• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The truth about voter fraud and intimidation in the 2004 election

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This is a non partisan report about voter fraud and intimidation in the 2004 presidential election...............What it shows is that democrats were the ones who committed voter fraud and felony acts against republicans offices and vehicles and there were no cases of republicans doing that to democrats.........

http://www.ac4vr.com/reports/072005/default.html

Of particular interest in Wisconsin and Pennsyvania two states that Kerry won by very close margins that if votes were counted correctly President Bush would have won...........
 
Last edited:

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Not surprising, here is what went on in my fine state!:roll:

"Illinois
(A) Nine Democrats Found Guilty Of Vote-Buying In East St. Louis

On June 29, 2005, a federal jury convicted Charles Powell, Chairman of the East St. Louis Democratic Party, and four others of felony conspiracy to commit vote fraud. The jury deliberated for more than five hours before convicting the five “of scheming to buy votes with cash, cigarettes and liquor last November to try to get key Democrats elected.” Prosecutors alleged that money for the vote-buying “flowed from the Belleville-based St. Clair County Democrats to their East St. Louis counterparts in a bid to elect certain Democratic candidates, including Mark Kern as St. Clair County Board chairman.” Each count carries up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. (199)

The five convictions on June 29 brought the total number of East St. Louis Democrats found guilty of vote-buying in the last four months to nine. On March 22, 2005, four Democrat activists in East St. Louis pleaded guilty to paying voters $5 to $10 to vote for the “Democratic ticket” in the November 2004 election. Those pleading guilty included three precinct committeemen and one precinct worker. According to the Belleville News-Democrat, the money used to buy votes came from the St. Clair County Democratic Central Committee, which paid $73,326 to East St. Louis Democratic precinct committeemen days before the election. (200)

Powell, then an East St. Louis City Councilman, was indicted in March 2005 along with four others on charges of “paying residents to vote in the Nov. 2 election to try to influence the races for Supreme Court, County Board chairman and president.” Powell and three of the others charged served as Democrat precinct committeemen. At the time, all five pleaded innocent to the charges. (201) Powell subsequently lost his bid for re-election to the City Council in April 2005. (202)

Among those convicted with Powell was Kelvin Ellis, the city’s Director of Regulatory Affairs and a Democratic precinct committeeman. (203) Ellis was already in jail at the time of his indictment charged in January 2005 with plotting the murder of a witness to a federal vote fraud investigation. According to the indictment, Ellis plotted to kill a witness who told the FBI that he had committed election fraud and other offenses. (204) “[W]hen voters are paid for their votes, our democracy is corrupted, and corrupted for all,” said U.S. Attorney Ronald Tenpas after announcing the indictments. (205) "
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Navy Pride said:
This is a non partisan report
No, it's not.

The AC4VR is comprised of two key high-level GOP operatives: Mark F. "Thor" Hearne, the General Counsel for Bush/Cheney '04, Inc., and Jim Dyke, the Communications Director for the RNC.

Sounds non-partisan to me. :roll:
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
shuamort said:
No, it's not.

The AC4VR is comprised of two key high-level GOP operatives: Mark F. "Thor" Hearne, the General Counsel for Bush/Cheney '04, Inc., and Jim Dyke, the Communications Director for the RNC.

Sounds non-partisan to me. :roll:
I think you meant to say "Sounds partisan to me" or you were being sarcastic.

Either way, I guess this ruins the credibility.
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
alex said:
I think you meant to say "Sounds partisan to me" or you were being sarcastic.

Either way, I guess this ruins the credibility.
Sarcasm. That's why the rolling eyes.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
From the site.........

"The American Center For Voting Rights (ACVR) was founded in February 2005 to protect the election process and zealously guard the constitutional right of all citizens to participate in deciding elections in a fair and equal manner free from discrimination, intimidation and fraud. ACVR will defend the election process through on-going civil litigation. ACVR’s activities will include voter education concerning election law and the election process to increase public understanding and thereby confidence in the fairness and outcome of elections. ACVR will sponsor symposiums and conferences with prominent legal scholars and election officials to address ways to improve the election process and increase public confidence that these processes contribute to fair and honest elections. ACVR is a non-partisan, non-profit organization that neither supports nor endorses any political party or candidate."

So either they are lying, and in great danger of a lawsuit, or you don't have your facts straight.;)


Further more, the legal statement reads as follows, sounds like the NAACP to me.:)

The American Center for Voting Rights is a non-profit organization, which is established for charitable purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The organization shall not carry on any activity not permitted to be carried on by an organization exempt from Federal income tax under section 501(c)(3).
The American Center for Voting Rights does no support or endorse any political party or candidate.
 
Last edited:

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
This is getting more and more hinky the more I read about it:
We called him this morning to see if we could ask him a few questions about the ACVR, his involvement as their apparent-organizer and his role as lead contributor for the 31-Page report [PDF] on the Ohio Election produced by the ACVR in time for Monday's hearings.

Hearne's response, "Not right now...Send me some information about who you're involved with and I'll give you a call back."

We persisted nonetheless, and asked if he could describe any of the "voter education and outreach" programs which the "About Us" page at the ACVR website describes as one of their activities. Or if he could tell us about any of the "symposiums and conferences" the group claims to be sponsoring as also mentioned on the site.

His response, "We certainly anticipate those. You keep an eye on our website."

We pressed on...


BRAD BLOG: How is it that you guys were invited to testify for a U.S. House Committee hearing after just forming so recently?

MARK F. (THOR) HEARNE, II: You'd have to ask the [House] committee...

BB: But to be invited as the only such organization so quickly after being formed? How did that happen?

HEARNE: I couldn't tell you. We're out here doing what we're doing and we accepted the offer.


He was, indeed, rather terse in the answers to our attempted questions, and so we wondered why he didn't wish to be more forthcoming about his "non-partisan" group.

"Sounds to me like your coming from the Left," he told us.
Snip
BB: You claim to be a non-partisan, tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization, but so far it seems that the organization is run by all high-level Republicans like yourself...

DYKE: You'll see an expansion of participants from other legal minds as well as academic minds that come from both parties in the future...
We asked Dyke about the 31-page report they gave to the House Committee on Monday which purports to be about problems in Ohio's Election. We wondered why the only thing their report largely discusses is allegations that liberal and progressive Voter Registration groups signed up voters such as "Dick Tracy" and "Mary Poppins" and contentions that Registration Workers were being paid in crack cocaine.

This seems odd given the hundreds and, really, thousands of reports of actual Election Day "irregularities" in Ohio, including long lines where voters in heavy Democratic areas were forced to wait from 4 to 10 hours to vote in some cases, and many precincts having fewer voting machines for the General Election than they had during the Primary.


DYKE: The facts that are put forward in the Ohio report, is really a compendium of facts from police reports...there's no effort to make things up. We're working from actual reports...it's an effort to put things forward to give people greater confidence in our voting system.


Again, we pressed him about the documented reports and hours and hours of film footage showing such lines in predominately minority and Democratic precincts:


Yeah, on I that, I think what we did was look to evidence based in fact...I don’t know if you read the testimony from the hearings...a man by the name of William Anthony who drove around...he said there were long lines everywhere, not just in minority precincts. So those reports are different from police testimony who said there were a hundred...or over a hundred reported incidence of voter registration fraud. It's not an accusation, it's something that's supported by police reports and court records.

BB: Most of the well-known Election Reform and Voting Rights groups, nearly 100 of them, have joined VelvetRevolution.us as Affiliates and have endorsed our "Divestiture for Democracy" campaign against the Voting Machine Companies. We are issue-oriented, not party-oriented, and as your organization claims to be in support of "Free and Honest" elections, I'd like to invite you to endorse our campaign, would you be willing to do so?

DYKE: Well, we'll look into. Send me some information about your organization and we can look into it.

BB: Where are you located, by the way?

DYKE: I'm Charleston, South Carolina.

BB: The Internic record for your group says you're a Dallas, TX group?

DYKE: That's the company that designed the website.

BB: I see. What company is that?

DYKE: I'd have to look into and get back to you.

BB: You don't recall their name?

DYKE: I'll have to check and get back to you on that.
So much more to quote. But check out the links for yourself as it turns out the HQ is a UPS store in Texas.

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001276.htm
http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001279.htm
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Deegan said:
You can spin it for days with your internet links, or you could read the stories of REAL DEMOCRATS being tried, and convicted of voter fraud. I suspect you'll choose the latter.:roll:
I read 'em. It's embarrassing for the democrats and they're idiots for trying it. But there's also the problem that we've got a 501(c)(3) that's acting with political motivation which is against the tax charter. Moreover, there are fishy doings too. It's not either/or as you're alledging.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
shuamort said:
I read 'em. It's embarrassing for the democrats and they're idiots for trying it. But there's also the problem that we've got a 501(c)(3) that's acting with political motivation which is against the tax charter. Moreover, there are fishy doings too. It's not either/or as you're alledging.

Like I said, sounds like the NAACP, the only difference of course is the stories they tell are truth, not fiction. Still, if they are found to be a partisan group, they should lose their status, but again, like the NAACP.....when pigs fly.:roll:
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
shuamort said:
No, it's not.

The AC4VR is comprised of two key high-level GOP operatives: Mark F. "Thor" Hearne, the General Counsel for Bush/Cheney '04, Inc., and Jim Dyke, the Communications Director for the RNC.

Sounds non-partisan to me. :roll:
The guy that put out the report was on the Michael Medved radio show today.......He said he was non partisan although in the past belonged to the democratic party...........
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Deegan said:
From the site.........

"The American Center For Voting Rights (ACVR) was founded in February 2005 to protect the election process and zealously guard the constitutional right of all citizens to participate in deciding elections in a fair and equal manner free from discrimination, intimidation and fraud. ACVR will defend the election process through on-going civil litigation. ACVR’s activities will include voter education concerning election law and the election process to increase public understanding and thereby confidence in the fairness and outcome of elections. ACVR will sponsor symposiums and conferences with prominent legal scholars and election officials to address ways to improve the election process and increase public confidence that these processes contribute to fair and honest elections. ACVR is a non-partisan, non-profit organization that neither supports nor endorses any political party or candidate."

So either they are lying, and in great danger of a lawsuit, or you don't have your facts straight.;)


Further more, the legal statement reads as follows, sounds like the NAACP to me.:)

The American Center for Voting Rights is a non-profit organization, which is established for charitable purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. The organization shall not carry on any activity not permitted to be carried on by an organization exempt from Federal income tax under section 501(c)(3).
The American Center for Voting Rights does no support or endorse any political party or candidate.
Thank you, to bad the democrats in this forum won't take the time to read the report.............
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Navy Pride said:
The guy that put out the report was on the Michael Medved radio show today.......He said he was non partisan although in the past belonged to the democratic party...........
In the past? So did Norm Coleman.
 

Hoot

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
18
Location
State of Confusion
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
After what the Republicans pulled down in Florida, 2000, you should be thanking your lucky stars that Bush is even in the White House, because it's obvious that more Floridians intended to vote for Gore then they did Bush.

And as Bush said..."Nominating a new justice to the US Supreme court is very important...after all, the Supreme court gets to pick who's president."
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Hoot said:
After what the Republicans pulled down in Florida, 2000, you should be thanking your lucky stars that Bush is even in the White House, because it's obvious that more Floridians intended to vote for Gore then they did Bush.

And as Bush said..."Nominating a new justice to the US Supreme court is very important...after all, the Supreme court gets to pick who's president."
I think I'll take the word of the SCOTUS over your own, but thanks for the input.;)
 

debate_junkie

Worst Nightmare
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
19
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
Navy Pride said:
This is a non partisan report about voter fraud and intimidation in the 2004 presidential election...............What it shows is that democrats were the ones who committed voter fraud and felony acts against republicans offices and vehicles and there were no cases of republicans doing that to democrats.........

http://www.ac4vr.com/reports/072005/default.html

Of particular interest in Wisconsin and Pennsyvania two states that Kerry won by very close margins that if votes were counted correctly President Bush would have won...........

Well if you're gonna include Pennsylvania... let's consider the hundreds of thousands of absentee ballot forms sent out by George Bush's campaign, urging people to vote by absentee ballot on his behalf. It is illegal to vote via absentee ballot in the state of PA if one is in town and able to go to the polls.

Did the Republican party scour my records? My job, my personal life to know whether I was eligible to vote via absentee ballot or not? If they did... I say I need to go to Washington and start slapping suits for invasion of privacy.

As for the absentee ballots in prisons... it is COMMON practice, because not everyone in prison is serving felonies. However, if we're going to be a stickler on rights... those serving time in prison for NON felony offenses do have the right to vote. Who should then be responsible for ensuring only those with the LEGAL right to vote, do so, within the prison system? Absentee ballots cannot be opened before the day of the election, so how is anyone to know until after? This is the government after all... the county boards should be able to have access to records of prison voters. Or would that be a violation of their rights?

I abhor the implication that PA somehow fixed an election for Kerry, when more notably, the larger cities, i.e. Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Allentown and at times Harrisburg, have boosted Democratic candidates vote totals WELL beyond those of Republicans.. and it's been consistent throughout my entire life.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Hoot said:
After what the Republicans pulled down in Florida, 2000, you should be thanking your lucky stars that Bush is even in the White House, because it's obvious that more Floridians intended to vote for Gore then they did Bush.
Yeah, objecting to an illigitimate recount not allowed by Florida election law and changing of vote qualification in the middle of an election(against Florida law), damn Republicans, how dare they.:roll:

And as Bush said..."Nominating a new justice to the US Supreme court is very important...after all, the Supreme court gets to pick who's president."
I said this in another thread, the U.S. Supreme court sent the judgement back to the court and gave them a chance to make the proper decision, that did not happen, so the U.S. Supreme Court simply ended the recount because it was not allowed by Florida election law. One machine recount, one hand recount.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
P.S.- An independent media recount showed that Bush did win by applying the standards set by voting law within the state, but why let facts get in the way.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Hoot said:
After what the Republicans pulled down in Florida, 2000, you should be thanking your lucky stars that Bush is even in the White House, because it's obvious that more Floridians intended to vote for Gore then they did Bush.

And as Bush said..."Nominating a new justice to the US Supreme court is very important...after all, the Supreme court gets to pick who's president."
Here we go again...........In the county where the ballots could not be read democrats designed them.........A copy of the ballot was published in the newspaper 2 weeks before the election.............Not one complaint about it.......Third grade school children were given the ballots and they got it right.....Little old ladies that can play watch 16 bingo cards at one time could not figure out the ballot........

The Florida Supreme Court, all democrats voted to let the recount go on using 59 different standards in 59 counties..........

The SCOTUS stopped the count under the equal protection phrase of the 14th amendment..........

You really need to get over it...You belong to a loser party that lost in 2000, 2002 and 2004 and you will continue to lose as long as your party is so far to the left................

Get over it
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Hmm, now what is that person supposed to get over? The election of 2000 or 2004? Which one is still ok to talk about and which one isn't? Where are we drawing the line here?
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
shuamort said:
Hmm, now what is that person supposed to get over? The election of 2000 or 2004? Which one is still ok to talk about and which one isn't? Where are we drawing the line here?
He/she was talking about the 2000 election...........Even with all the irregularities in 2004 by the dems as outlined in the report President Bush won by over 3,000,000 votes and judging by the report should have won Pa. and Wisconsin too if the dems had not cheated.........
 

Hoot

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
18
Location
State of Confusion
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
LaMidRighter said:
Yeah, objecting to an illigitimate recount not allowed by Florida election law and changing of vote qualification in the middle of an election(against Florida law), damn Republicans, how dare they.:roll:

I said this in another thread, the U.S. Supreme court sent the judgement back to the court and gave them a chance to make the proper decision, that did not happen, so the U.S. Supreme Court simply ended the recount because it was not allowed by Florida election law. One machine recount, one hand recount.
You need to read "The Betrayal of America," by Vincent Bugliosi and you'd see the error of your ways.
 

Hoot

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
18
Location
State of Confusion
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
LaMidRighter said:
P.S.- An independent media recount showed that Bush did win by applying the standards set by voting law within the state, but why let facts get in the way.
You dare speak of "voting law" when you ignore the Florida State Law that allows the counting of undervotes...a count that was never completed before SCOTUS gave the election to Bush?! How convienent of you to support the law you like and ridicule the law that you don't.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Hoot said:
LaMidRighter said:
You need to read "The Betrayal of America," by Vincent Bugliosi and you'd see the error of your ways.

Why not just read moveon.org to get the truth..:roll: Burgliosi is a democrat partisan hack.......Why would anyone but a liberal believe anything he wrote?
 

Hoot

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
1,686
Reaction score
18
Location
State of Confusion
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Navy Pride said:
Hoot said:
Why not just read moveon.org to get the truth..:roll: Burgliosi is a democrat partisan hack.......Why would anyone but a liberal believe anything he wrote?
Bugliosi is not a Democrat. You should also read "Outrage," by Bugliosi about how OJ got away with murder, and of course, "Helter Skelter," about the Manson family, and if you can find it, "No Island of Sanity," about how SCOTUS allowed a sitting President to be sued in civil court.

Or just try reading, period. And no fair saying the last book you read was TV Guide! LOL
 
Top Bottom