictive laws on who may register to vote; it does not prohibit valid election integrity laws that govern the casting of a ballot.

Recently, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in Pennsylvania State Conference of the NAACP v. Schmidt, rejected the interpretation of the Materiality Provision advanced by the Democratic National Committee. Had the court sided with Democrats, states would not be able to require that qualified voters vote for one candidate per contest, mark ballots with pens or pencils (not crayons), use a standard envelope to mail ballots, or signify on absentee envelopes that a ballot is enclosed.

This panel of judges, entirely appointed by Democrats, affirmed a state’s ability to protect the integrity of elections by upholding essential state voting rules that give voters confidence that elections in our country are fair, honest and open.

But the fight won’t stop in Pennsylvania. Lawyers from the Democratic Party have virtually unlimited funding to fight on all fronts. Whether the money comes from liberal billionaires such as George Soros and Swiss citizen Hansjorg Wyss, or so-called good government groups like Eric Holder’s National Democratic Redistricting Committee, which is purportedly “working to protect fair maps” and “combat ongoing gerrymandering,” the result is the same: an endless barrage of legal volleys against fair, open and honest elections.

In reality, these funders, as Mr. Holder’s committee admitted to the IRS, are working to “favorably position Democrats,” not to protect the right to vote.

Although the Democratic Party has mostly moved past Mr. Elias because of his big bills and even bigger self-promoting online persona, this unlimited funding allowed him to file suits regarding an expansive reading of the Materiality Provision in states in nearly every federal circuit court of appeals. But the 3rd Circuit’s ruling spells trouble for all these cases.

And while Mr. Elias has been marginalized by the Biden White House, many law firms and lawyers are looking to take his place as the lead lawyers for the Democrats.

This new brand of lawyer will continue to try to radically reshape state election integrity laws through litigation rather than the legislative process by using theories and tactics that fall outside the mainstream. As the court in Virginia found in 2017 in deciding to accept a single vote that Democratic lawyers attempted to prevent from counting: “It matters not the importance of the disposition of a ballot in a given election; it matters the dignity of the citizen, the integrity of the electoral process and the destiny of our constitutional republic.”

Thank goodness the appellate courts are putting black-letter law above politics and supporting the election integrity initiatives that give voters confidence in the American system.

Trevor Stanley is an attorney who specializes in political law. He is also vice president for election education at the Republican National Lawyers Association