Media Smears O’Keefe – Using Obama Election Lawyer
by Charles C. Johnson
Obama election lawyer Samuel Issacharoff (left). Source: NYU Law School
The left is desperate to quash James O’Keefe’s exposé of potential voter fraud in New Hampshire–and to prevent voter ID laws from being passed and enforced in states across the nation.
On Tuesday, during the New Hampshire primary election, members of O’Keefe’s Project Veritas recorded poll workers from both parties providing ballots in the names of recently deceased voters at multiple polling places across the state.
New Hampshire does not require voters to present photo identification at polling places. The state’s Republican legislature passed a voter ID law last year, but Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat, vetoed the measure, and the state senate failed to override his veto.
Left-wing groups and the Obama administration are targeting voter ID laws in advance of the 2012 election. Recently, for example, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder blocked South Carolina’s new voter ID law.
Ryan Reilly of Talking Points Memo (TPM) Muckracker has attacked the Project Veritas sting in an article alleging that “O’Keefe’s allies could face criminal charges on both the federal and state level for procuring ballots under false names.” Citing “election law experts,” Reilly concludes that the undercover video “doesn’t demonstrate a need for voter ID laws at all.”
The media has picked up Muckraker’s talking points (pun intended) and run with them. Salon.com, for example, smugly declares: “O’Keefe has pretty clearly violated the law and TPM reports that a federal prosecutor is reviewing his video. But at least he finally proved that voter fraud is a very real threat….As we all know, once you prove that something is hypothetically possible, it is a factual certainty that ACORN has done it.”
Even the Wall Street Journal fell into step, citing Reilly’s article: “Election law experts say James O’Keefe’s affiliates who got the ballots under false names could face criminal charges, as federal law bans not only the casting of such ballots, but their procurement as well, according to TPM.” Few of the media outlets repeating Reilly’s claims appear to have consulted “election law experts” with different opinions.
Curiously, one of the experts Reilly spoke to is Samuel Issacharoff of NYU Law School.
Issacharoff happened to be on Barack Obama’s legal team during the 2008 election, and assisted John Kerry’s campaign in 2004.
Obama used Issacharoff’s textbook, The Law of Democracy, while teaching at University of Chicago Law School–and Issacharoff thanked Obama on page x of the introduction for his help with the manuscript.
In 2009, Issacharoff regaled an admiring NYU audience with tales from Election Day in Chicago.
Reilly does not provide those highly relevant facts en route to smearing O’Keefe.
Indeed, Reilly may have deliberately sought opinions that would support his evidently predetermined conclusion that O’Keefe’s associates had committed a crime. He sent an email to an election law listserv in which he opined that the sting was “the largest coordinated attempt at in-person voter impersonation fraud,” and asked for comment.
It is unclear whether the experts Reilly interviewed knew more about the Project Veritas sting than he told them. He argues that O’Keefe’s colleagues violated a federal law prohibiting the “procurement” of ballots, even though they left each polling station without voting. However, that law applies to those who attempt to “deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process.” O’Keefe and Project Veritas were trying to defend the freedom and impartiality of that process.
Reilly also quotes UC-Irvine School of Law Professor Rick Hansen, who jokes that O’Keefe should “next show how easy it is to rob a bank with a plastic gun.” The more appropriate analogy is the undercover DEA agent who buys cocaine from a drug dealer to bust an entire smuggling ring, or perhaps the “white hat” computer hacker who highlights the security flaws of a computer system in the hope that they will be fixed.
Reilly quotes another professor, Henry Brady, who serves as Dean of the Goldman School of Public Policy at UC-Berkeley: “Yes, this shows it’s possible to do what they did but you have to ask yourself… how many illegal immigrants would risk a jail term to vote illegally?” In fact, in one recent example in Illinois, two Iranian non-citizens were prosecuted after having voted fraudulently for years, and now face possible deportation.
The enthusiasm with which left-wing media have rushed to accuse O’Keefe of voter fraud–while denying that voter fraud is a problem–is laughable. Reilly even admitted, in an interview with Current TV’s David Shuster, that “New Hampshire doesn’t have, like many other states, make you actually sign a piece of paper when you accept your ballot, so that’s something that could potentially have prevented this as well. They do have some lax rules…” (5:51 to 6:05 below).
Al Sharpton of MSNBC devoted an entire segment to accusing O’Keefe of committing fraud–”He actually increased fraud in the state by 1200 percent to try to prove there was a problem that didn’t exist”–deliberately obscuring the point of the Project Veritas sting, which was to show the potential for voter fraud in the absence of photo ID requirements.
Last night, a furious Gov. Lynch called for the investigators to be “prosecuted to the full extent of the law, if in fact they are found guilty of some criminal act.” (Normally, people are prosecuted before being found guilty.) Last July, in explaining his veto of the voter ID law, Gov. Lynch had claimed: “There is no voter fraud problem in New Hampshire. We already have strong elections laws that are effective in regulating our elections.”
O’Keefe’s real “crime” is blowing the whistle on the weaknesses in an election system that does not require voters to prove their identity. Though Project Veritas showed that it was as easy for Republicans to cheat as Democrats, the left knows which party benefits most from the status quo. That why they’ve made O’Keefe–not voter ID–the issue.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
131 Comments
Res ipsa loquitor
If 60 Minutes did the same thing there would be no laws broken, and that is the only test the Court can apply under the Equal Protection Clause.
Dont you dare touch my illegal voter……….. That is the only hope Obummer has in staying in the White House.
What a bunch of sleezy people!
Thanks, James for all your hard work.
O'Keefe just keeps chugging on… never know where he will strike next. Ya gott'a admire the kid, don'cha?
Ugh! I sure wouldn't want his legal bills.
.
I wonder how they might react in New Hampshire if a few dozen Tea Party out of state busses showed up on election morning ready to vote. Wisconsin may need a few hundred thousand guest voters to keep Walker in office. I wonder if you can get absentee ballots for deceased voters.
Off topic, but I bet it's real easy to take your CamelBak canteen hose, thread it down the back of your pants and around your hip to the front, and use it to simulate peeing on something.
Just sayin'.
Well done, James.
It is high comedy watching elected officials and the media shoot the messanger. Wonder what NH voters think of their so called "leaders"after this story broke.
The democRATs are the sole beneficiary of voter fraud. Every state must require a valid photo ID. The dems know that a certain percent of their votes come from the dead, illegals, convicts and prisoners. Keep the democratic plantation going.
The biggest fear of Liberal Democrats is an honest election. They have done more to damage the integrity of the electorate than any group in history. I'm about ready to demand the "purple ink" be ought out before all is lost and voting becomes a meaningless adventure.
New Hampshire voting procedures are extremely lax. I was shocked to see the poll workers providing an address to the supposed voters which they then confirmed. In Maryland, voters have to give their name, address, and birthday (but not year). Poll workers should not be prompting the voters with that information. It would still be very easy to memorize that information and vote in the name of someone else, but at least it takes a little bit more effort than in New Hampshire.
By the way, in Maryland it is illegal to use a camera or recorder in the voting site, so O'Keefe would really be in trouble here.
Stealing Elections 101. They learned this in college.
As long as O'keefe didn't vote I don't see a problem.
Keep on keeping on, O'Keefe. With enough recorded examples of fraud there will be change. Regular people of all political stripes hold their vote in high esteem.
If you think voting is "easy" in New Hampshire, come to Oregon, I'll bet that an astute investigator could register and successfully vote 500 times, no ID required, just a gas or electric bill…
Of course the left is attacking O'Keefe. He has proven (as if no one knew) that voter fraud is an on-going problem and to Democrats a right. Voter ID is the only way this will ever get stopped, and you can bet the farm that Democrats will fight it tooth and nail. If voter fraud was stopped, they might never win again.
This is but the tip of the iceberg! Come the presidential election, obama's minions will stop at nothing to get him re-elected. This will dwarf the election scandal that occurred in West Virginia by JFK's minions (i.e., they blatantly handed out millions of dollars in Logan County, WV in order to buy votes)
"In fact, in one recent example in Illinois, two Iranian non-citizens were prosecuted after having voted fraudulently for years, and now face possible deportation."
Now face POSSIBLE deportation? They should have been booted immediately. But of course, now that obama has "suspended deportations" for (coincidentally) 18 months, they'll probably get to vote again in 2012.
"Normally, people are prosecuted before being found guilty"
True, but PERSECUTION can happen anytime a corrupt politician chooses.
Democrats are such rancid hypocrites. O'Keefe is the victim here and is to be commended for exposing Big Government corruption. It figures the Obama goon squads in the media are wanting him prosecuted. He wasn't carrying a billy club was he?
The fact that Democrats fight so hard not to allow fair elections tells you they are cheating in the elections. It's time for an independent audit of EVERYTHING! The elections, the Fed, and every government agency. If they will cheat at the elections, they will cheat on everything else as well. I want to see serious jail time for those responsible for the fraud they are allowing. Until we get rid of the criminals in Washington the country will continue to decline.
I'm sure the attorny general and democrat gov will get right on this………attacking the messenger I mean.
I believe this is just an attempt to bury O'Keefe and Project Veritas under a mountain of legal bills, no lawyer in his right mind would think he could successfully prosecute O'Keefe with this nonsense.
I defy any troll to come here and defend this obvious smear.
My understanding is that you have to look at intent to declare most crimes. This being one of them.
His intent was not to harm the system, but to repair it.
But like any Communist in history. They'll shoot the messenger before they'll ever change their ways.
"The democRATs are the sole beneficiary of voter fraud"
Exactly what I thought when I read this line:
"Though Project Veritas showed that it was as easy for Republicans to cheat as Democrats"
Actually what that means is that democrats can steal, not only dead democrat votes, but ALSO turn dead Republicans into democrat voters.
Projection and misdirection. I called it right up front, James and his friends will be the target – as opposed to fixing what is so clearly broken in election "law".
It is quite laughable witnessing the progressives continue to claim that there is no election fraud, that there is no voter fraud, as they scream fraud at James and his friends. Projection and denial often leads to such hypocrisy.
I point out that, in the videos presented, the folks asked if the names were on the list, as opposed to saying they were that particular person. I hope that was done in all cases – for it shows those folks were not trying to assume identities, but rather were inquiring as to whether those publicly announced passed on individuals names were remaining on the voter rolls.
Just a few days ago I had to have my driver license scanned so that my teenage son could buy a video game. I had to buy it and I had to have my government issued and required ID scanned into some database in order to purchase it. I have to have a special ID in order to even possess a firearm or even one cartridge and remain banned 100%, along with the rest of the Citizens in this state from exercising the right to carry, concealed or openly, my own property.With its expiration date, each Illinoisan becomes a criminal, a gun offender, by nothing more than the tick of a clock. Yet, when it comes to voting – a government created right (which is so very different from an inalienable right endowed by our Creator) cannot require at least the same level of permission slip security? It is all a wee bit backward, huh?
You know, I have always, through all the corruption, held out trust in the process. I have maintained in my own mind that even with a level of cheating, that we could overcome it with numbers – keeping the validity of the process in tact. I no longer buy into that scenario and come down in a place where I no longer trust the process itself. Our votes are counted as those in control want the end result to look like – as opposed to what the vote actually comes out to be. We don't use county lines, instead, districts are gerrymandered to create the desired outcome. Equality be dammed.
If we do not get a handle on this in the here and now, there will be only one path left, there will be only one resolution remaining. This nation once had to experience that terrible path to be born and again in order to end the ownership of one man over another. Apparently, we have not learned our lesson and are headed for the hat trick – doing it for a third time.
We have one chance left, if folks get their heads out of their collectivist behinds, to avoid that path. This is the last election that will determine if elections even matter. People, by the millions have to write in candidates on their ballots in order to force the party elite to count the ballots rather than just make totals up. There has to be such an outpouring of support for tossing BOTH party machines out that they cannot deny it or hide it.
The fraud HAS to be exposed and while James and his associates did exactly that, it is going to take a much larger scale operation than what they did exact the information sharing on the scale it has to take place.
Here in Illinois, if a candidate does not file to "accept" a write in vote, the votes are not counted. Imagine Illinois government explaining millions of ballots simply discarded because of "unauthorized" write ins!!
Folks, we have the authority. It is time we USE IT! Past time.
The Department of Justice came up with a scheme to illegally send drugs to Mexican drug cartels so that those guns would then be used in crimes in the US and therefore prove the need for gun control laws.
If O'keefe needs jailtime, his cell should be next to Eric Holders.
James better hope that none of the deceased' ballots belonged to one of "Holder's people."
These deceitful Democrats are doing what they always do when the curtain gets pulled back on them: Attack, vilify, destroy, evade, deflect. No matter what it takes these miscreants will not allow their destructive and dysfunctional policies to be changed. Corruption, waste, cronyism and misery are vital to the survival of the Democratic mind set.
With people like this in charge it's a miracle we still have a country at all.
It used to be that the democrats had a hard time raising enough money to compete in elections. Something has changed that equation. Obama will have a billion dollars to spend, and Romney only has 30 to 40 million so far. Why is this? Did the democrats suddenly become richer than the republicans? How is that possible? If you listen to them talk they all hate big business, so how did they get their money? They didn't earn it, that's for sure!
When I first registered to vote I declared no party whatsoever.
The first time I went to vote, I was handed a Democrat Primary Ballot – as if it was by default or something. Sure, it was partly my fault for lacking understanding of the process and my right, but I place most of the blame for that on my high school teacher who drilled into my head that my vote didn't really count because of the Electoral College.
Long story short – ACORN tactics existed long before ACORN was around. Someone else had to have checked the Democrat box on my original registration form. I ma left to wonder how many other people that happened to. I know this much – after my ballot had to be spoiled because thee wasn't anyone I was willing to vote for on that ballot, I have always felt like my vote was not counted. As I write in candidates this time around, I know my vote won't be counted.
And Democrats have the gall to talk up disenfranchisement? ?
Their projection is ripe on this topic. It is they who do the disenfranchising the most – so long as it bolsters their numbers, they love it.
I live rural so my polling place is pretty small. Even though the election judges know exactly who I am, I still present my ID when I walk in the door. It is nice to see the judges thank me for doing so each and every time. Now, if only the two political parties making up the same machine would actually respect the vote by protecting the sanctity of it, and then count them all, write ins included, we might just have an honest election.
"My understanding is that you have to look at intent to declare most crimes."
Oh no. That's the way it USED to be. The legal term is mens rea, the requirement of the state to prove intent. Unfortunately, Congress has been specifically targeting mens rea, removing that requirement in most legislation.
Not sure where this stands in this case, but I wouldn't be surprised if no intent need be proven.
I keep saying and I will say it again:
Registration to vote must be at least 30 days PRIOR to voting,…..
On election day, show up in person,….
Present a voter ID,…..
and finally,…..
vote in English.
Speaking of high comedy, when I watched the RYK fella talking about the election rules, I at first had no volume. I thought that fella was going to be part of the "sting" and was wearing a wig…….I was thinking PIMP get up like the ACORN expose. Then, I turned up the volume and he was indeed actually the "government official". Ugh.
I find it stunning elected officials can look into a camera and condemn a sting that clearly points out how easily a person can vote illegally in their state….
and then attack the messenger!
wow
just wow
hmmm… I didn't see O'Keefe in any of those videos. Who are they going to charge and with what?
Missy.
Isn't it Oregon where people HAVE to vote on line or absentee/early ballot? Thought someone on another board told me you can't vote in person there.
Maybe it's changed but talk about a sweet set up for illegal voting, OMG!
He said they have to prove intent. No they clearly did not intend to vote. It really makes you wonder what the news media is protecting? 4 more years of a crappy economy? What's going on here? There is some heavy money feeding down from the top of these news organizations, it's the only explaination.
Those who wish to water down the voter identification requirements, do so in order to subvert the process. Less requirements equals more fraud. That's the only reason. No one is denied access to a ballot if requirements are enforced, except for the deceased and illegal aliens.
Now remember boys and girls that:
Democrats cannot win without cheating, so Voter ID discriminates against Democrats
Democrats cannot win in the arena of ideas, so they have to cheat. By gerrymandering and ballot box stuffing and opening sealed court records, and using innuendo and misinformation about things that are never backed up by facts
What bothers me is I am not seeing the DEAFENING ROAR on message boards from NH voters who WANT clean elections.
Where are NH voters? We know msm won't give them air time, but not one message board I've been on has one post from a legal NH voter talking about what they think of all this.
Hello……..why are we fighting this fight for the people of NH? They should be burying your governor for his blatant unwillingness to insure clean elections in your state.
OPEN YOUR MOUTH, FILE SUITS, DEMAND VOTER ID. Do something! We're kinda busy in our own states!
Oregon is a "vote by mail only" state, you don't have to register in person and all you need is a "utility bill" (gas, electric, cable, cell phone etc…) to do so.
This past election cycle they began "testing" internet voting, which usually means a mandate is right around the corner in this stupidly "progressive" state…
The Oregon voter registration form can be found here:
http://oregonvotes.org/doc/publications/forms/500...
Here is what the "ID requirements" on it are:
You must provide your valid
Oregon Driver's License,
Permit or ID number.
A suspended Driver's License is valid,
a revoked Driver's License is not valid.
-or-
If you do not have valid Oregon ID,
provide the last four digits of your
Social Security number.
-or-
If you do not have a Social Security
number or valid Oregon identification,
provide a copy of one of the following
that shows your name and current
address:
acceptable identification:
valid photo identification
a paycheck stub
a utility bill
a bank statement
a government document
proof of eligibility under the
Uniformed and Overseas
Citizens Absentee Voting
Act (UOCAVA) or the Voting
Accessibility for the Elderly
and Handicapped Act (VAEH)
Is it just me or could you actually drive a Mack truck through those lax "requirements"?
There is absolutely nothing to stop it but a VERY HOLLOW warning, since vote by mail's inception there have been ZERO investigations or prosecutions of fraud or potential fraud.
Send in your ballots (after paying the postage / poll tax), the media will tell you there was an election and provide you with the results as tabulated by the Oregon Public Employees Union…
I like O'Keefe, and agree with the points he's trying to make about my home state of NH. But in this case he didn't do his homework on the law. What he did was illegal under NH law. NH RSA 659:34 that it is a Class A misdemeanor when a person at the polls, “when obtaining an official ballot … makes a false material statement regarding his or her qualifications as a voter to an election officer" OR “applies for a ballot in a name other than his or her own,” OR “gives a false name or answer if under examination as to his or her qualifications as a voter before the supervisors of the checklist or moderator,” among others. No lefty here, though a lawyer (and former prosecutor). The policy points made are valid, but this was a shady move. 20 states likewise require no ID at the polls; NH requires a variety of ID and signed affidavit subject to criminal fraud prosecution AT REGISTRATION, and simply a verbal name and address process at voting (also subject to fraud prosecution). The system here is subject to abuse and should probably be tweaked, but that won't provide exception to complying with current laws.
If it's "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" how do the progs explain the amount of times their minions have been fooled by O'Keefe?
Address and Birthday are easily read upside down off the rolls once the worker lines up their little rulers with the name….
They would have to thread it through their winkies… cause they were pissing. Not that I think that it is such a serios thing they did, childish, and perhaps uncalled for, but hardly criminal behavior. Especially when compared to the torture and mutilation the very scumbags that were being pissed on are completely OK with doing. Screw them, we should bury them in pigs blood. They are our enemy, they are the enemy of all things decent and good, pissing on their dead bodies is NOTHING compared to what they would do, and have done to our guys.
It never ceases to amaze me to what lengths Liberals will go to keep voter fraud a very real possibility. Maybe more conservatives whould perpetrate this sort of sting. If conservatives were comitting vote fraud on a alarge scale all over the coutry and their candidates were winning because of it, the left would be screaming from the mountain tops that we need voter ID
So there's a good chance America will be flooded with zombies but they won't be terrorizing the living, just voting for Barack Obama? So is Election 2012 another remake then or something original?
Not possible with the new electronic pollbooks. The screen is facing the poll worker and it would be hard for the voter to lean over the screen and read the information upside down. Again, it would still be fairly easy to memorize someone's address and birthday and vote in their behalf Maryland, but New Hampshire doesn't even take the precaution of requiring that voters identify themselves by name, address and birthday.
wow
Obviously most of the voters in that looney state don't object, hence the sound of silence.
Save yurself, Missy. Find a way to come to Texas. We got indoor plumbin and everythin.
Music's great, beer's cold, BBQ's hot, and folks are friendly.
You can even find jobs. Salary might not be as high, but neither is the cost of livin compared to most states. The oil patch keeps the tax man away and in some places the sun shines 325 days a year.
you could do worse……
in fact you are doin worse. Come on down. We'd love to have ya.
))))))))))
The Love Boat captain better be ready for some new surroundings. Not only did he participate in an illegal conspiracy to commit voter fraud, they filmed a poll worker. In New Hampshire it is a felony to film a poll worker without their consent. I see the article failed to state in one instance, a poll worker knew the decedent and contacted the police. The criminal thug left before the police arrived.
Voter ID is a huge political issue and the US Supreme Court is going to be forced to deal with it again before too long. In '08 the SC upheld Indiana's requirement to produce photo identification as constitutional and found IN had a valid interest in improving election procedures as well as deterring fraud. DOJ (which always functions politically, to some extent, on behalf of the administration in power) is currently putting up some roadblocks to proposed ID laws in SC and TX. Left-leaning groups have lots of studies purporting to show that sizable numbers of eligible voters do not have government-issued photo IDs and that percentages are higher for seniors, minorities, disabled and elderly — thus the argument that the policies of fraud prevention are overborne by likelihood of voter suppression. A bunch of states currently have proposed voter ID legislation, and all, if enacted, will likely be challenged. Many Dems, in their honest moments, fear that the laws could be detrimental in the '12 presidential race. In NH, there is nothing salacious alleged … apparently it takes a couple months for the automated process of Vital Statistics's receipt of death certificates –> names removed from voter rolls, to occur. No fraudulently cast votes are alleged, and the poll workers complied with the law. But the video highlighted the potential that exists, as it does in 20 states that don't require ID at the polls (but before, at registration). So this is just a round fired in the larger national fight. It's an important issue, and we'll be seeing it a lot more (SC is about to sue DOJ) until the 9 guys in black robes issue another ruling in this area.
You must have learned your law in the jailhouse. The only intent necessary is the intent to request a ballot and they did. Otherwise, an individual who went in to rob a bank could simply say: "I never intended to take the money, I just wanted to look at it".
And to prove my point. After my wife passed away, I called the Election Board to make sure she was no longer registered. She was an R, but shockingly the BOE worker stated that it is very, very common for the ACORN types to scan the obituaries trolling for names and then cross referencing them to polling places. Once that basic information can be found, there is nothing to stop having a person show up claiming to be the "dead" voter who is still active on the roles.
This is getting better by the day!
They are so desperately trying to control the message and make this story about O'Keefe and not about voter ID they are shooting themselves in the foot.
Does any one here believe that Project Veritas did not expect this to happen? They probably fully expected to get charged with something. The more squawking the left does, the longer this story stays in the news and they can't ignore the real part of the story…….Voter Fraud!
Keep it up, Lefties. And, get your IDs ready, cause your going to need them.
Help Project Veritas out if you can: https://www.theprojectveritas.com/civicrm/contrib...
I've re-read this article because I thought I had read it quote from the actual law:
FTA;
"It is unclear whether the experts Reilly interviewed knew more about the Project Veritas sting than he told them. He argues that O’Keefe’s colleagues violated a federal law prohibiting the “procurement” of ballots, even though they left each polling station without voting. However, that law applies to those who attempt to “deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process.”
It seems to me that they have not run afoul of the law in this case and that intent is considered. If that was a direct quote from the actual law.
He has proven nothing. One of the poll workers knew one of the decedents and contacted the police. The criminal thug left before the police arrived.
Boy, do you need an education. The reason it is a crime to request a ballot is to punish persons who attempt to commit voter fraud and are caught before they vote. He can tell his side to the jury after the jury hears from the poll worker who caught one of the thugs and the police who arrived after the poll worker contacted them.
Husky, I would think you'd be applauding Project Veritas. They just demonstrated how easy it would be for Republicans, Libertarians, Paulites or Martians to illegally vote against a Democrat at the polls..
Unless…………OH, you assume that only Democrats cheat………..OK then, carry-on………
No lawyer in his right mind will prosecute? HMMM In New Hampshire, not only is it a felony to attempt to procure a ballot, it is a felony to film a poll worker without their consent. This will be a very easy prosecution. Especially after the poll worker who called the police testifies and the police who answered the call do, too. I am certain the fine citizens of New Hampshire do not appreciate their police running around for juvenile pranks. If the Love Boat captain is convicted of a crime, it violates his probation. He gets to return to Louisiana to see the judge he trashed after he received three years of federal probation.
It is called conspiracy and/or aiding and abetting.
Prove intent? Where did you learn your criminal law? It is a crime to attempt to procure a ballot. That is right. All they have to prove is they requested a ballot and circumstantial evidence is clearly admissible.
Applauding? You have to be kidding. What you do not understand is the system in New Hampshire worked. That is right, it worked. In one instance, the police were called. For example, when you drive a car, do you ever violate a law? Obviously, everyone does. Does this mean the system is broken? No. When you are caught, you are punished and in the case of voter fraud, it can be very severe. For this reason, wide spread voter fraud is simply a figment of the far right's imagination.
You are exactly the problem in this country.
Someone exposes a major problem and all you can do is condemn them. You don't want to fix the problem you just want the status quo which is rife with fraud.
I'd say you should be ashamed of yourself but liberals have no shame.
"and then count them all, write ins included, we might just have an honest election."
Gives me an idea. Maybe we need a new Super-PAC in support of the write-in election of Mickey Mouse. Then run ads everywhere that Mickey is a Progressive socialist champion of the common man and minorities.
Knowing how easily fooled the "progressive" voter is, we might grab half of obama's support with MM write-ins. And then even if those votes aren't counted, no big deal.
I'm saying in the video they say that. I was thinking intent to vote. Anyway the spirit of the law to obtain a ballot couldn't apply here. This was done in the spirit of protecting your freedom.
You can clearly see how ridiculous it is to not prove you are the person voting
And there is the situation.
"Authorized journalists".
You know, attacking the messenger is, really, the only thing they have left.
The irony of this law is that it was added to the state's constitution in a "vote by mail only" "test vote" back in 1993, ever since then we have never elected any "new" republicans as Senators or Congressmen.
Every election is a "nail biter" and of course the media winks and nods to the democrat secretary of state and assures us everything's on the up and up any time anyone dares to question the system or its security.
This is my home and I will fight to take it back from the fascist left until the bitter end, I am an American, I run INTO fires not away from them.
"the BOE worker stated that it is very, very common for the ACORN types to scan the obituaries trolling for names and then cross referencing them to polling places"
And if it is that common, who is it that's running cover for this kind of fraud? I mean, as bad as this is, there must be some powerful interests protecting the perpetrators.
Did you watch the video? The PV guy COULD have taken that ballot that the poll worker offered by simply stating that he was a dead guy! The poll worker even explained that no one could vote twice because they check the Address. What? Oh, great, so a dead guy won't be able to vote twice. Well, THAT'S reassuring.
Unscrupulous Dim shysters like Samuel Issacharoff, are vewwy upset with James O'Keefe's little expose', because dead voters are the Democrats' largest and most informed constituency.
I got a kick out of a young sounding individual being given a ballot for someone who is clearly, by birth date, not even close to the age of the registered voter.
I have made the same point about recording. He/they will be in trouble. Isn't it interesting that it is being shown that such a law really only protects people from being BUSTED?
Crime to request a ballot? Care to cite that law Bo? And how do you square the way the question was asked?
Do you have a Mr. So and so Listed? Etc?
I notice you have zero to say about anything BUT exposing how easily FRAUD can and DOES take place. Gee, Bo, why is that?
Skeeeeeered?
I am the problem in this country because I believe criminals should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. ROTFLMFAO Perhaps you missed the headline that one of the poll workers recognized their little ruse and contacted the police. What you wingnuts do not understand is no system is perfect. For example, have you been charged with every traffic violation you have committed? Obviously, not. However, does this mean the system is broken? No. The Love Boat captain is going to be leaving his parents' basement real soon.
Interesting, yet another post where you ignore the problems with the POLL WORKERS and the clearly demonstrated problem with access to ballots no matter who you are.
Why is that, Bo?
Exposing serious problems regarding one of our most important abilities and you call it a juvenile prank? That is what you think about exposing avenues to voter fraud? Really?
Now that I see how easy it is to steal a ballot, maybe I might bring a copy of the obituaries to the polls. Maybe other non liberals might do the same thing. Wouldn't that be a howl?
You are the problem because you KNOW there is something wrong that CAN and SHOULD be fixed, but you're too soaked in partisan idiocy to do what needs to be done. You just want the status quo, which in the case of liberals is fraud and corruption. If 60 Minutes did this you'd be silent. But since it was done by someone the left hates, you're all over it like stink on a monkey.
You're a phony and not a very bright one at that.
Constitution makes no mention of Authorized Journalists, or any Journalists for that matter.
Freedom of the Press = Freedom of the Printing Press, not the Press Corps, as there was no Press Corps when the Bill of Rights was drawn up.
Printing Press in this Century = Internet Blogs and Websites, as well as News Papers, TV and Radio News.
Freedom of the Press was put in place to protect the Printing Press of the day from the Government, not to protect the Government from the Printing Press of the day.
Also, your traffic analogy is ridiculous. Voter fraud can be fixed with voter ID laws and you know it..
You're probably the guy that sues the person that saves you from choking to death because he bruised you doing the Heimlich….
Once again, you need an education. All the Love Boat captain had to do was request an interview with a person associated with the voting process in New Hampshire. They could have asked them how they handled persons who had recently died. In fact, they probably could have requested to be taken to a polling location for a trial run. Instead, these thugs decided to take the law into their own hands. As a result, they violated the law and should be punished accordingly. The Love Boat captain is going to find out that Federal judges and magistrates take probation violations seriously.
No Problem? Check this out. High probability similar situation in a lot of metro areas.
http://www.620wtmj.com/blogs/charliesykes/1371676...
Read and weep:
659:34 Wrongful Voting; Penalties for Voter Fraud. –
I. A person is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000 if such person:
(a) When registering to vote; when obtaining an official ballot; or when casting a vote by official ballot, makes a false material statement regarding his or her qualifications as a voter to an election officer or submits a voter registration form, an election day registration affidavit, a qualified voter affidavit, a domicile affidavit, or an absentee registration affidavit containing false material information regarding his or her qualifications as a voter;
(b) Votes more than once for any office or measure;
(c) Applies for a ballot in a name other than his or her own;
(d) Applies for a ballot in his or her own name after he or she has voted once;
(e) Votes for any office or measure at an election if such person is not qualified to vote as provided in RSA 654; or
(f) Gives a false name or answer if under examination as to his or her qualifications as a voter before the supervisors of the checklist or moderator.
What you additionally need to know, circumstantial evidence is permitted. For example, the poll workers perception of the nature of the request is admissible. I am certain the state will begin with the poll worker who learned of the thugs little ruse and telephoned police. The poll worker will also testify, that when the thug was confronted, he ran away. The police will then testify they answered the call and probably discuss the efforts they put forth in attempting to apprehend the thug. I am certain the jury will find this very amusing, don't you?
Really. HMMM In this case, one of the thugs was caught in the act. So the system does work.
You need a reality check. It's not enough for a government employee to point to the rules and it's not enough that they give us verbal reassurances of how the process is SUPPOSED to work and it's not enough that the Democrats are saying that this just can't happen. They haven't the credibility for such blind trust. We don't trust them and PV just demonstrated AGAIN why we don't trust them. There are flaws in our voting process and we need to fix them. The evidence of just a few of those flaws is now on video tape, it's not just an opinion. Whether anyone at PV broke the law will not change that.
Spoken like a true partisan lapdog….congrats, your parents must be so proud….
I have an idea. Jimmy should tell his side to the jury. That is, of course, after the state calls the poll worker who uncovered the thugs little game and telephoned the police. The thug in question then ran away. The police will then be called to discuss their involvement, which included their attempts to catch and apprehend the thug who ran away. I am certain the jury will find this little escapade very amusing, don't you?
I think you are incorrect
As an example
The other day a woman went into a bank to rob it.
Not because she wanted to, but because she had (what she thought was) a bomb attached to her ankle by a robber who also tied up her husband.
If true, should she be sent to prison?
Intent is a very important factor in not only deciding who is guilty of a crime but also the punishment for it.
You must remember something here.
Justice without mercy is not justice at all. It's tyranny.
Keep gulping down that kool-aid while voter fraud goes unchecked….
You know, voter fraud? The reason any of this is even an issue? Like how O'Keefe proved? Oh right, you're not interested in actually making things better, you're just interested in being a left-wing lapdog. Sorry, forgot I was dealing with someone without the ability to reason or use common sense….
Now go get your treat Fido….
It's clear you are discussing this subject with more than any natural love of a subject. How much do you make doing this? if you don't mind me asking. What's the going rate? Be honest.
Cause you need lessons from your mentor, it's too obvious at this point. Back to the lab with you, you are not ready yet. I really need you to come out of your training strong, this time with a little more believability.
You are such a two-faced hypocrite. If O'Keefe's action is any sort of a crime then it's also a crime the New Black Panther Party thugs to swing batons and intimidate voters in front of a polling station. Can't have it both way's, Sis. But I don't imagine there is any hope you will manage to liberate your pinhead from the grasp of your sphincter either.
Gee, these would be the same Lefties who have been yelping that ACORN's voter registration fraud is OK because it's not vote fraud. Gimme a break.
I think you posted on the wrong browser tab.
As you always like to point out, voter fraud and those who commit voter fraud and are dumb enough to film themselves doing it should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Interesting. For all we know, someone left these on James O'Keefe doorstep. Do you KNOW differently? Or are you just assuming things that wouldn't hold up in court for three seconds?
Already happened and you white supremacists are finally trying to fight back.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act
I'm a white supremacist? Please enlighten me, and make it good … I could use some humor right now.
And FWIW I'm about the only person posting here that is critical of O'Keefe's video and believe he violated NH criminal election law.
Common prohibition in many states, IIRC. Yes, it does pose a problem.
"1 (a) …when obtaining an official ballot…"
Only a problem if he touched the ballot.
"1 (f) Gives a false name or answer if under examination as to his or her qualifications as a voter before the supervisors of the checklist or moderator. "
"…if under examination…" May be a risk here, depending on interpretation.
HMMM. So if a person robbing a bank does not touch the money because a police officer is pointing a gun at him, he is innocent? That is a pretty long stretch. Once again, a poll worker discovered Jimmy's little game and called the police. When the jury hears this and the efforts the police took to catch the perpetrators, I do not think they will be amused.
Yes, the truth hurts in your little world, doesn't it?
You must be logged in to post a comment.