Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Voting Rights vs Voting Fraud
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Worried about a trend here....
The DOJ declined to prosecute Black Panters who were caught on tape blatantly intimidating voters in Phila, brandishing night sticks at white voters. One Black Panther had to promise never to carry a weapon to a polling place again. Reverse this and have white KKK members in West Virginia threatening black voters and would you have the same decision? GA reports that voter fraud by illegals and other has become such a problem that they want to instituted a photo id system for voting. They offer the photo ids free to anyone who does not drive. The DOJ disallows this because it supposedly disenfrachises minority voters. I don't get it. I want honest elections - am I in the minority? |
Anonymous
| So, you're stating that DOJ is ignoring voter intimidation and fraud because the perpretrators are people of color? Is it your position that black people and illegal immigrants are immune from prosecution by the law? |
Anonymous
I didn't take a position - the DOJ did. I just repeated the position they took - they will not prosecute Black Panthers who were caught on tape blatently brandishing night sticks at white would be voters - right in front of the door of the polling place. And speaking of DOJ positions, didn't they just expand the 'rights' of illegal immigrants to petition or appeal their deportation orders yesterday? I am worried that the rights of white voters to vote in some neighborhoods AND the rights of all citizens to honest elections can be perceived to be more at risk as a result of these DOJ positions. If the threatening of white voters with night sticks deserves nothing more than a slap on the wrist and the attempts to restrict elections to those residents of this country who are citizens plus to insure one man-one vote are dismissed as disenfranchisement of minorities - how else am I to feel? |
jsteele
Site Admin Offline
Site Admin Offline
|
The justice department has been dropping a number of Bush-era cases. For example, charges were dropped against James Tobin, a Republican political organizer who was involved in jamming Democratic phone lines on election day 2002:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2009/05/27/feds_end_prosecution_of_gop_organizer/ The fact of the matter is that Republicans have been screaming "vote fraud" at anything that moves. Then, the Bush Administration fired many career professionals from Justice's Civil Rights Division and replaced them with hand-picked political hacks. See this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/20/AR2007062002543.html As a result, just about all voting rights cases from that period are tainted. Those cases that aren't politically-motivated witch hunts are screwed up by the incompetence that was the hallmark of the Bush Administration. As regards Georgia, while a photo ID could be obtained without charge, it obviously could not be obtained without meeting certain requirements such as providing a social security number. Given Georgia's history of poor record keeping, inaccuracies frequently prevented individuals from rightfully being able to vote. For all the constant GOP cries about voter fraud, there is almost none that has actually been documented. Do you realize that Gonzales actually got fired because of his attempts to restructure the Justice Department into one big anti-vote fraud organization? All that and he still couldn't find real cases. At some point your Republicans are going to have to stop mopping around trying to make yourselves look like victims all the time. I remember when you accused Democrats of that, but the shoe is really on the other foot now. It seems like half the posts here are from Republicans complaining about white people being oppressed. |
Anonymous
| Every administration brings in their own people so that point regarding firing makes no sense. I know many people from the Bush administration who are now out of jobs and are not angry because they know that this is the deal and it has nothing to do with the Original Post. To the OP, yes there is a problem with DOJ being only sensitive to minorities in just about every area of the law. This is a huge problem because it starts to breed anger --DOJ needs to prosecute crimes regardless of color or political affiliation. I am still amazed that ACORN is still getting federal money. |
Anonymous
| Justice was so screwed up they even let Ted Stevens off the hook. |
Anonymous
For over a hundred years the govt has been set up where most jobs are career civil service positions and some jobs are political appointments. The political positions are usually the supervisory/policy-setting positions, and of course those can be expected to turn over every election. The civil service positions however are nonpolitical and it is illegal to take political considerations into hiring or firing, which is exactly what the Bushies admitted doing. |
Anonymous
| If they illegally fired civil service protected lawyers in the Bush DOJ - why are they so busy investigating the forced resignations of DOJ political appointees. No time to research, but I bet snopes.com would have a field day with this assertion. |
Anonymous
I don't know about firing, but they clearly hired and promoted less qualified people for illegal (and stupid) reasons (like someone who's wife was an active democrat lost out to someone who seemed more republican). I don't even know what to say to you if you missed that whole scandal but feel confident that it didn't happen. Try starting here http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/washington/29justice.html |
Anonymous
What happened to the Justice Department because of political hiring may have been a scandal, but what happened to Iraq in the early days after the war because of the same kind of hiring was a tragedy! |
Anonymous
At some point the Dems will have to find someone else to blame for everything. Every time a Republican posts on this board, whether it is a valid comment or not, the automatic response from some on this board is usually one of the following: 1. where did you get that info - Fox News 2. did rush tell you to say that 3. repeating hannity gives you no credibility 4. you are a republican so you must be grumpy 5. Bush is an idiot 6. right winger doom and gloom scenario I mean at some point you need to move on, it is getting a little tired. Why can't the discussion just be about the issue at hand instead of deteriorating into attempts at getting a quick laugh. Focus on the issue - agree or disagree and why you agree or disagree but keep your personal distaste for one party or another to yourself. These types of comments add nothing to the discussion another to make the people who post them to feel better about themselves. For what its worth I am an independent. I know some on this board will trash me for this post - but I don't really care. |
Anonymous
| This post is right-on! And can we ease up on the universal catch-word 'right-wingers' as well? I've been avoiding 'limousine liberals' as I don't think it is helpful or lofty to throw in every second word. |
Anonymous
I have seen the video of the incident in Philly with the Black Panthers and it is truly disturbing that DOJ has declined to prosecute those who were involved in the intimidation tactics. To ensure fair elections any individual who engages in voter intimidation (especially physical intimidation) should be prosecuted regardless of race, political affiliation, etc. I don't care if the perpetrators are white, black, hispanic or purple nor do I care whom they supported in the election. We should all be concerned about preserving fair elections as they are the cornerstone of a healthy democracy. |
Anonymous
| I am also disturbed by the clip of the Panthers. But is there information about why the DOJ is not prosecuting? Specifically, I wonder whether they are saying what was done is okay, or that there are technical reasons they won't prosecute (as in the Stephens case). |
Anonymous
|
My understanding is that the Stephens case was thrown out because the prosecution (DOJ) withheld exculpatory evidence. As in, maybe Stephens was not guilty after all? But wait, that doesn't fit into the narrative...
I too would like to know why DOJ dropped the Phila Black Panters case - certainly the video is not exculpatory evidence. |