Getbig Main Boards > Politics and Political Issues Board

Voter Fraud Thread

(1/74) > >>

Soul Crusher:
Democrat says Democratic Party bosses use voter fraud
Daily Caller ^ | 11-21-11 | Neil Munro

Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 4:45:14 PM by bigbob

Top Democrats are aggressively pushing the claim that Republicans’ worries about voter fraud are an insincere excuse to suppress voting by African-Americans and Hispanics.

But former Alabama Democratic Rep. Artur Davis told The Daily Caller that anti-fraud measures are needed to protect African-Americans from corrupt political bosses — many of them African-Americans themselves — who run Democratic Party machines in the South.

On Nov. 14, progressive Democratic Reps. John Conyers, Steny Hoyer, Jerrold Nadler, Keith Ellison, Steve Cohen, Marcia Fudge and Emanuel Clearer, the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus — along with representatives from several advocacy groups — held a meeting to complain about what they say is the danger posed by laws that require voters to identify themselves.

Artur Davis is unimpressed.

“What I have seen in my state, in my region, is the the most aggressive practitioners of voter-fraud are local machines who are tied lock, stock and barrel to the special interests in their communities — the landfills, the casino operators — and they’re cooking the [ballot] boxes on election day, they’re manufacturing absentee ballots, they’re voting [in the names of] people named Donald Duck, because they want to control politics and thwart progress,” he told TheDC.

“People who are progressives have no business defending those individuals.”

Davis is free to talk publicly because he quit electoral politics in 2010, giving up his African-American-dominated district to run for the Democratic nomination in the 2010 gubernatorial race. He lost in the primary, and the the winning Democrat subsequently lost to the Republican by 16 points, 42 percent to 58 percent.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

240 is Back:
this is how obama can squeak out a win in 2012.  make is close enough to cheat.

don't worry though, the repubs won't march in protest more than 1 afternoon per month.  THey understand that any real protests justify being hosed with tear gas.  since they were okay with teh OWS wimps getting maced, surely they'll be okay with it whne they're protesting a stolen election.

Soul Crusher:
Air of desperation in Democrats' attempts to roll back voter laws

 Oklahoman     

Published: December 13, 2011



THE idea of requiring voters to prove they are who they say they are before casting a ballot, as several states have done in recent years, has Democrats riled up. They promise a strong push in 2012 to right these so-called wrongs.


Advertisement
 
Democratic Party officials are, as The Associated Press reported, “organizing on a number of fronts to overturn some of the measures, educate voters on the types of documents necessary to vote and pursue lawsuits if necessary.”

Our guess is they won't be visiting Oklahoma, whose voter ID law was given 74 percent approval by voters last year. Here are two reasons: Our law provides voters a wide berth when it comes to providing documentation, and a current effort to challenge it is having a tough time.

A woman filed suit last year in Tulsa County naming then-Gov. Brad Henry as a defendant. A judge said that wasn't the proper venue and ordered the lawsuit moved to Oklahoma County. The woman's attorney dismissed that suit and filed a subsequent lawsuit this year, naming the state Election Board. The state Supreme Court recently said Oklahoma County is the proper venue for the case because that's where the Election Board is housed.

The lawsuit contends Oklahoma's new law impinges on those who don't have an appropriate ID “or who are unwilling to accept any level of this statewide infringement on the right to vote.”

We've never understood the infringement argument, which is a staple of Democrats on this issue. Requiring an ID to cash a check or board an airplane or buy a pack of smokes isn't seen as onerous. But somehow doing the same to cast a vote is?

That's a weak argument, particularly in Oklahoma. State law requires voters to show a driver's license or other government-issued photo ID. Failing that, they can use other identification such as the voter card that's issued free by county election boards. Finally, if they have no ID when they arrive to vote, they can cast a provisional ballot.

Other states have stricter rules. For example, some allow for provisional ballots but require voters to return to the polling place with an ID within a certain time frame in order for their vote to count. Those states are sure to get a visit from Democratic Party forces.

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of voter ID laws. Studies conducted after the 2008 election showed they didn't hurt turnout among blacks and other groups that Democrats say are most likely to be adversely affected. These efforts to overturn or weaken the laws have an air of desperation to them.



Read more: http://newsok.com/air-of-desperation-in-democrats-attempts-to-roll-back-voter-laws/article/3631452#ixzz1gR3hxfiD

Soul Crusher:
Eric Holder Announces Opposition to Election Integrity Laws
PJ Media ^ | December 13, 2011 | J. Christian Adams



On Tuesday night, I spoke in Austin, Texas at a rally organized by True the Vote. It took place on the grounds of the LBJ library on the campus of the University of Texas. The rally was in response to Eric Holder’s announcement at the same place two hours later of a concerted Justice Department effort to oppose virtually every electoral integrity measure promoted by Constitutional conservatives and Republicans.

Holder’s announcement will have profound partisan results in the 2012 election because of his professed unwillingness to enforce laws to prevent voter fraud. Indeed, tonight he made clear his opposition to these laws, such as voter ID and even the requirement to register to vote in advance of an election.


Holder announced broad opposition to voter identification requirements and a ramped up effort to enforce voting registration laws in welfare agencies. He didn’t make any announcements about enforcing Section 8 of Motor Voter to ensure dead people don’t populate the roles. He also said that voter fraud “isn’t a huge problem,” perhaps marking the first time the nation’s chief law enforcement downplayed criminal behavior. Of course that is in vogue in this administration, starting with the New Black Panther dismissal and now with Fast and Furious.

In opposition to Holder, I spoke, as did a group of inspiring patriots starting with Catherine Englebrecht of True the Vote. Anita Moncrief, Reverend C. L. Bryan, George Rodriguez (head of the San Antonio Tea Party) and Adryana Boybe, National Director of VOCES Action followed. Boybe’s speech defending Texas Voter ID may be the first time I heard the policy defended in Spanish. Moncrief, though, had the line of the night – that “Al Sharpton has a platinum race card.”

Holder laid down markers which will excite his base and disturb law abiding citizens. He supported restrictions on political speech which will criminalize campaign falsehoods. He vowed hyper-scrutiny of voter integrity laws such as voter ID and vowed to run states like Texas through a nasty gauntlet on redistricting. If this doesn’t send a signal to Texas and South Carolina to pull their Voter ID laws out of Justice and go to court, nothing else will. Also in attendance was Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez, a staring character in my book Injustice.

Holder brought along his puppy, Charlie Savage of the New York Times, from whom we can expect glowing sycophantic coverage of Holder’s announcement at any minute at the New York Times website. Savage is the same reporter who covered purported politicization at the Bush Justice Department. For this he won a Pulitzer Prize.


PJ Media’s Every Single One series reported on the same story Savage did, except this time on the 113 attorney hires by the Obama Civil Rights Division. Savage only covered a handful of Bush hires – he had to, otherwise his story wouldn’t work because the Bush DOJ hired scores of liberal activist lawyers. But the Obama Justice Department gives no quarter to the enemy in hiring, and hired 113 leftists out of 113 openings. I described in my book Injustice how PJ Media had to sue Eric Holder to extract this information:

During the Bush era, DOJ leaders quickly fulfilled FOIA requests. For instance, in 2006 Charlie Savage, then at the Boston Globe, requested all the resumes of the recently hired attorneys in the Bush Civil Rights Division. The DOJ leadership produced the materials within days, well ahead of the legal deadline—they acted so fast, in fact, that some colleagues and I complained they were rushing. Suspecting we were being set up for a leftwing smear campaign, we urged DOJ officials to protect our privacy while fully complying with the requests. But our concerns were ignored and the information was rushed out anyway, resulting in a slew of slanderous media stories, some attacking us in extremely personal ways, followed by curious questions from our family members about why we were in the news. There was a particularly merciless leftist blogosphere attack on a pair of attorneys who happened to be two of the hardest working and most dedicated lawyers in the entire Voting Section.

After PJ Media obtained the Obama hiring information, Savage, ever the cuddly puppy, wrote a puff piece about the Obama hiring practices. Gone was his outrage over politicized hiring that he exhibited at the Boston Globe for the Bush DOJ. That’s what PJ Media is for – reporting on stories the dying dead trees media won’t. Given the scope of the Every Single One series, perhaps PJ Media deserves a Pulitzer too. If Charlie got one, PJ Media certainly should. Stay tuned.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




disgusting.   

Soul Crusher:
New Documents Show Department of Justice Coordination with ACORN-Connected Project Vote
Judicial Watch ^ | December 14, 2011




Group Tied to Voter Registration Fraud Lobbies DOJ to Use National Voting Rights Act to Boost Welfare Voter Registration; Project Vote Official Promotes Hires for Department of Justice’s Voting Section



Washington, DC -- December 14, 2011

Judicial Watch, the organization that investigates and fights government corruption, announced today that it obtained records detailing communications between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Estelle Rogers, a former ACORN attorney currently serving as Director of Advocacy for the ACORN-connected organization Project Vote. ( Judicial Watch v. Department of Justice (No. 11-1497)). Judicial Watch is investigating the DOJ’s partnering with Project Vote on a national campaign to use the National Voting Rights Act (NVRA) to register more individuals on public assistance, widely considered a key voting demographic for the Obama 2012 campaign. President Obama previously worked for Project Vote.

According to the records, obtained pursuant to a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on August 19, 2011, “civil rights groups” met with Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli on March 17, 2011 , to specifically discuss Section 7 of National Voting Rights Act, which requires states to offer voter registration services at all public assistance agencies. The groups included Project Vote, the American Association of People with Disabilities, Demos, the League of Women Voters, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Fair Elections Legal Network, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) Legal Defense Fund, and Paralyzed Veterans of America.

On March 29, 2011, Rogers and the “undersigned voting rights groups” that met with Perrelli on March 17, 2011, sent detailed recommendations to the associate attorney general for strengthening “compliance with the NVRA. Forwarded to Perrelli by Rogers, the recommendations stated “we are grateful that you have invited us to continue this dialogue on the Department’s [DOJ’s] role in providing guidance to states, and we would be happy to supply any additional information you need.”

The records also detail an effort by Rogers to secure jobs for three individual applicants for positions with Civil Rights Division’s Voting Section, the department within the DOJ responsible for enforcing the National Voting Rights Act:

•In a February 23, 2010, email to T. Christian Herren , Chief of the DOJ’s Voting Section, Rogers wrote, “I want to heartily recommend two candidates to you. [NAMES REDACTED]” In an April 20, 2010, email, Rogers wrote, “I look forward to continuing to work with you, Chris. And please let me know if you need any more feedback regarding hires.”
•In a December 7, 2010, email, Rogers wrote, “I’d still love to talk for real, but in the meantime, the main reason I called is that you have an applicant for the [REDACTED] position [REDACTED] qualifies her beautifully for your position, and I hope you will give her every consideration. [REDACTED] So she would be a great fit, and I recommend her without reservation. Please let me know if I can tell you more. And give me a call if you possibly can.”
In a July 13, 2010, email to Herren and DOJ political appointee Julie Fernandes , Rogers references NVRA litigation and she informs Herren that she will be bringing Niyati Shah to a meeting at the DOJ. Shah “will be working on a lot of the litigation we’ll be telling you about,” Rogers writes. Rogers also indicated Nicole Kovite Zeitler, director of Project Vote’s public agency registration project, would also attend the meeting. As reported by The American Spectator’s Matthew Vadum, Zeitler “manages Project Vote’s efforts to advocate for enforcement of Section 7 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 through technical assistance and litigation across the country,” according to her bio on Project Vote’s website.

As Director of Advocacy for Project Vote, Estelle Rogers – a former attorney for ACORN, which was besieged with charges of corruption and fraud before declaring bankruptcy in November 2010 – is a primary contact person on policy matters at Project Vote on both state and federal levels and has been actively involved in voter registration issues. By threatening lawsuits under Section 7 of the NVRA, Project Vote has aggressively sought to force election officials in various states to increase the registration of people receiving public assistance.

On June 20, 2011, Rogers and the ACLU co-wrote a letter to the DOJ, asking the department to block Florida’s new election integrity law (H.B. 1355). Florida has since withdrawn its application to the DOJ for “preclearance” of the law, and has taken its case to court instead.

On August 4, 2011, Judicial Watch released documents obtained from the Colorado Department of State showing that ACORN and Project Vote successfully pressured Colorado officials into implementing new policies for increasing the registration of public assistance recipients during the 2008 and 2010 election seasons. Following the policy changes, the percentage of invalid voter registration forms from Colorado public assistance agencies was four times the national average. Project Vote also sought a “legislative fix” to allow people without a driver’s license or state identification to register to vote online.

In addition to pursuing public agency registration cases in Missouri, Ohio, Indiana, Georgia, and New Mexico, Project Vote and the NAACP filed a lawsuit on April 19, 2011, against the State of Louisiana alleging violations of the NVRA. Less than three months later, on July 12, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division/Voting Section sued Louisiana on the same grounds, claiming that “Louisiana officials have not routinely offered voter registration forms, assistance and services to the state’s eligible citizens who apply, recertify or provide a change address for public assistance or disability services.”

The DOJ also sued the State of Rhode Island on March 11, 2011, alleging violations of the NVRA. The lawsuit led to policy changes intended to increase the number of voter registration applications processed by “public assistance and disability service officers.” These two lawsuits, filed within five months of each other, are the first such lawsuits filed by the DOJ since 2007.

Project Vote and the “community organization” ACORN have both been linked to massive voter registration fraud. A total of 70 ACORN employees in 12 states have been convicted of voter registration fraud. And as documented in a July 2009 report by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, of the 1.3 million registrations Project Vote/ACORN submitted in the 2008 election cycle, more than one-third were invalid.

Moreover, Project Vote’s “Field Director,” Amy Busefink, who handled the online registration campaign for Colorado, entered an Alford plea to two gross misdemeanor counts of conspiracy to commit the crime of compensation for registration of voters in Nevada while working for ACORN. (An Alford plea is a guilty plea, where the defendant does not admit the act or assert innocence, but admits that sufficient evidence exists with which the prosecution could likely convince a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.)

“It is an affront to the rule of law and a threat to the integrity of our elections that the ACORN-front Project Vote is coordinating with the Holder Department of Justice on voting law,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Now we know why the Holder DOJ never bothered to fully investigate voter registration fraud by Project Vote/ACORN – because Project Vote and the Department of Justice seem to have implemented a joint litigation strategy in the run up to the 2012 elections.”



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page