The actions filmed for this video are indefensible. People attempting to defend these union activists’ actions should be ridiculed:

What justification is there for these union activists to prevent a journalist from filming what’s happening in a public place? More importantly, what justification is there for these union activists to repeatedly intimidate and harrass journalists?

Thuggish behavior, whether it’s the NBPP intimidating voters or union activists threatening a journalist for covering a public speech, has dramatically increased in recent years.

That behavior must stop. IMMEDIATELY. There’s no justification for violent behavior, especially when we’re talking about people exercising their constitutionally-protected rights to vote and to report what happens in public places.

Nonetheless, this video is proof positive that union activists won’t hesitate in ignoring a person’s constitutionally protected rights. All too often, all that matters to these activists/thugs is whether someone is getting in their way.

It’s time that this type of thuggish behavior was vigorously prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Furthermore, if the penalties aren’t harsh for thuggish behavior, then legislation must be written and passed that sends the message that thuggish behavior will carry with it harsh penalties.

Anything less is unacceptable.

Technorati: Unions, Violence, Prosecutions, Corruption, Thugs, Activists, First Amendment, Public Property, Constitution, Civil Rights, Voting, New Black Panther Party

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Benjamin Jealous’ op-ed is one of the most tepid responses to a major flap I’ve seen in ages. Here’s what I’m referring to:

It is unfortunate that at a time when our nation is reeling in the midst of one of the most devastating downturns in our economy since the Great Depression, the NAACP is compelled to deal with a disturbing, corrosive attack from the Tea Party.

Instead of joining us to repudiate racism, Tea Party leaders have attempted a tit for tat and demanded that we condemn the New Black Panther Party for reported hate speech. It is a false argument. Of course we condemn hate speech from anyone and any organization, including the New Black Panther Party. But that party is a mere flea compared to the influence and size of the Tea Party. And the New Black Panther Party is not a member of the NAACP. What we are asking the Tea Party to eschew is not the racism of some outside organization, but the bigotry within.

Mr. Jealous’ argument is flimsy at best. The NAACP’s mission statement speaks rather expansively about what its mission is:

The following statement of objectives is found on the first page of the NAACP Constitution, the principal objectives of the Association shall be:

• To ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of all citizens
• To achieve equality of rights and eliminate race prejudice among the citizens of the United States
• To remove all barriers of racial discrimination through democratic processes
• To seek enactment and enforcement of federal, state, and local laws securing civil rights
• To inform the public of the adverse effects of racial discrimination and to seek its elimination
• To educate persons as to their constitutional rights and to take all lawful action to secure the exercise thereof, and to take any other lawful action in furtherance of these objectives, consistent with the NAACP’s Articles of Incorporation and this Constitution.

The NAACP can’t seriously argue that they’re taking “all lawful action” to guarantee people can exercise “their constitutional rights.” Their inaction is essentially turning a blind eye towards people’s constitutional right to vote. That’s the opposite of taking “all lawful action to secure the exercise” of people’s constitutional rights. Here’s what Chairman Gerald Reynolds said in his opening remarks to the USCCR’s July 6th hearing:

As most of you are aware by now, the litigation stemmed from an incident on Election Day 2008 in which two members of the New Black Panther Party appeared at a polling station in Philadelphia. Video and eyewitness testimony showed that they stood at an entrance to a polling place dressed in paramilitary garb and black combat boots. One brandished a nightstick. They hurled racial epithets at whites and blacks alike, taunting poll watchers and poll observers who were there to aid voters.

How can an organization that proclaims itself to be a civil rights organization tolerate anyone hurling “racial epithets at whites and blacks alike”? For that matter, how can the NAACP sanction with their silence the “taunting [of] poll watchers and poll observers who were there to aid voters”?

I’d think that guaranteeing the smooth operation of polling stations would be Civil Rights 101. I’d think that preventing the hurling of “racial epithets at whites and blacks alike” would elicit, at minimum, a tersely worded statement from the NAACP.

By not speaking out against the NBPP’s threatening behavior, the NAACP is saying that they aren’t concerned with people’s civil rights unless they fit into a certain category. Even then, the NAACP won’t step forward if the perpetrators aren’t white.

That isn’t what Bobby Kennedy fought and died for. That certainly isn’t what Dr. Martin Luther King envisioned when he fought and died for all men to be treated equally based on the content of their character, not the color of their skin.

In this case, the NAACP is saying with their inaction that people’s civil rights are directly tied to whether the perpetrators’ skin color. Since the perpetrators’ skin color was black, in the eyes of the NAACP, the perpetrators shouldn’t be punished. That some of the victims of the NBPP’s abusive behavior obviously isn’t the NAACP’s concern.

This statement in President Jealous’ op-ed is especially infuriating:

The NAACP is working hard to move our nation forward. We have joined with almost 200 other organizations representing people of all races, creeds and faiths to form a movement to pull America back together and put America back to work. “One Nation Working Together” is the antithesis to the bitter polarization being bred by the Tea Party and its ilk. It represents a clarion call to unity, to come together as a country.

The NAACP can’t say that they’re “working hard to move our nation forward” if they’re turning a blind eye towards the NBPP’s thuggish actions. People don’t want situational or conditional enforcement of this nation’s civil rights laws. They’re demanding that the New Black Panthers be held accountable because standing silent is appeasement.

How dare the NAACP say that TEA Party activists are breeding “bitter polarization” when they tolerate the thuggish behavior embodied by the NBPP’s behavior at that polling station in Philadelphia.

As a TEA Party activist, I know what is and isn’t tolerated. I know with certainty that if anyone associated with the St. Cloud TEA Party events made a racist comment, we wouldn’t tolerate that behavior. We’d demand a sincere apology from any person who made racist comments. Likewise, we’d demand that they leave the event and never return. WITHOUT EXCEPTIONS.

The NAACP owes America an apology for its situational indignation of racism. More importantly, the NAACP owes civil rights legends like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. an apology for straying far from the principles he fought his entire life for.

Finally, the New Black Panther Party owes America an apology for threatening people who tried voting or who tried monitoring the elections.

Technorati: Racism, Ben Jealous, NAACP, Resolution, TEA Party, New Black Panthers, Voter Intimidation, Thugs, Martin Luther King, Bobby Kennedy, Civil Rights

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Mark Dayton has jumped into the emerging Franken-Ritchie voter fraud story, saying that Gov. Pawlenty is being irresponsible:

DFL gubernatorial candidate Mark Dayton Thursday took Gov. Tim Pawlenty to task for saying that felons’ illegal voting “may have flipped the election” between U.S. Sen. Al Franken and Norm Coleman, decided by 312 votes in 2008.

“Before people, including Gov. Pawlenty, make wild specious claims…they really ought to have the facts,” Dayton said. “This is about the integrity a Minnesota election and I would say that integrity ought to be upheld whether the DFL candidate get the most votes or the Republican candidate or the Independence Party.”

Not surprisingly, Mr. Dayton’s thoughts are twisted. For months, Mark Ritchie told us that there was no voter fraud in Minnesota. I’ve said from the outset that there were some irregularities that couldn’t be explained away.

Minnesota Majority has now found proof of felons voting even though the Ramsey and Hennepin county attorneys don’t want to accept that information:

Minnesota Majority’s Dan McGrath was interviewed on July 15, 2010 by Jeff Passolt of Fox 9 News. Passolt challenged Minnesota Majority’s report about felons voting in the 2008 election, echoing some of the criticisms being voiced by county prosecutors. Prosecutors claim that the felon problem is limited to just a handful of cases and that most cases only involve felons registering to vote, not actually voting. McGrath responded by presenting an Election Day Sign-in Roster with the signature of a felon that Ramsey County prosecutors claim only registered to vote but clearly actually voted.

Minnesota Majority has offered to meet with both Ramsey and Hennepin county prosecutors on numerous occasions to share our evidence, but our offers have been rebuffed each time. We stand by our claim that hundreds of felons both REGISTERED and VOTED in the 2008 election.

Mr. Dayton is saying that Gov. Pawlenty is being irresponsible in speculating about information that the public is already making decisions on. I don’t agree that it’s being irresponsible as long as Gov. Pawlenty is being irresponsible because he’s saying upfront that he’s speculating.

I’d further argue that it’s Mr. Ritchie who’s been irresponsible. Minnesota Majority wouldn’t have anything to investigate if Mr. Ritchie had complied with HAVA’s anti-fraud provisions, which Ritchie didn’t:

Minnesota Majority has experienced the DOJ’s refusal to investigate these kind of cases first-hand. On November 17th of 2008 (immediately following the 2008 General Election and while the Coleman-Franken recount battle was getting underway), Minnesota Majority president Jeff Davis sent a certified letter to then Voting Section chief of the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ, Christopher Coates, requesting an investigation into apparent failures to comply with HAVA by Secretary of State Mark Ritchie. No response was forthcoming.

Since the DOJ in Washington DC failed to follow up on Davis’ complaint, Minnesota Majority contacted the local FBI office and lodged the same complaint. Special Agent Brian Kinney responded and visited the Minnesota Majority office to examine Minnesota Majority’s findings. At that time, he said, “based on what I see here there is more than enough evidence to initiate an internal complaint.” He gave his assurances that he would bring the matter to the attention of his supervisors. There was no further follow-up.

Let me repeat: this wouldn’t be an issue if Mr. Ritchie had complied with all of HAVA’s provisions, not just the ones he agreed with. Let’s hope that Mr. Dayton would agree that the FBI is a serious law enforcement agency. Their agent, Special Agent Brian Kinney, told Minnesota Majority that “there is more than enough evidence to initiate an internal complaint” based on what the evidence he’d seen.

Let’s also highlight the suspicious goings on in the Ramsey County attorneys office. Why was a felon charged with illegally registering to vote when the sign-in sheets indicate the felon voted?

Shouldn’t we ask whether Mr. Dayton is being irresponsible by defending Mr. Ritchie’s inaction and inattentiveness? Is Mr. Dayton defending Mr. Ritchie simply because he’s from the DFL? Would he defend a Republican if, say, Dan Severson, was Minnesota’s SecState? I wouldn’t bet on it.

Simply put, Mark Dayton’s whining wouldn’t have happened if Mark Ritchie had done his responsibilities outlined in HAVA.

I’d take it a step farther and say that not protecting election integrity shouldn’t be a partisan issue. This is our God-given right as citizens of this great nation. Mr. Ritchie was the product of the SOSP, which was being funded by the same people who helped fund ACORN.

For not protecting Minnesota’s election integrity, Mark Ritchie deserves an F. Mark Dayton deserves a D- for defending this political hack. Election integrity shouldn’t be a partisan issue. Thanks to Mssrs. Dayton and Ritchie, it now is.

Technorati: Interview, Tim Pawlenty, Norm Coleman, Dan Severson, Election Integrity, MNGOP, Mark Dayton, Mark Ritchie, HAVA, Voter Fraud, DFL, Election 2010

There have been many questions that haven’t been adequately answered about the 2008 election that produced Sen. Al Franken. One of those questions might have been answered thanks to an investigation conducted by the DFL watchdogs in the Minnesota legislature.

For those of you laughing hysterically at that last statement, that was my intent. Minnesotans know that this DFL-dominated Minnesota legislature certainly wasn’t interested in investigating anything involving other Democrats, especially if it had to do with corruption. (See also the DFL stonewalling of investigations into Lori Swanson’s union-busting activities.)

According to this article, the investigators that discovered the potentially illegal voting were employed by Minnesota Majority. Minnesota Majority’s report is today’s must reading. Here’s what caught my attention from the report:

In the course of researching irregularities in Minnesota’s 2008 General Election, Minnesota Majority obtained records from the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension listing all persons under the supervision of the Minnesota Department of Corrections. From these records, we extracted a list of individuals charged with felony crimes at the time of the 2008 election. We then compared this list of felons to voter history records from the Secretary of State’s statewide voter registration system (SVRS).

From this comparison, we compiled a list of 2,803 felons who potentially voted in the 2008 General Election. The highest concentration of the suspected fraudulent votes was found in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties, so additional research was focused in these areas. We verified sample matches with court documents. We also examined polling place roster signatures and voter registration cards. After completing these verifications, we had a high degree of confidence that we had detected hundreds of
fraudulent votes cast by ineligible felons in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties.

If this information is accurate, it’s certainly possible that these felons cast illegal votes. It’s equally possible that they cast votes that gave Al Franken the victory.

Based on Minnesota Majority’s investigation, Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman and Ramsey County Attorney, and former DFL gubernatorial candidate, Susan Gaertner haven’t put a high priority on prosecuting these convicted criminals:

On October 14th of 2009, Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner announced that 23 individual felons had been charged with election crimes in connection with the 2008 election, characterizing the number as “a handful.” Most were only charged with registering illegally, not actually voting. This left the public with the impression that voter fraud issues from the 2008 election were settled and insignificant. News stories about these prosecutions were very different from the information Minnesota Majority had been compiling on felon voters.

On October 16th of 2009, Minnesota Majority’s submitted affidavits attesting to our findings on felon voters to Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman and Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner. In all, 1,359 names of suspected ineligible felon voters were forwarded to these county attorneys for investigation, with supporting evidence. Eight months after Minnesota Majority provided evidence of felon voters to the county attorneys, Hennepin County has charged 3 individuals with fraudulent voting by felons and Ramsey County has quietly charged an additional 6 persons.

Notice that Minnesota Majority’s investigation didn’t say that these felons had registered illegally, though that’s certainly true, too. They specifically called these felons voters. They didn’t make that accusation lightly.

That was their conclusion after checking the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension’s list of convicted felons and crossreferencing that with “polling place roster signatures and voter registration cards.” That’s how they arrived at 1,359 after starting with 2,803 potential felon voters.

Anyone who reads this blog knows that I’m not big into conspiracy theories. This isn’t a conspiracy theory, though, is it? It’s possibly a conspiracy but it’s well beyond a theory. It stopped being a theory when Minnesota Majority found 1,359 names on the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension’s list of felons that also turned up on “polling place roster signatures and voter registration cards.”

If Mark Ritchie argues that there isn’t voter fraud happening in Minnesota, then it’s our responsibility to point out that (a) it’s illegal for convicted felons to vote and (b) lots of felons voted in the 2008 election.

That’s before we start talking about the 40,000 ballot discrepancy between the numbers of ballots handed out and the number of people listed on polling place login sheets. It’s impossible to argue that there wasn’t either corruption or incompetence involved if 40,000 people got who didn’t sign the voters’ sign in sheets at their precinct got ballots.

This information doesn’t cast Mr. Ritchie in a positive light:

But the report got a far different review in Ramsey County, which contains St. Paul. Phil Carruthers of the Ramsey County attorney’s office said his agency had taken the charges “very seriously” and found that the Minnesota Majority “had done a good job in their review.”

The report says that in Ramsey, 460 names on voting records were matched with felon lists, and a further review found 52 were conclusive matches.

Carruthers attributed differences in the numbers to Minnesota Majority’s lack of access to nonpublic information, such as exact birth dates and other court records. For example, he said, “public records might show a felon was given 10 years probation, but internal records the county attorney has might show that the probation period was cut to five and the felon was eligible to vote.”

Carruthers said Ramsey County is still investigating all the names and has asked that 15 investigators be hired to complete the process. “So far we have charged 28 people with felonies, have 17 more under review and have 182 cases still open,” he said. “And there is a good chance we may match or even exceed their numbers.”

Why didn’t Ritchie’s office scrub the felons from the SVRS? Is it because he’s focused too much on increasing voter turnout without putting a priority on preserving election integrity? That certainly appears to be the pattern with Democrats these days. It certainly appears to be the practice in Eric Holder’s Justice Department.

Minnesota’s newspapers have largely ignored this scandal. Now it’s attracting national headlines. It’ll be interesting to see if the Strib and Pi-Press and other Twin Cities media outlets will continue ignoring this scandal.

Technorati: Al Franken, Mark Ritchie, Voter Fraud, Felon Voting, Ramsey County, Hennepin County, Mike Freeman, Susan Gaertner, DFL, Investigations, Minnesota Majority, Scandal, Election 2008

Conservatives have frequently criticized Mark Rtichie for being corrupt. Thanks to Ed Morrissey’s post of J. Christian Adams’ interview with Chris Baker and Minnesota Majority’s investigation into election irregularities, we’re now getting a clearer picture of Mr. Ritchie’s corruption. Here’s a portion of Minnesota Majority’s report on its investigation:

Minnesota Majority has experienced the DOJ’s refusal to investigate these kind of cases first-hand. On November 17th of 2008 (immediately following the 2008 General Election and while the Coleman-Franken recount battle was getting underway), Minnesota Majority president Jeff Davis sent a certified letter to then Voting Section chief of the Civil Rights Division at the DOJ, Christopher Coates, requesting an investigation into apparent failures to comply with HAVA by Secretary of State Mark Ritchie. No response was forthcoming.

Since the DOJ in Washington DC failed to follow up on Davis’ complaint, Minnesota Majority contacted the local FBI office and lodged the same complaint. Special Agent Brian Kinney responded and visited the Minnesota Majority office to examine Minnesota Majority’s findings. At that time, he said, “based on what I see here there is more than enough evidence to initiate an internal complaint.” He gave his assurances that he would bring the matter to the attention of his supervisors. There was no further follow-up.

The fact that the DOJ didn’t respond to Minnesota Majority’s investigation into voting irregularities is troubling enough. What’s more troubling to me is the fact that someone must’ve intervened with the FBI’s investigation. Special Agent Kinney said that what he found was “more than enough evidence to initiate an internal complaint.” I’m betting that it isn’t often that the FBI finds “more than enough evidence to initiate an internal complaint” before walking away.

Most troubling of all is the fact that there isn’t proof that Mr. Ritchie attempted to comply with HAVA’s anti-fraud provisions. Nor is there proof that the DFL legislature attempted to investigate these alleged violations as is their right to conduct oversight. In the Minnesota House, the chairman responsible for initiating investigations into election irregularities and all things elections is Rep. Gene Pelowski.

This report by Minnesota Majority’s Dan McGrath outlines Minnesota Majority’s findings.

In the course of researching irregularities in Minnesota’s 2008 General Election, Minnesota Majority obtained records from the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension listing all persons under the supervision of the Minnesota Department of Corrections. From these records, we extracted a list of individuals charged with felony crimes at the time of the 2008 election. We then compared this list of felons to voter history records from the Secretary of State’s statewide voter registration system (SVRS).

From this comparison, we compiled a list of 2,803 felons who potentially voted in the 2008 General Election. The highest concentration of the suspected fraudulent votes was found in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties, so additional research was focused in these areas. We verified sample matches with court documents. We also examined polling place roster signatures and voter registration cards. After completing these verifications, we had a high degree of confidence that we had detected hundreds of fraudulent votes cast by ineligible felons in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties.

On October 14th of 2009, Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner announced that 23 individual felons had been charged with election crimes in connection with the 2008 election, characterizing the number as “a handful.” Most were only charged with registering illegally, not actually voting. This left the public with the impression that voter fraud issues from the 2008 election were settled and insignificant. News
stories about these prosecutions were very different from the information Minnesota Majority had been compiling on felon voters.

The DFL has criticized Minnesota Majority for being a partisan, conservative-leaning organization in the hopes of deligitimizing their work. Those criticisms should be forever vanquished because former DFL gubernatorial candidate Susan Gaertner acted on a number of people discovered by Minnesota Majority’s investigation.

What’s astonishing to me is that an organization like Minnesota Majority appears to be the only organization interested in protecting election integrity. It’s stunning, in my opinion, that Mark Ritchie, supposedly the highest ranking elections officer in the state, did nothing to comply with HAVA’s anti-fraud provisions. Similarly, it’s stunning that Mr. Pelowski’s committee didn’t launch an investigation into Minnesota Majority’s findings. They certainly could’ve called a hearing while the legislature wasn’t in session.

When Dan Severson won the MNGOP endorsement to be their candidate for Secretary of State, DFL chairman Brian Melendez issued a statement, which I wrote about here. Here’s Chairman Melendez’s statement:

“The Secretary of State’s most important duty is protecting the citizens’ right to vote, that crown jewel of liberty that safeguards all other rights. But Dan Severson would toss up barriers to citizens voting. His rhetoric is disrespectful to the hard-working election officials who, county by county, community by community, shepherd our democratic processes. Severson is a radical partisan who is unsuited to the office of Secretary of State.

“Minnesotans deserve a Secretary of State who cares about maintaining our fair and secure election system and who will work to make sure that all eligible voters can cast their ballots. Dan Severson is not that person. Severson evidently cares a great deal about flinging baseless accusations in a vain quest to rewrite the history of the 2008 recount, but cares very little about maintaining the fair and transparent processes that made that recount a success.”

Chairman Melendez accused Dan Severson of throwing up “barriers to citizens voting.” I said then what I’ll repeat now: what Chairman Melendez calls barriers, most people call safeguards. Based on Minnesota Majority’s findings, it isn’t a stretch to think that some of the things Chairman Melendez calls barriers might be anti-fraud provisions in HAVA.

The fact that the DFL didn’t put a priority on investigating these allegations, many of which have been substantiated, is disturbing though not particularly surprising. These are the same people that refused, twice, to investigate potential union-busting activities by Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson.

This information is most disturbing:

On October 16th of 2009, Minnesota Majority’s submitted affidavits attesting to our findings on felon voters to Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman and Ramsey County Attorney Susan Gaertner. In all, 1,359 names of suspected ineligible felon voters were forwarded to these county attorneys for investigation, with supporting evidence. Eight months after Minnesota Majority provided evidence of
felon voters to the county attorneys, Hennepin County has charged 3 individuals with fraudulent voting by felons and Ramsey County has quietly charged an additional 6 persons.

Since the Minnesota statute of limitations on election crimes is two years, the County Attorney’s ability to prosecute election crimes from the 2008 General Election will expire in November 2010. In many instances, the statute of limitations for registration fraud in 2008 has already passed. In addition, since Minnesota law only requires election records to be retained for 22 months, county election officials will begin destroying election records containing evidence of election crimes in September of 2010.

Let’s review this because it’s that important: of the 1,359 suspected ineligible felon voters that Minnesota Majority submitted to the Hennepin and Ramsey County attorneys, 9 people have been charged with fraudulent voting by felons.

What’s more disturbing is that it will be legal for these records to be thrown out, never to be seen again. The only hope that those records won’t be discarded is if there’s a requirement in federal law requiring their retention.

From a legislative standpoint, it should be a high priority for the next legislature to mandate a longer retention of election records and establish a longer statute of limitations for prosecuting voter fraud.

Let’s also do away with the myth that Minnesota’s election system is run efficiently. First, I’ll stipulate that Minnesota’s election laws are among the most straightforward and clearly written laws in the nation. In my estimation, they are the nation’s gold standard.

This information tells me, though, that Minnesota’s elections are anything but well-run:

On November 3rd of 2008, the day before the General Election, KMSP TV aired a story about convicted felons on the voter registration rolls. Tom Lyden reported that he had found about 100 felons newly registered to vote. One of them was inexplicably registered while still in prison. Lyden brought his findings to Secretary Ritchie, who said he was aware of 26 ineligible felons who had registered to vote and he offered his assurances that the felons problem would be addressed.

Following the 2008 election, Minnesota Majority began to investigate whether any felons who were illegally registered managed to actually vote. What we found surprised us, because the data suggested that 20 times more felons than had been identified by KMSP-TV may have actually voted in the 2008 General Election.

This isn’t acceptable. SecState Ritchie’s lackadaisical attitude towards eliminating felons who weren’t eligible to vote from the final 2008 voter registration list is disturbing at minimum.

This information should startle Minnesotans, too:

First and foremost, we discovered that the number of voters accounted for having cast a ballot in the secretary of state’s voter files did not match the number of ballots certified by the election canvassing board. There were approximately 40,000 more ballots counted than voter histories to account for them.

I’d like to hear SecState Ritchie’s explanation for how that could happen, especially on that widespread of a basis. It’s impossible for me to say that Minnesota’s elections are well run when there are 40,000 more ballots counted in 2008’s final vote totals than there are names on voter registration lists. Having voted a couple dozen times, I know that my polling place requires me to sign the registration sheet before I’m given a ballot. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION.

How is it possible that 40,000 people were handed ballots without the voters signing the registration sheet? That’s approximately 10 times in each of Minnesota’s 4,131 precincts.

Using a standard deceased matching service commonly utilized by mailing houses, we discovered thousands of individuals flagged as deceased who are still on the active voter rolls.

This is insane. We’re talking about Minnesota. This isn’t Chicago or Philadelphia, where elections are occasionally lost based on the ‘dead relatives vote turnout’.

If people can read this post and still say that they’re confident that Minnesota’s elections are (a) well run and (b) corruption free, then they’ve gotta be lying through their teeth.

Similarly, if people can read this post and say that Minnesota is complying with HAVA’s anti-fraud provisions, then those people shouldn’t be trusted.

It’s time that Minnesota revamped its election operations. The first step in that process is to elect someone who takes election integrity seriously. That immediately eliminates Mark Ritchie from serious voters’ consideration. He’s had 4 years to run Minnesota’s elections into the ground. That’s 4 years too many.

Similarly, it’s important that Minnesota lengthened the statute of limitations for voter fraud and voter registration fraud and all other election-related crimes. Finally, it’s important that election records be retained longer, too.

Only then can we be certain that Minnesota’s elections are being run properly.

Technorati: HAVA, Registration Fraud, Voter Fraud, Felon Voting, Dead Vote, Mark Ritchie, Susan Gaertner, Hennepin County, Mike Freeman, Ramsey County, Corruption, DFL, Election 2008, Election 2010

When I first wrote about the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation scandal 10 days ago, the article I quoted didn’t mention Bartle Bull’s name. I didn’t know about his involvement in the incident until Part I of Megyn Kelly’s interview with J. Christian Adams.

I find it most interesting that my Google news search of J. Christian Adams’ name turns up 277 entries. What’s even more interesting is that my Google news search of Bartle Bull’s name yields a paltry 8 hits.

By comparison, a Google search on the terms BP Oil Spill yields 19,700 stories.

First, those story counts are miniscule for people at the epicenter of a major scandal, which this voter intimidation scandal is, even though the Agenda Media isn’t treating it as such.

Second, I think it’s rather odd that Bartle Bull’s name isn’t connected with J. Christian Adams’ name much more frequently. Bull was an attorney deployed at the Philadelphia, PA voting site where the New Black Panthers were intimidating voters and election judges.

Let me revise that statement. I think it’s entirely intentional that the Agenda Media isn’t mentioning Bartle Bull’s name in connection with this case. I think it’s intentional because the Agenda Media knows that they can’t cast this as a conservative crackpot with an axe to grind the minute they mention that a civil rights attorney who was a close friend of Bobby Kennedy’s in the 1960’s witnessed the acts of intimidation.

I just did searches of the New York Times, the Washington Post and the LA Times in connection with Bartle Bull. Each search came up empty. I wish I could say that I’m surprised but I’d be lying. It would be an accurate statement to say that I’m upset that these newspapers haven’t covered this scandal.

When Republicans retake the House this November, one of the things they should do is conduct oversight hearings into why this case was dropped after the DoJ attorneys won a default judgement against James Jackson, King Samir Shabazz and the New Black Panther Party.

It’s bad enough that the 3 major newspapers are essentially ignoring this case. It’s worse that the Agenda Media isn’t telling people that the new Black Panther Party’s threats and intimidation were witnessed by credible witnesses, including a close friend of famed civil rights advocate Bobby Kennedy.

Frankly, I think it’s appalling that they’re getting away with this level of negligence. Worse, it’s appalling that Congress isn’t treating this issue with the seriousness it deserves.

As Mssrs. Adams and Bull have shown, this shouldn’t be a partisan issue. This should be an issue that 80+ percent of the nation agrees on. Instead, you’ve got the Agenda Media, the Holder Justice Department and the Obama administration pitching a whitewash.

That’s unacceptable and it won’t be tolerated. Their individual days of reckoning are fast approaching. It won’t be pretty when their days of reckoning arrive.

Technorati: Google, Agenda Media, LA Times, Washington Post, NY Times, James Jackson, King Samir Shabazz, Black Panthers, DOJ, Eric Holder, President Obama, Corruption, Racism, Bartle Bull, bobby Kennedy, Civil Rights, J. Christian Adams, Investigation

Cross-posted at California Conservative

There’s now question that Far Left’s villification campaign against J. Christian Adams is into full gear. What’s embarrassing are the arguments they’re making against J. Christian Adams. This hit piece is a great example:

A former Justice Department official told Main Justice that the attorney behind the controversial New Black Panther Party voter intimidation case was hired in the Civil Rights Division Voting Section under a process the DOJ Inspector General later determined was improperly influenced by politics.

Joseph Rich, the former chief of the Civil Rights Division’s Voting Section and a 36-year employee of the Department of Justice, said that shortly before he left the DOJ in 2005 he received a call from Bradley Schlozman, then a Deputy Assistant Attorney General who later became acting Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Rights Division.

Here’s my reaction to that argument: So what? How does this information change the facts of the case? Does this information change whether James Jackson or King Samir Shabazz intimidated potential voters and election judges? Does this information change what we’ve seen on that video?

Of course it doesn’t.

You’d think that if people are going to argue something, they’d make a compelling argument that changes people’s minds. Instead, the radical Left isn’t trying to persuade anyone. They’re just smearing someone who’s opposed their agenda.

The bad news is that this is just the start of the smear merchants’ campaign. The smear merchants are being deployed into political campaigns literally as we speak.

The good news is that the smear merchants’ arguments are flimsy at best and easily refuted.

J. Christian Adams has the facts on his side in this instance. He’s also got Bartle Bull, a man of opposite political beliefs but a man who’s lived and breathed the civil rights movement because of his attachment to Bobby Kennedy, on his side.

Couple those things with the video and you’ve got a pretty formidable base to fight from.

Technorati: Hearing, Testimony, J. Christian Adams, Bartle Bull, Civil Rights, James Jackson, King Samir Shabazz, Black Panthers, DOJ, Corruption, Eric Holder, Loretta King, Steve Rosenbaum

Cross-posted at California Conservative

The New Black Panther Election Day Intimidation story isn’t new. It’s literally been in the press since Election Day, 2008. This weekend, the story took a new twist, thanks to J. Christian Adams’s op-ed. Here’s what will infuriate fair-minded Americans:

On the day President Obama was elected, armed men wearing the black berets and jackboots of the New Black Panther Party were stationed at the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia. They brandished a weapon and intimidated voters and poll watchers. After the election, the Justice Department brought a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and those armed thugs. I and other Justice attorneys diligently pursued the case and obtained an entry of default after the defendants ignored the charges. Before a final judgment could be entered in May 2009, our superiors ordered us to dismiss the case.

The New Black Panther case was the simplest and most obvious violation of federal law I saw in my Justice Department career. Because of the corrupt nature of the dismissal, statements falsely characterizing the case and, most of all, indefensible orders for the career attorneys not to comply with lawful subpoenas investigating the dismissal, this month I resigned my position as a Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney.

We’ve known that the New Black Panthers didn’t bother to put up a legal fight. There’s no defending something with that much visual evidence. That’s a case even I could win. The facts speak for themselves.

That part isn’t new.

What’s new is that a prosecutor working the case has stepped forward to accuse the assistant attorney general for civil rights, Tom Perez, of testifying that the “facts and law” did not support this case. Here’s something else that’s new:

Most corrupt of all, the lawyers who ordered the dismissal, Loretta King, the Obama-appointed acting head of the Civil Rights Division, and Steve Rosenbaum, did not even read the internal Justice Department memorandums supporting the case and investigation. Just as Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. admitted that he did not read the Arizona immigration law before he condemned it, Mr. Rosenbaum admitted that he had not bothered to read the most important department documents detailing the investigative facts and applicable law in the New Black Panther case. Christopher Coates, the former Voting Section chief, was so outraged at this dereliction of responsibility that he actually threw the memos at Mr. Rosenbaum in the meeting where they were discussing the dismissal of the case. The department subsequently removed all of Mr. Coates’ responsibilities and sent him to South Carolina.

Let’s swap out the New Black Panthers Party and insert white supremacists. Let’s swap out the white voters and insert black voters. Is there any doubt but that the white supremacists would’ve been prosecuted, convicted and received the maximum sentence? Of course there isn’t. The facts speak for themselves. It’s that obvious.

Most disgusting is this information:

Some of my co-workers argued that the law should not be used against black wrongdoers because of the long history of slavery and segregation. Less charitable individuals called it “payback time.” Incredibly, after the case was dismissed, instructions were given that no more cases against racial minorities like the Black Panther case would be brought by the Voting Section.

If this information is the truth, then it’s time to start cleaning out the Obama Injustice Department. It’s corrupt to the point that Loretta King, Steve Rosenbaum and Tom Perez should probably be brought up on ethics charges, if not criminal charges.

If the law isn’t applied equally to everyone, then it’s worthless.

I’d love seeing a reporter at Monday’s White House Briefing ask Robert Gibbs why this case was dropped. Further, I’d love seeing the White House press corps pepper him with question after question on this subject.

If the media won’t question these actions, then that should be the final nail in the Agenda Media’s coffin. If the Agenda Media won’t ask questions about such a vile potential scandal, then they’re complicit in any potential scandal.

With the exception of the Nixon administration, I haven’t read about this type of corruption since I started following politics. If the NBPP isn’t held accountable for their acts of intimidation, then this administration needs to be swept into the dustbin of history during the 2012 elections.

There’s no excusing this, though the bloggers at MainJustice attempt to do just that in this post:

When the George W. Bush Justice Department filed a civil complaint against members of the New Black Panther Party in January, it invoked a rarely used provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act to allege voter intimidation.

It was the second time the Bush DOJ filed suit under Section 11 (b) of the landmark civil rights legislation, both times targeting black defendants.

The common denominator in these unusual applications of Section 11 (b) is J. Christian Adams, a line attorney at the Justice Department who compiled the Black Panthers case and also worked on a 2005 federal lawsuit against black officials in Mississippi accused of discriminating against whites.

Adams is a career Voting Section lawyer. He is also a foot soldier in the conservative movement, hired into the Justice Department during the Bush administration under a process the department’s Inspector General concluded was improperly politicized.

Adams’s background helps explain how a relatively minor incident in Philadelphia during the 2008 presidential election involving two members of an anti-white fringe group blossomed into a political controversy for the Obama administration.

“Adams’ background helps explain how a relatively minor incident in Philadelphia…blossomed into a political controversy“? Excuse me? This wasn’t an isolated incident like these bloggers would have you believe:

Some have called the actions in Philadelphia an isolated incident, not worthy of federal attention. To the contrary, the Black Panthers in October 2008 announced a nationwide deployment for the election. We had indications that polling-place thugs were deployed elsewhere, not only in November 2008, but also during the Democratic primaries, where they targeted white Hillary Rodham Clinton supporters. In any event, the law clearly prohibits even isolated incidents of voter intimidation.

Let these lefty bloggers whine all they want about Adams’ political affiliation. They’re utterly irrelevant to this story. What’s relevant is that the New Black Panther Party was caught on tape committing acts of voter intimidation. Res ipsa loquitur. The facts speak for themselves.

It’s that simple.

Technorati: Scandal, New Black Panther Party, Corruption, Voting Rights Act, Eric Holder, Loretta King, Steve Rosenbaum, Department Of Justice, Ethics, Criminal Charges, President Obama, Democrats, J. Christian Adams, Op-ed, Resignation

Cross-posted at California Conservative

This Editor and Publisher article perpetuates the myth that ACORN is being wrongfully targeted by evil conservatives. E & P is perpetuating this shattered myth:

Leading up to the 2008 presidential campaign, ACORN was a target of allegations of voter fraud from the Republican Party and conservative news sources. Although the predicted voter fraud never materialized, the stories planted during the election season yielded a bountiful crop of misinformation. Now, in November 2009, a national survey revealed shocking public misperceptions about ACORN: more than half of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of ACORN, and 52% of Republicans, 18% of independents, and 9% of Democrats think ACORN stole the election for Obama.

While I don’t believe that President Obama would’ve lost the election if not for ACORN, it isn’t a myth that ACORN committed voter registration fraud. In fact, I’m betting that this article is a distraction from yesterday’s report. E & P knows that ACORN employees pled guilty to voter registration fraud in Seattle:

Three of seven defendants in the biggest voter-registration fraud scheme in Washington history have pleaded guilty and one has been sentenced, prosecutors said Monday.

The defendants were all temporary employees of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, when they allegedly filled out and submitted more than 1,800 fictitious voter-registration cards during a 2006 registration drive in King and Pierce counties.

E & P knows about ACORN, not ACORN employees, being indicted by Nevada’s Democratic Attorney General for “operating a fraud-infested voter registration drive in the state during the 2008 presidential campaign”:

ACORN illegally compensated workers to register voters based on a corporate mandated quota system, according to Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto. Because canvassers were illegally required to meet quotas to keep their jobs, thousands of registrations with fake names and addresses were submitted throughout the state.

Notice that Nevada’s Attorney General accused ACORN the organization of illegally compensating workers “based on a corporate mandated quote system.” Nevada’s A.G. wouldn’t make that accusation without having proof of that, most likely in the form of people coming forward during the investigation or in the form of emails recovered during the execution of a search warrant or interoffice memos.

It isn’t a coincidence that E & P’s article showed up the day after Andrew Breitbart reported that San Diego ACORN’s office dumped a bunch of sensitive documents into a dumpster days after California A.G. Jerry Brown announced that he’d be investigating ACORN’s San Diego office.

Among the documents allegedly dumped by ACORN’s San Diego office were employees’ W-4 forms. Follow this link to view a blank W-4 form. Notice that a person’s social security number is one of the things that an employee must fill out. According to this article, W-4 forms are supposed to be kept for four years “after the tax due date or the actual date paid.” If any of the W-4’s that were dumped were for temps, then ACORN’s got alot of trouble with the IRS and others.

E & P then tries softpedalling the child prostitution charges:

The embarrassing videos were soon posted to the Internet, and in short order became a national story. Starting at the conservative Web site biggovernment.com, the videos quickly became the top story at Fox News and conservative talk radio, moved to CNN’s Lou Dobbs Show, then proved irresistible for the mainstream news media.

ACORN responded by firing the employees involved and initiating an internal review by former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger. Washington responded to the incidents with outrage, with Congress quickly voting to rescind ACORN’s federal funding, primarily for homeownership counseling. Although ACORN received no funds from the IRS or the Census Bureau, both agencies also removed ACORN as “partners” in their efforts to help the working poor qualify for tax rebates and to encourage low-income households to fill out census forms.

That’s nice PR but it doesn’t mean a thing in light of the document dump prior to the California AG initiating an investigation into ACORN California. It means less when coupled with the ACORN organization using incentives and quotas, which is against Nevada law.

ACORN’s defense has always been that after they find out about the wrongdoing, they cooperate with the investigations. Average people don’t care about that. They’re just wondering why ACORN doesn’t establish policies that would eliminate the need to assist in so many investigations.

Despite everything that E & P wrote, the inescapable truth is that ACORN is corrupt to its core. It’s just that simple.

Technorati: ACORN, Registration Drive, Scandal, Investigations, Document Dump, Nevada, California, Payroll Records, Identity Theft, Corruption, Democrats

Cross-posted at California Conservative

Doug Grow’s post about a potential matchup of Rep. Erik Paulsen vs. State Sen. Terri Bonoff got me thinking about the 2010 election cycle.

First, let’s put in the context of there being a significantly different political dynamic at work in the 2010 cycle than what existed in 2008. Simply put, Sen. Bonoff might’ve lost her best opportunity to win the Third District seat.

According to Rasmussen’s Generic Ballot Question polling, Democrats currently trail Republicans by a 43%-38% margin, which is outside the margin of error. That means Bonoff, like Tarryl Clark, would be fighting against this year’s trend. It isn’t impossible to win in this climate but it’s more challenging than 2008 would’ve been.

It’s also more difficult to defeat an incumbent than it is to capture an open seat. If you factor in what I call the Obama Factor (Obama’s presence at the top of the ticket plus his great GOTV operation), it isn’t difficult to picture Sen. Bonoff having a better shot at winning last time.

The other thing that’s getting noticed is that Erik Paulsen is a solid conservative who is creating a strong bond with CD-3 GOP activists. Those activists will be a strong GOTV operation next year.

There’s still 15 months separating us from Election Day, 2010, which is several political lifetimes. Still, with Democrats spending money like there’s no tomorrow and with health care reform pulling Democrats down, coupled with the fact that Democrats will have alot of vulnerable freshman and sophomore seats to defend and Sen. Bonoff is fighting an uphill fight.

Technorati: DFL, Terri Bonoff, President Obama, Health Care, Polling, Generic Ballot, MNGOP, Erik Paulsen, Election 2010