Leftist Judge Rules Against Ballot Security To Prevent Election Fraud!

fraud Leftist Judge rules against Ballot Security to Prevent Election Fraud!

31 years ago, the RNC entered into a consent agreement to settle a lawsuit brought by the DNC not to peruse suspected voter fraud or prevent voter fraud. The RNC has been held to that consent agreement to this day. Each time they go to court to remove the consent agreement, a particular judge comes out of retirement to rule against the RNC requests.

New Jersey District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise, appointed by Jimmy Carter, ruled to keep in place a 30-year-old restriction against the RNC “which is national in scope, limiting the Republican National Committee ‘s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention”

The judge cited voter suppression of minorities outweighing the impact of voter fraud.

There are serious reasons for concern of voter fraud:

1) Pew Research Center states in 2012 -

“Voter registration in the United States largely reflects its 19th-century origins and has not kept pace with advancing technology and a mobile society. States’ systems must be brought into the 21st century to be more accurate, cost-effective, and efficient.

Research commissioned by the Pew Center on the States highlights the extent of the challenge:

  • Approximately 24 million—one of every eight—voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.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.”

2)  The American people support voter ID laws by an overwhelming 74% (Washington Post.)

Hispanic Americans support voter ID laws by an overwhelming 71 % (Pew Research Center.)

3) The presidential election of 2000 was won by only 500 votes.

4) Local elections can be won by just a handful of votes.

5) People who believe their vote does not count or will be canceled out by fraud are unlikely to bother to vote.

Multiple left leaning groups are being criminally investigated for voter fraud schemes in the swing state of Florida.

6) 160 counties in the U.S. have more registered voters than people living in those counties.

Question: Have you seen any documented examples of voter suppression?

They appear to only be in Michelle Obama’s dreams.

Judicial Watch challenged her accusation, but it went unanswered.

Scott Gessler, CO Sec of State stated: “These accusations are built on a foundation of sand,” referring to voter suppression. He also states that the opposition to voter ID is well-financed and organized. “Disenfranchisement hysteria is, frankly, silly”

During a 1981 gubernatorial election in New Jersey, concern was raised over voter suppression; and the Democratic National Committee sued the RNC. That one incident in NJ 30 years ago came with a “consent decree”, stipulating that the RNC was prohibited from pre-election “ballot security” activates:

As modified in 1987, the Decree defined “ballot security activates” to mean “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.

One section is particularly disturbing. Areas where minorities are living are in particular off limits for voter fraud protection measures. What message does this send to the DNC? Answer: Voter fraud will be allowed in minority areas; please target your efforts in those neighborhoods as this court is giving you a get-out-of-jail free card:

(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;

It should come as no surprise that voter fraud issues are rampant in the swing states districts where minorities make up a large percentage of the population.

Furthermore, the Court held that the RNC was barred from asserting this argument because the RNC willingly entered the Decree as a means of settling the initial 1981 lawsuit and the RNC again consented to the Decree, as modified, in 1987. The District Court also held that the Decree did not violate the First Amendment because, under the Decree, the RNC is free to communicate with state parties about subjects other than ballot security. Additionally, the Court noted that the First Amendment applies only to state actions and does not prevent private parties from agreeing to refrain from certain types of speech.

Prior to the 2012 elections, the RNC again attempted to have the consent decree vacated. An Obama-appointed Judge Joseph Greenway, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit, denied the petition.

This past week’s ruling on Monday, January the 14th by the SCOTUS to refuse to hear the case brought by the RNC to end the consent order suggests there will be no end to rampant voter fraud; this ruling is an open invitation to the DNC and it’s affiliates to perpetrate fraud with no repercussions, accountability, or scrutiny.

Obama won the 2012 election by 400,000 votes in 4 swing states. All of these states had precincts that had statistical miracles of 99% of the vote going to Obama and voter registration numbers far in excess of their actual population counts. Additionally, all of these same states had claims of voter machine errors changing individual votes cast from Romney to Obama. With the RNC’s hands tied, barring them from any action to remedy the situation, we are bound for more of the same in the upcoming 2014 and 2016 election cycles.

No U.S. citizen should ever have to wonder if their vote was canceled out by a fraudulent vote. The system is set up to fail the legitimate voter; we demand integrity, full transparency, and accountability in our elections!

What is the solution to this predicament? See my article Addressing Voter Fraud – A 14 Point Plan For 2013. Force action by your State Representatives and Governors, or be content to be obsolete.

The NEXT STEP For Fair Elections In 2014 And 2016

I Voted SC The NEXT STEP for Fair Elections in 2014 And 2016

There are several great organizations documenting REAL voter fraud. There are also many local news reports from ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX confirming or reporting on such antics. Unfortunately, these stories never make it to the national news. Apparently, the Big News Networks and national newspapers do not find it newsworthy. The mass of evidence is far beyond anecdotal, as those large media outlets would like the public to believe. Many articles in the media have attempted to make laughing stocks of those reporting on these topics. Don’t be fooled; this is an attempt to discredit by mockery.

In a previous article, I provide a list of remedies to virtually eliminate voter fraud. The list is not rocket science! The list of solutions is purely logical, simple, and common-sense; anyone with a problem-solving ability could have done the same. Many have; some of the ideas are not new but are not typically presented in a comprehensive solutions plan.

Human nature seems to prevail. The daily drama of the never-ending 24/7 news cycle have taken our eyes off the ball. It is more fun and entertaining to see the newest of stories each day than to take action for long-term fixes. When the election cycles of 2014 and 2016 roll around, we will again be shocked and have more dramatic news accounts of fraud. Sadly, they will have been preventable. What have we done to fix it? Many have tried, but this seems to be a solo effort; the parties do not collaborate.

Enforcing existing law is not a solution. Nor is reporting on the fraud without purposeful action to remedy the loopholes.

Voter fraud is not selective in a political side; all sides have been caught red-handed in the action over history. However, we now have a problem that is more one-sided; and those currently in power who intentionally benefit from fraud look the other way. It is no longer a problem of a few instances; we now have a deliberate institutional underground that is promoting illegal activities, primarily in the swing states that have the potential to sway the election results. Some of these organizations, ACORN and it’s new offshoots, have been documented as surviving at the expense of the Federal Government.

Important local elections are also in jeopardy. The problem is widespread and accepted.

This is America, folks! We should feel embarrassed and ashamed that our voting system is so broken. Many 3rd world nations have systems that outshine our voting system. So often, the infrastructure is deemed as needing to be brought up to the 21st Century; why are our voting laws and system so antiquated? Where are the progressives on this issue of infrastructure updates? More importantly, where are the conservatives legislators and grassroots groups?

Seriously, how hard is it to make this happen? For those who oppose this complete overhaul of infrastructure, I ask you a simple question: WHY?

The following sites document and promote existing voter law enforcement or document voter fraud. Why can’t conservatives collaborate and support a comprehensive voter fraud legislation package?


Photo credit: Cali4Beach (Creative Commons)

Addressing Voter Fraud – A 14 Point Plan For 2013

voter fraud Addressing Voter Fraud – A 14 Point Plan for 2013

The sheer number of voter fraud stories in the 2012 elections the media refuses to investigate is staggering. Hundreds of legitimate concerns potentially impacting thousands of votes have been both raised and ignored. There are, however, many examples proven and confirmed by Mainstream Media sources. They are well-documented examples such as:

-160 counties across the U.S. have more voters on their voter registration rolls than live voters living in their district.

-Well over 100 % of registered voters casting votes, and statistical “miracles” of 100% of 59 precincts (known as divisions in Philadelphia) voting unanimously for only one candidate.

-And more statistical “miracles” occurred where only one candidate received 100% of the vote in dozens of urban precincts in Ohio, nine of them in Cleavland.

Please note that while these statistics may seem like a small percentage of the vote, they are in the crucial swing states. These “small” issues can decide the election outcome when they occur in such states that carry critical electoral votes.

Currently, only three states require proof of U.S. citizenship to vote: Georgia, Alabama, and Kansas. Arizona’s attempt to enact citizenship proof was invalidated by the U.S appeals court in San Francisco prior to the 2012 election. The invalidation came after the people of Arizona approved the requirement in a 2004 vote. The U.S. Supreme Court is to hear arguments early in 2013 and make it’s ruling in June 2013 on the issue of all States’ ability to enact such laws. That same 9th Circuit Court stated that a 1993 law bars the Arizona registration requirement. The federal measure establishes a national voter application and requires every state to “accept and use” it. The law “does not give states room to add their own requirements” to the federal application. The 1993 law was known as the Motor Voter Law, a separate provision that requires states to let residents register to vote when applying for a driver’s license. County Supervisors of elections in Florida claim these Motor Voter laws prevent them from verifying citizenship. The only way for them to investigate is if they receive a tip, according to an NBC-2 investigative report.

Additionally, only fifteen states require photo ID; and thirty five states have no photo requirements. Again, no proof of citizenship is required in the combined total of forty seven of the states.

The refusal of activist judges and certain states to require ID to vote is disenfranchising to all US citizens who vote legally. Fraudulent votes cancel out real votes.

Americans from all political parties have spoken in an overwhelming majority for the need of proof of identity when voting.

A poll by the Washington Post in 2012 indicates that “Almost three-quarters of all Americans support the idea that people should have to show photo identification to vote, even though they are nearly as concerned about voter suppression as they are about fraud in presidential elections, according to a new Washington Post poll.”

“Q: In your view, should voters in the United States be required to show official, government-issued photo identification — such as a drivers license — when they cast ballots on Election Day, or shouldn’t they have to do this? 74% – Should be required vs. 23% Should not be required.”

If the Democrat Party leaders were truly interested in a legitimate election, they would have advocated to give out free ID to all those who they claim would be “disenfranchised” if forced to prove their identity to vote. The UN election observers/poll watchers in 2012 made comments about how surprised they were that the U.S. voting system is purely based on trust and that voters are not required to prove their identity.

The fact is, the Dems are not interested in a “true vote.” What exists today is an organized strategy edge they are not willing to give up; it gives them just enough edge to win elections. Why is there a propensity and advocacy by some to give away almost everything for free, except for legitimate ID’s? In our society, a valid ID is a necessity to function; it is a basic need of every citizen.

Conservatives are not typically the party of free handouts. However, in this case, I recommend a national program of free Photo ID for anyone who claims they can’t afford one. This would be a program funded by the federal government to all states.

This program would end the debate over a “poll tax.”

1) The program would have guidelines to meet and restrict standards of proof of citizenship prior to issuing the ID. The ID’s must be issued at least 100 days prior to any election in order to be used in an election to vote. This is to allow a bi-partisan team to complete an examination of all ID’s issued before elections. This bi-partisan team will consist of certified “ID watchers” from both political parties; this program would work much the same as poll watchers. The “ID watchers” would be given complete access to all documents used to issue ID’s, including the photos to match the age of the ID holder.

2) Each respective political party could promote new government-issued IDs the same way they drive voter registrations. They would be responsible for ensuring their constituents become legally able to vote in elections. There would no longer be claims of disenfranchisement of anyone.

3) If any ID is found to be issued fraudulently, the individual in question would be flagged at their precinct and removed from the voter rolls; and criminal charges would be filed. If any ID issuer in the state’s ID center is found to be issuing ID’s that are not accompanied by legitimate proof of citizenship, serious federal criminal penalties would be charged.

4) The department that would address these criminal sanctions would be be run by a bipartisan team, not the DOJ, and have 100% transparency. This transparency would be available to the public via a website. All discrepancies would be reported on the website for anyone to review. All questionable documents would be scanned and available on the website; with the individual ID applicant name redacted, protocols would be developed to create a check and balance system.

These would be federal dollars well spent. The program would cost virtually nothing, as there is almost no legal citizen in this country who does not already have a government-issued state ID. However, the number of legitimate voters who are being disenfranchised by fraud canceling their vote is likely beyond our belief. We have only scratched the surface of the fraud reports.

5) All states should be required to end all ID-issuing to non-citizens without labeling them as such.

A driver’s license is all it takes to vote. Some states are issuing drivers’ licenses to non-citizens, which enables them to go to the polls and cast votes. I suggest that drivers’ licenses issued to non- citizens must be stamped on the front with any politically correct name the left finds to be inoffensive. Of course, they will find the stamp offensive in and of itself. However, we must find a way to allow only US citizens to vote. Many states currently issue a non-standard ID for those under the legal drinking age. We propose the same for non-U.S. citizens.

Any state issuing ID’s to non-citizens within a margin of more than .5% without marking those ID’s appropriately would lose its ability to cast electoral votes in a general election. It would also lose its ability to send representatives from their state to participate in the federal government for a minimum of 1 year.

6) The double vote: Prior to the elections and after elections, a cross-reference list is to be compiled of all who are registered or have voted in all of the states. Currently, there is no such requirement. If anyone was found to have voted more than once, within or outside of their state, severe criminal charges would be imposed, to include mandatory jail time. Anyone who is registered in more than one state or county or precinct will be sent a notification to choose their precinct; if there is no response, they will be removed from all rolls other than their last identifiable and known address. Conspiracy to commit voter fraud by any party official advocating or directing others on how to circumvent the system would also be prosecuted in a similar manner to the full extent of the law.

7) Absentee ballots: Choosing to vote absentee is a right that is imperative to retain. This right also creates concern, as it is the ripest for fraud. A photocopy of the voter’s ID would have to accompany the absentee ballot. That ID information would be crosschecked upon receipt for legitimacy, including death records. Should the ID raise any red flags, the bipartisan team would contact the voter to ensure legitimacy. A protocol for disputes would be put in place for deciding any questionable ballots.

8) Provisional Ballots: All standard ID requirements would apply. No affidavits would be accepted for sole proof of eligibility.

9) The dead vote: Any person on the voter rolls over 80 years of age would be verified for legitimacy by the “ID Watchers”, by home visit if necessary. Absentee ballots would be matched to live individuals and cross-referenced to death records. All suspect registrations and/or ballots would be investigated by the nonpartisan committee.

10) Military vote: All ballots would be sent out to military personal far in advance of elections, within one week of the official ballot being established. Any state that does not monitor their own counties for this standard would be denied representation in DC for a one year.

11) The mentally challenged or criminally insane vote: Any setting where votes are cast without consent from the family or legal guardian from institutional settings housing the mentally challenged would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Convicted criminals (where the law applies) would have their vote tossed out, cross-checking all relevant criminal records to ballots. All participating staff would be charged criminally if found to be helping those individuals to the polls or requesting absentee ballots on their behalf.

12) Technology vs. Paper Ballots: Technology and software have the ability to be manipulated by programmers without the ability to verify results or fraud. If states choose to use electronic voting machines, those votes must accompany paper ballots for verification. Similar to random drug tests, precincts and counties with known past issues, recent concerns raised by reports from individuals, and random sampling of others would be used to monitor the integrity of the system. Any state opting out of this system would be ineligible for representation in the federal government. Those states not in compliance may continue to have local elections in their desired manner.

13) All software programs utilized to tabulate votes at the state and county levels are to be checked by the bi-artisan team. This will take place before elections, spot-checked during and after elections. If any program is found to be intentionally written to change outcomes, those involved will be prosecuted; and that company and all individuals involved would be barred from any further software production or participating in any election process. All bids for voting machine upkeep and programming would be put out for bids. No contracts would be awarded at any gov’t level without a fair bidding process to be overseen by the bipartisan teams.

Only U.S. companies would be allowed to participate in voting tabulation or software used in any of the operations in this system. This is to ensure all standards are met and to ensure U.S. laws prevail and will be enforced if any irregularities occur.

14) Lastly, any state, county, or precinct that does not allow certified poll watchers to actively observe the voting process and ballot counting would be denied the ability to submit their results to be counted.

The 2012 election debacle should be the last time we as citizens of the USA see this type of alleged fraud perpetrated on our great country. There should never be a question in any U.S. citizen’s mind that an election was fair or legitimate. Even the perception of fraud is unacceptable. While there is no claim that the 2012 election would have turned out differently, it is imperative that the U.S. maintains the utmost concern for voter integrity from here forward. There is no justifiable excuse for any concerns over the legitimacy of the elections in the U.S.A.

The goal is to ensure that all citizens feel their vote counts; this will also drive greater participation in the voting process.

If you want to see this plan set in motion, forward this information to all your representatives and governors. Email it to all your friends and family. And don’t forget to post it on social media sites or blogs. Please help to get the word out. We demand our votes be counted!


(Edited by Jim Griffin.)