Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

host · 01-10-2008, 04:00 PM

What the fuck kind of a country do you boys want me to have to live in? Here is a "commission" on election "reform" that conducted hearings where the public was not permitted to testify, yet it sported an advisory board with a member who has been exposed as a criminal, republican sponsored vote REFORM, saboteur, Mark "Thor" Hearne:

Quote:

http://www.american.edu/ia/cfer/
COMMISSION ON FEDERAL ELECTION REFORM

The Commission on Federal Election Reform, co-chaired by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, issued its report with 87 recommendations on September 19, 2005. The Commission was organized by American University's Center for Democracy and Election Management (CDEM) and remains an ongoing project of CDEM to make sure that future elections are an improvement on the past ones. The project will focus on evaluating the impact of the Help America Vote Act and will bring the Commission's recommendations to the attention of the executive and legislative branches of federal and state governments and to the public....

http://www.american.edu/ia/cfer/members.htm
Co-Chairs

President Jimmy Carter

President Carter was the 39th President of the United States from 1977 to 1981 and 83rd Governor of Georgia from 1971 to 1975. In 1982 he founded the Carter Center as a forum for mediating conflicts and promoting democracy, health care, and human rights. He co-chaired with former President Gerald Ford the National Commission on Election Reform.

Read full bio

Honorable James A. Baker, III

James A. Baker, III has served in senior government positions under three United States Presidents. He served as Secretary of State, Secretary of Treasury, and White House Chief of Staff. Mr. Baker is presently a senior partner in the law firm of Baker Botts and Honorary Chairman of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University.

Read full bio

Meet the Academic Advisory Committee Members.
http://www.american.edu/ia/cfer/aadvisory.htm
Academic Advisors...

<h2>....Mark F. Hearne II, Partner, Lathrop and Gage LC</h2>

Quote:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=1317&print=1
<center>
<div id="Outline">
Conyers to Carter: James Baker 'Inappropriate' for Blue-Ribbon Election Commission!

Ranking Minority House Judiciary Comm. Member Calls for True Voting Rights Advocates to Be Included on Commission
ALSO: American Center for Voting Rights GOP Front Group Confirmed as 'Academic Advisor' to Panel!
Posted By Brad Friedman On 12th April 2005 @ 11:44 In Election Irregularities, Election 2004, ACVR | Comments Disabled

<div id="BlogContent"><img src="http://www.BradBlog.com/Images/Siren.gif" hspace="6" vspace="3" border="0" align="left">In a letter sent yesterday by Congressman John Conyers, the ranking minority member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, to former-President Jimmy Carter, Conyers has expressed his "strong opposition" to the "conflicting interest" of having Bush/Cheney loyalist, James A. Baker, III serve as the Co-Chair of a recently seated blue-ribbon commission set to investigate Election 2004!
<img src="http://www.BradBlog.com/Images/BakerConyersCarter.jpg" hspace="6" vspace="3" border="0" align="right">Carter has been named as Co-Chair, along with Baker, on the secretly convened and recently announced commission to investigate problems in Election 2004 and to make recommendations on changes needed to improve accuracy, confidence, transparency and inclusion in the American Electoral System.
From <a href="http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/ltrtopotuscarter.pdf" target="_blank">Conyers' letter to Carter [PDF]</a> [1]...
<div class="media">For many of us, Mr. Baker will be forever remembered for his ultimately successful efforts to shut down the counting of votes in the 2000 Florida election and I am concerned that his involvement in that election may present a conflict with the goals and initiatives of your Commission.</div>

In the letter, Conyers also calls upon Carter to include true Voting Rights and Election Reform advocacy groups such as <a href="http://www.VelvetRevolution.us" target="_blank">Velvet Revolution</a> [2] on the commission which is currently staffed instead by politicos and Bush/Cheney/RNC cronies.
ALSO: <a href="http://www.BradBlog.com" target="_blank">The BRAD BLOG</a> [3] can now confirm that Mark F. (Thor) Hearne, II, the National Attorney for Bush/Cheney '04 Inc. and leader of the recently invented, phony GOP front group calling themselves the "non-partisan" <a href="http://www.AC4VR.com" target="_blank">American Center for Voting Rights</a> [4] (ACVR) has been seated on the Academic Advisory board for this commission!

The fix, as we've been warning for some time, is clearly --- and dangerously --- in with this commission! 
For more on the Bush/Cheney/RNC-run ACVR and how they are tied directly to the Baker/Carter Commission, please see the <a href="http://www.BradBlog.com/ACVR" target="_blank">BRAD BLOG Special Coverage page on the developing ACVR scam</a> [5].
UPDATE: The letter from Conyers to Carter is now posted <a href="http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/ltrtopotuscarter.pdf" target="_blank">here [PDF]</a> [6]. As well, Conyers has just blogged on the topic, and added even stronger language for his concern of Baker on this commission. From the just posted item at ConyersBlog:
<div class="media">How can an individual who played a critical role in the disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of Floridians now co-chair a Commission which should have as its mission ensuring that every vote counts?

This is of great concern to me and should be of great concern to every single person who cares about this important issue. <a href="http://velvetrevolution.us/content/electoralreform/BakerCarterComm_PressRelease_033005.php" target="_blank">Online activists</a> [7] have been taking a close look at this issue. Please keep an eye on it.</div>
...MORE WILL BE COMING ON BRAD BLOG CONCERNING THE BLUE-RIBBON COMMISSION, ITS MAKE-UP, AND THE INSIDIOUS GAMING OF ITS MANDATE...STAY TUNED...

Quote:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5524&print=1

<center>
<div id="Outline">
USA Today: Voters Who Would be Disenfranchised, as Photo ID Case Set to be Heard by SCOTUS on Wednesday

Republican Vote Suppression Scheme, Said to be 'Most Important Voting Rights Case Since Bush v. Gore' to be Judged by Republican Supreme Court
[UPDATE: USA Today Allows Discredited GOP Vote Suppressor, Con Man, Thor Hearne to Blog on Their Website in Reply!]
Posted By Brad Friedman On 7th January 2008 @ 18:40 In Indiana, ACVR, Photo ID Laws, U.S. Supreme Court | 8 Comments

<div id="BlogContent">In advance of Wednesday's hearing in the U.S. Supreme Court on the landmark case concerning the Republican Photo ID polling place restrictions in the state of Indiana, <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-06-court_N.htm" target="_blank">USA Today reports...</a> [1]
<div class="media">WASHINGTON — The League of Women Voters has tried to put names and faces on the people who could be hurt by a strict Indiana voter-identification law that the Supreme Court will take up Wednesday.
The league, in a court filing, refers to Mary Wayne Montgomery Eble, 92, who had no driver's license or ready access to the birth certificate she needed to get an alternative ID.
Ray Wardell, a stroke victim, made one trip to a state office for an alternative ID in vain. He did not have the proper document and returned home on foot with the aid of his walker.
Kim Tilman, a mother of seven whose husband, a janitor, is the family's sole source of income, found it would cost $26-$50 to round up the necessary papers for a proper ID.
The league is among the groups backing Indiana challengers to the law who say it impinges on the right to vote and mostly hurts elderly, disabled, poor and minority voters. A Republican-controlled Legislature passed the measure in 2005.</div>

Backers of the law have been unable to cite a single case of "voter fraud", apparently in Indiana history, that would have been prevented by this law, which is, as <a href="http://www.BradBlog.com" target="_blank">BRAD BLOG</a> [2] readers know well by now, meant to do little more than keep as many Democratic-leaning voters from being able to exercise their right to cast a legal vote in an election.
UPDATE 1/8/08: Where USA Today did themselves proud with the article linked above, they did themselves in by giving space to discredited GOP operative, snake-oil salesman, vote suppression front man, Thor Hearne to blog in reply. Hearne shouldn't be allowed outside of a jail cell, much less allowed to post his lies, disinformation and propaganda with impunity at USA Today. And I've said as much in the comments section (typos and all, in my middle-of-the-night, outraged response) below <a href="http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/01/opposing-view-m.html" target="_blank">his blog item at the newspaper's website</a> [3].

It's incredible that USA Today did not note Hearne's dozens of conflicts of interest with the very item he wrote on their pages. As to Hearne, it would hardly be the first time this conman has slid by without telling the truth about who he actually is.
Shame on USA Today. If readers here are unaware who and what Thor Hearne is, see our years long special coverage on him and the GOP propaganda scam he has been running right here: <a href="http://www.BradBlog.com/ACVR" target="_blank">www.BradBlog.com/ACVR</a> [4].
</div>
<hr class="Divider" align="center" />
Article printed from The BRAD BLOG: http://www.bradblog.com

URL to article: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5524
URLs in this post: [1] USA Today reports...: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2008-01-06-court_N.htm [2] BRAD BLOG: http://www.BradBlog.com [3] his blog item at the newspaper's website: http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/01/opposing-view-m.html [4] www.BradBlog.com/ACVR: http://www.BradBlog.com/ACVR

Click <a href="#Print" onclick="window.print(); return false;" title="Click here to print.">here</a> to print.
</div>

Quote:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/11/18/voter-id-sponsor/
<h2 class="title">Voter ID Sponsor: If Blacks “Are Not Paid To Vote, They Don’t Go To The Polls”</h2>
Tom Daschle blogged on ThinkProgress yesterday about the problems with a Voter ID bill proposed in Georgia. He called it a “<a href="/2005/11/17/appointees-voting/">modern day poll-tax</a>” that would make it harder for people to exercise their right to vote.

Apparently, that was the intent. In a memo released today, the bill’s chief sponsor, Rep. Sue Burmeister (R-Augusta), <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20051124203157/http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/1105/18natvra.html">explained the rationale of her bill</a>:
<blockquote>The chief sponsor of Georgia’s voter identification law told the Justice Department that if black people in her district “are not paid to vote, they don’t go to the polls,” and that if fewer blacks vote as a result of the new law, it is only because it would end such voting fraud.
The newly released Justice Department memo quoting state Rep. Sue Burmeister (R-Augusta) was prepared by department lawyers as the federal government considered whether to approve the new law.</blockquote>
As <a href="/2005/11/17/appointees-voting/">Daschle noted yesterday</a>, the Washington Post reported “A team of Justice Department lawyers and analysts who reviewed a Georgia voter-identification law <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/16/AR2005111602504.html">recommended rejecting it because it was likely to discriminate against black voters</a>,” but were overruled by political appointees.

(HT: <a href="http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/003107.html">War and Piece</a>)

Quote:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/26/spakovsky-primer/

<h2 class="title">Hans Von Spakovsky 101: How To Suppress The Vote Like A Pro</h2>
<img src='/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/von_spakovsky.jpg' class=imgright alt='von_spakovsky.jpg' />
Today, the Senate Rules and Administration Committee <a href="http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004289.php#more">will vote</a> on the nomination of Hans von Spakovsky for a seat on the Federal Election Commission. In June, the Rules Committee <a href="http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/feinstein-warns-fec-member-of-rough-confirmation-process-2007-06-14.html">held a confirmation hearing</a> on four nominees to the FEC. But much of the hearing focused on <a href="http://www.civilrights.org/press_room/buzz_clips/civilrightsorg-stories/who-is-hans-von-spakovksy.html">Spakovsky</a>, who has become a lighting rod for criticism over his controversial tenure in the Justice Department. 

The committee <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wirestory?id=3275151">did not vote on von Spakovsky at the time</a> because chairwoman Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) wanted to give Spakovsky “a chance to respond in writing to a <a href="http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/press-2667.html">letter</a>, submitted by six former career staffers at the Justice Department, opposing his nomination.” 
Spakovsky, a former political appointee in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division whom President Bush temporarily placed on the FEC using <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/01/20060104-3.html">a recess appointment</a>, is said to have “used every opportunity he had over four years in the Justice Department to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/07/AR2007060702289.html">make it difficult for voters</a> — poor, minority and Democratic — to go to the polls.”

Here’s an overview of his record of disenfranchising voters:
<blockquote>Spakovsky stalled ruling on Mississippi redistricting, effecting electoral outcomes: In 2002, under Spakovsky’s leadership, the DoJ <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/22/AR2006012200984_pf.html">stalled</a> making a determination under the Voting Rights Act on a conservative-drawn redistricting plan, approving it by default. The plan <a href="http://www.clcblog.org/blog_item-109.html">influenced the outcome of a key House race</a>.
Spakovsky pushed through Texas re-districting that violated the Voting Rights Act: In 2003, “<a href="http://www.clcblog.org/blog_item-109.html">led the battle within [the] Civil Rights Division</a> to approve the Texas redistricting.” In 2006, the Supreme Court held that parts of the plan <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/28/washington/28cnd-scotus.html?ex=1181880000&en=958aa2eebe71bbf4&ei=5070">violated provisions of Voting Rights Act by diluting minority voting strength</a>.

Spakovsky urged Maryland officials to reject voter registration forms of lawful voters: In 2003, Spakovsky told a Maryland election official <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/hava/maryland_ltr.htm">to deny voter registration applications</a> if any of the information on the application failed to match what is in the DMV and Social Security databases. The move exceeded federal law and was found to <a href="http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/17102317.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nation">needlessly reject thousands of applications to vote</a> that were lawful.
Spakovsky blocked an investigation into voter discrimination against Native Americans: In 2004, then-Minnesota U.S. Attrorney Thomas Heffelfinger believed a state voter ID ruling would disenfranchise Indian voters, but when the DoJ’s voting rights section sought to open an investigation, Spakovsky directed attorneys not to contact county officials, which “<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-usatty31may31,0,7660086,full.story?coll=la-home-center">effectively ended any department inquiry</a>.”

Spakovsky approved “modern day poll tax” over objections of career staff: In 2005, a team of Justice Department lawyers and analysts who reviewed a Georgia voter-identification law recommended rejecting it because <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/16/AR2005111602504.html">it was likely to discriminate against black voters</a>. But the law was approved the next day by political appointees, including Spakovsky. When the law was eventually overturned, a federal judge compared it to <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/19/AR2006091901382.html">a Jim Crow-era poll tax</a>.</blockquote>
In June, five House Democrats from Georgia, including civil rights veteran John Lewis of Atlanta, wrote a letter cautioning senators against confirming Spakovsky, saying his appointment “<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wirestory?id=3275151">could potentially turn back the clock on 50 years of progress</a>” in voting rights.
As the six former Justice Department officials wrote in June, because of his “dubious stewardship” of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, the Senate Rules Committee should “<a href="http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/press-2667.html">refuse to reward</a>” him with a seat on the Federal Election Commission.

The Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights has more on Spakovsky <a href="http://www.civilrights.org/press_room/buzz_clips/civilrightsorg-stories/who-is-hans-von-spakovksy.html">here</a> and <a href="http://www.civilrights.org/press_room/fact-sheets/hans-von-spakovksy.html">here</a>. Paul Kiel at TPMMuckraker has <a href="http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003415.php">more</a> as well. 
UPDATE: Slate’s Dahlia Lithwick has more on why Spakovsky shouldn’t be confirmed <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2174680/">here</a>.

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...102702171.html
The headline on an Oct. 28 article incorrectly said that a Georgia law on voter identification was overturned. A federal appeals court upheld an injunction barring the state from enforcing the law, which requires many voters without government-issued identification such as a driver's license or passport to get a new digital ID card. A secondary headline said the state can no longer charge for access to the Nov. 8 election. The state never levied a charge for voting; it did charge $20 for five years to get the new digital ID.
Voter ID Law Is Overturned
Georgia Can No Longer Charge For Access to Nov. 8 Election

By Darryl Fears
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 28, 2005; A03

In a case that some have called a showdown over voting rights, a U.S. appeals court yesterday upheld an injunction barring the state of Georgia from enforcing a law requiring citizens to get government-issued photo identification in order to vote.

The ruling allows thousands of Georgians who do not have government-issued identification, such as driver's licenses and passports, to vote in the Nov. 8 municipal elections without obtaining a special digital identification card, which costs $20 for five years. In prior elections, Georgians could use any one of 17 types of identification that show the person's name and address, including a driver's license, utility bill, bank statement or a paycheck, to gain access to a voting booth.

Last week, when issuing the injunction, U.S. District Judge Harold L. Murphy likened the law to a Jim Crow-era poll tax that required residents, most of them black, to pay back taxes before voting. He said the law appeared to violate the Constitution for that reason. In the 2004 election, about 150,000 Georgians voted without producing government-issued identification.

"Obviously, we're very pleased with the decision," said Daniel Levitas of the American Civil Liberties Union, which joined the NAACP and other groups in a federal lawsuit against the Georgia law. "It's especially timely to see the federal courts step in to protect the precious rights of voters. This decision confirms our contention that the Georgia ID law poses a constitutional hurdle to the right to vote."

State officials say they will challenge the decision by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that was handed down by Judges Frank M. Hull, Stanley F. Birch Jr. and Joel F. Dubina. Birch and Dubina were appointed by President George H. W. Bush, and Hull was named to the appellate court by President Bill Clinton. The case is being watched nationally as Republicans and Democrats in many states battle over who will be allowed on the voter rolls.

The Georgia ID law has been controversial from the day it was submitted in March. Conservative lawmakers said it was needed to limit elections fraud. Liberal lawmakers said that argument was a smokescreen masking another intent: to maintain Republican power in the state by diluting the minority vote, which typically goes to Democrats.

Because Georgia falls under the Voting Rights Act, the Justice Department had to approve the change in state law. It did so in August, prompting charges from outside and inside the department that it was backing away from strong enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.

Under the Georgia law, residents would need to produce original birth certificates and other documents to get the new digital identification card. The cards could only be obtained at Department of Motor Vehicles offices.

But critics say that many potential voters do not have the required documents and that some could not afford the $20 processing fee for identification.

State officials promised to provide free identification to anyone who swore under oath that they were indigent. But the law provided no definition of what constituted indigence in the state of Georgia, opening the possibility for possible perjury charges, activists said.

Liberal critics compiled statistics showing that far more white residents owned cars than African Americans. The law, they argued, gave an unfair advantage to white people while placing a burden on those who are black.

On top of that, the state recently reorganized the Department of Motor Vehicles, paring down the number of offices. After the reorganization, there were no DMV offices in Atlanta, a city with a wide black majority. The closest station is at least nine miles away. Fewer than 60 of the state's 159 counties have DMV offices.

State officials countered that they were providing a single vehicle, known as the GLOW bus, to traverse the state, providing applications and licenses to those with the proper documents. Critics expressed disbelief that one bus could accommodate the needs of so many potential voters.

Black lawmakers railed against the law. At times, they openly wept during the debates. Nevertheless, it passed both the House and Senate in near-lightning speed. The governor signed it in April.

"We did it because we thought it was the . . . thing to do to clean up Georgia election law," said Sen. William Stephens, a Republican from Cherokee County. He cited a report in the Atlanta Journal Constitution newspaper saying that more than 5,000 dead people voted in the eight elections before 2000.

Stephens said another Journal Constitution report stated that a poll revealed 80 percent of Georgians supported the voter ID law.

But Secretary of State Cathy Cox, a Democrat who oversees the election process, said there has not been a proven case of voter fraud in the state in nearly a decade.

As for the poll, Rep. Tyrone Brooks, president of the Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials, said respondents, especially those who are black, were not informed of the law's impact.

"You talk to African Americans, and they will tell you that this is a hardship," Brooks said.

Quote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...601717_pf.html
Bush Picks Controversial Nominees for FEC

By Thomas B. Edsall and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, December 17, 2005; A09

President Bush nominated two controversial lawyers to the Federal Election Commission yesterday: Hans von Spakovsky who helped Georgia win approval of a disputed voter-identification law, and Robert D. Lenhard, who was part of a legal team that challenged the constitutionality of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.

In addition, Bush proposed a second term for commissioner David M. Mason and nominated Steven T. Walther, a Nevada lawyer with close ties to Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).

Von Spakovsky and Mason are Republican appointees, while Lenhard and Walther are Democratic picks for the bipartisan six-member commission.

In a letter to Senate Rules Committee Chairman Trent Lott (R-Miss.), Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) wrote that he is "extremely troubled" by the von Spakovsky nomination. Kennedy contends that von Spakovsky "may be at the heart of the political interference that is undermining the [Justice] Department's enforcement of federal civil laws."

Career Justice Department lawyers involved in a Georgia case said von Spakovsky pushed strongly for approval of a state program requiring voters to have photo identification. A team of staff lawyers that examined the case recommended 4 to 1 that the Georgia plan should be rejected because it would harm black voters; the recommendation was overruled by von Spakovsky and other senior officials in the Civil Rights Division.

Before working in the Justice Department, von Spakovsky was the Republican Party chairman in Fulton County, Ga., and served on the board of the Voter Integrity Project, which advocated regular purging of voter roles to prevent felons from casting ballots.

In a brief telephone interview, von Spakovsky played down his role in policy decisions in the Civil Rights Division. "I'm just a career lawyer who works in the front office of civil rights," he said. He noted that the department has rules against career lawyers talking to reporters.

In a 1997 policy paper, von Spakovsky wrote, "Georgia should require all potential voters to present reliable photo identification at their polling location to help prevent impostors from voting."

Asked if it was a conflict for von Spakovsky to work on a case involving a Republican plan in his home state of Georgia, Justice spokesman Eric Holland said: "Many of the dedicated and professional attorneys in the Voting Rights Section have worked in advocacy roles involving voting issues prior to their arrival at the Justice Department. . . . Justice Department attorneys are always mindful of their responsibility to perform duties in ethical matters, including recusing themselves as necessary under standards of ethical and professional conduct."

The Lenhard nomination, first proposed in July 2003, has provoked strong opposition from advocacy groups seeking tough enforcement of campaign finance laws, especially the 2002 McCain-Feingold bill.

Meredith McGehee, president and executive director of the Alliance for Better Campaigns, described the prospect of Lenhard replacing Thomas as "beyond disappointing" when it was first proposed.

Reid issued a statement yesterday saying that he is "very pleased the president acted today upon my two recommendations for Commissioners on the Federal Election Commission," Walther and Lenhard.

<h3>What are you advocating here, seaver and loquitur, what is the problem you both seem in favor of "fixing"?</h3>

Quote:

In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud - New York Times
WASHINGTON, April 11 — Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/wa...n/12fraud.html

Quote:

The incredible, disappearing American Center for Voting Rights ...
The major bipartisan draft fraud report (PDF) (recently posted by Slate and suppressed by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission [TimesSelect subscription ...
www.slate.com/id/2166589

Quote:

Tova Andrea Wang - A Rigged Report on U.S. Voting ...
Yet, after sitting on the draft for six months, the EAC publicly released a report -- citing it as based on work by me and my co-author -- that completely ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...082901928.html

loquitur, you're a member of the bar. Why am I getting the impression that you are unconcerned about a massive, long standing partisan operation of one major political party to suppress the vote, that encompasses members of the Federalist Society, republican national lawyers association, high ranking elected and party officials and political appointees, has resulted in the compromising of the DOJ's commitment and ability to enforce voting and civil rights, and to investigate and to prosecute crimes in a non-partisan, fair, and timely manner.

And to recognize that the wrongdoing reaches into the offices of the POTUS and the VP:

Quote:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0070313-4.html

...The President did that briefly, in a conversation had with the Attorney General in October of 2006, in which, in a wide-ranging conversation on a lot of different issues, this briefly came up and the President said, I've been hearing about this election fraud matters from members of Congress, want to make sure you're on top of that, as well. There was no directive given, as far as telling him to fire anybody or anything like that.....

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...ics&id=5117015
White House Mulled Firing All U.S. Attorneys
Tuesday, March 13, 2007 | 11:58 AM
Dems: Firings Politically Motivated

..."At no time were names added or subtracted by the White House," Perino said. "We continue to believe that the decision to remove and replace U.S. attorneys who serve at the pleasure of the president was perfectly appropriate and within administration's discretion. We stand by the Department of Justice's assertion that they were removed for performance and managerial reasons."

Dating back to mid-2004, the White House's legislative affairs, political affairs and chief of staff's office had received complaints from a variety of sources about the lack of vigorous prosecution of election fraud cases in various locations, including Philadelphia, Milwaukee and New Mexico, she said.

Those complaints were passed on to the Justice Department or Mier's office.

"The president recalls hearing complaints about election fraud not being vigorously prosecuted and believes he may have informally mentioned it to the attorney general during a brief discussion on other Department of Justice matters," Perino said, adding that the conversation would have taken place in October 2006.

"At no time did any White Hose officials, including the president, direct the Department of Justice to take specific action against any individual U.S. attorney," Perino said.

The Washington Post reported initially on the idea of dismissing all the prosecutors, saying it reviewed a number of internal White House e-mails preceding the final dismissals....

Quote:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/reports/u...ory/15977.html
New U.S. attorneys seem to have partisan records
By Greg Gordon | McClatchy Newspapers

* Posted on Friday, March 23, 2007

WASHINGTON — Under President Bush, the Justice Department has backed laws that narrow minority voting rights and pressed U.S. attorneys to investigate voter fraud—policies that critics say have been intended to suppress Democratic votes.

Bush, his deputy chief of staff, Karl Rove, and other Republican political advisers have highlighted voting rights issues and what Rove has called the "growing problem" of election fraud by Democrats since Bush took power in the tumultuous election of 2000, a race ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Since 2005, McClatchy Newspapers has found, Bush has appointed at least three U.S. attorneys who had worked in the Justice Department's civil rights division when it was rolling back longstanding voting-rights policies aimed at protecting predominantly poor, minority voters....

...The Bush administration's emphasis on voter fraud is drawing scrutiny from the Democratic Congress, which has begun investigating the firings of eight U.S. attorneys—two of whom say that their ousters may have been prompted by the Bush administration's dissatisfaction with their investigations of alleged Democratic voter fraud.

Bush has said he's heard complaints from Republicans about some U.S. attorneys' "lack of vigorous prosecution of election fraud cases," and administration e-mails have shown that Rove and other White House officials were involved in the dismissals and in selecting a Rove aide to replace one of the U.S. attorneys. Nonetheless, Bush has refused to permit congressional investigators to question Rove and others under oath.....

.....Last April, while the Justice Department and the White House were planning the firings, Rove gave a speech in Washington to the Republican National Lawyers Association. He ticked off 11 states that he said could be pivotal in the 2008 elections. Bush has appointed new U.S. attorneys in nine of them since 2005: Florida, Colorado, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Arkansas, Michigan, Nevada and New Mexico. U.S. attorneys in the latter four were among those fired.
<h3>Rove thanked the audience for "all that you are doing in those hot spots around the country to ensure that the integrity of the ballot is protected." He added, "A lot in American politics is up for grabs."....

....Rove talked about the Northwest region in his speech last spring to the Republican lawyers and voiced concern about the trend toward mail-in ballots and online voting. He also questioned the legitimacy of voter rolls in Philadelphia and Milwaukee.</h3>

One audience member asked Rove whether he'd "thought about using the bully pulpit of the White House to talk about election reform and an election integrity agenda that would put the Democrats back on the defensive."

"Yes, it's an interesting idea," Rove responded.....

Quote:

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/070531nj1.htm
LEGAL AFFAIRS
The Scales Of Justice

By Murray Waas, National Journal
© National Journal Group Inc.
Thursday, May 31, 2007

In the closing weeks of Missouri's tight 2006 U.S. Senate race, the U.S. attorney in Little Rock, Ark., took the unusual step of revealing that his office's investigation into possible state government contracting abuses in Missouri had found no evidence of wrongdoing by Republican Gov. Matt Blunt....

.....Mark (Thor) Hearne
As national election counsel for the 2004 Bush-Cheney campaign, Hearne worked with White House presidential adviser Karl Rove and the Republican National Committee to identify potential voting fraud in battleground states, three people who worked with Hearne at the time said in interviews. Party activists say that Hearne has become one of the most important Republicans on voting-fraud issues in recent years.

A resume posted on the Web site of Hearne's law firm showed that during the 2004 presidential campaign, Hearne was "responsible for advising the campaign on national litigation and election-law strategy as well as overseeing local counsel.... From September through the election, Hearne traveled to every battleground state and oversaw more than 65 different lawsuits that concerned the outcome of the election."

Although Hearne has a reputation as a committed partisan, as a partner at Lathrop & Gage he has represented private citizens faced with losing their homes or properties to eminent domain claims. Associates say that Hearne has personally represented more than 50 property owners. "It's a passion of his not just because of his belief that eminent domain claims are not right, but because he wants to help the people," says an attorney who has worked with him on election-law issues.

But politics is clearly also a Hearne passion. Among his mementos are personal letters from President Bush and Karl Rove thanking him for his work in the 2004 campaign and a picture of Hearne holding up and examining a ballot with a "dimpled chad" in Broward County as a representative of the Bush campaign during the contested 2000 Florida recount.

In February 2005, with encouragement from Rove and the White House, Hearne founded the American Center for Voting Rights, which represented itself as a nonpartisan watchdog group looking for voting fraud. Critics, including the liberal group People for the American Way and state chapters of the League of Women Voters, say that the group was a Republican front and pursued only allegations of voting fraud by Democrats. The group now appears to be defunct.

Citing Hearne's work, Rove told the Republican National Lawyers Association in a speech on April 7, 2006: "We are, in some parts of the country, I am afraid to say, beginning to look like we have elections like those run in countries where the guys in charge are ... colonels in mirrored sunglasses." .....

Quote:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/reports/u...ory/16224.html
U.S. attorneys
rss
2006 Missouri's election was ground zero for GOP
By Greg Gordon | McClatchy Newspapers

* Posted on Wednesday, May 2, 2007
...The preoccupation with ballot fraud in Missouri was part of a wider national effort that critics charge was aimed at protecting the Republican majority in Congress by dampening Democratic turnout. That effort included stiffer voter-identification requirements, wholesale purges of names from lists of registered voters and tight policing of liberal get-out-the-vote drives.

Bush administration officials deny those claims. But they've gotten traction in recent weeks because three of the U.S. attorneys ousted by the Justice Department charge that they lost their jobs because they failed to prove Republican allegations of voter fraud. They say their inquiries found little evidence to support the claims.

Few have endorsed the strategy of pursuing allegations of voter fraud with more enthusiasm than White House political guru Karl Rove. And nowhere has the plan been more apparent than in Missouri.....

....._The Missouri General Assembly—with the White House's help—narrowly passed a law requiring voters to show photo identification cards, which Carnahan estimated would disenfranchise 200,000 voters. The state Supreme Court voided the law as unconstitutional before the election.

_Two weeks before the election, the St. Louis Board of Elections sent letters threatening to disqualify 5,000 newly registered minority voters if they failed to verify their identities promptly, a move—instigated by a Republican appointee—that may have violated federal law. After an outcry, the board rescinded the threat.

_Five days before the election, Schlozman, then interim U.S. attorney in Kansas City, announced indictments of four voter-registration workers for a Democratic-leaning group on charges of submitting phony applications, despite a Justice Department policy discouraging such action close to an election.

_In an interview with conservative talk-show host Hugh Hewitt a couple of days before the election, <h3>Rove said he'd just visited Missouri and had met with Republican strategists who "are well aware of" the threat of voter fraud.</h3> He said the party had "a large number of lawyers that are standing by, trained and ready to intervene" to keep the election clean.

Missouri Republicans have railed about alleged voter fraud ever since President Bush narrowly won the White House in the chaotic 2000 election and Missouri Republican Sen. John Ashcroft lost to a dead man, the late Democratic Gov. Mel Carnahan, whose name stayed on the ballot weeks after he died in a plane crash.

Joining the push to contain "voter fraud" were Sen. Christopher Bond, R-Mo., who charged that votes by dogs and dead people had defeated Ashcroft, Missouri Republican Gov. Matt Blunt, whose stinging allegations of fraud were later debunked, and St. Louis lawyer Mark "Thor" Hearne, national counsel to Bush's 2004 re-election campaign, who set up a nonprofit group to publicize allegations of voter fraud.

Many Democrats contend that the efforts amount to a voter-suppression campaign.

"The real problem has never been vote fraud," said Rep. William Lacy Clay, D-Mo. "It's access to the polls. In the last 50 years, no one in Missouri has been prosecuted for impersonating someone else at the polls. But thousands of eligible voters have been denied their constitutional rights. . . . It's sickening.".....

Quote:

http://www.firedupmissouri.com/rove_..._lott_writings

omgA <a target="_blank" href="http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003100.php#more">post this afternoon at the excellent TPM Muckraker</a> demonstrates that a speech on "Voter Fraud" delivered by Karl Rove to the Republican National Lawyers Association in April 2006 drew heavily on a New York Post op-ed co-authored by nutty professor John Lott: <blockquote>...we took a hard look at just where Karl Rove got the bulk of the voter fraud stories he imparted at an <a target="_blank" href="http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002982.php">April 7, 2006 speech</a> before the Republican National Lawyer's Association. We noted that three of the seven "hot spots" he mentioned in that speech appeared to come directly from a <a target="_blank" href="http://www.americanretiredpersons.com/InsuranceServices/itsfraud.htm">2000 New York Post op-ed</a> by Stephen Bronars and John Lott, Jr.... </blockquote>Missourians <a target="_blank" href="/lott_id_hearing">may recall</a> that John Lott was the creator of written "expert" testimony submitted to the Cole County Circuit Court by <a target="_blank" href="/cummins_hearne_doj_purge">voter fraud hypester Thor Hearne</a> as the prominent GOP attorney spearheaded the third-party legal defense of Missouri's Republican-built Photo ID Voting Law, which the courts would <a target="_blank" href="http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/09/missouri-judge-rules-voter-id-law.php">ultimately find unconstitutional</a>. That Rove and Hearne were relying on writings from the same discredited academic to stoke the bogus flames of "voter fraud" fear and agitate for the constitutionality of a suppressive Photo ID voter identification law is yet another indicator of the national pervasiveness and thorough coordination of the effort by Republican Party operatives at the highest levels.

One giant, criminal cabal, ethics, oaths to the constitution, all compromised in the quest for total political domination, at any cost, injustice, or consequence. I once would not have thought it was even possible for so many to be so united, and yet so compromised....empty, corrupt vessels on a fool's mission resulting in the destruction of the republic.