Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Any form of intimidation should not be tolerated" ERD, & Related News, FRI. 1/19/07

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
rumpel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 02:44 PM
Original message
"Any form of intimidation should not be tolerated" ERD, & Related News, FRI. 1/19/07
Edited on Fri Jan-19-07 02:45 PM by rumpel
Today, I would like to welcome the new Senator and former Congressman, Benjamin Cardin of Maryland, new member of the Judiciary Committee. Last night, I watched the Judiciary Gonzales hearings in it's entirety, somewhat late from other DU'ers :), but likewise impressed of a potential progress on the horizon.
Senator Cardin's exchange with Attorney General Gonzales is case in point of what is going on inside the Department of Justice' Civil Rights Division.

Long lines in two counties of at best 2 hours, more commonly 3 hours, was the experience of voters in two counties on November 7, 2006. While this is attributable to several factors, he said, of too few machines, inadequate training of supervisors and many additional factors, these lines were only experienced in yes, predominantly black counties. Senator Cardin expressed his serious doubts whether election officials were in fact acting in good faith to ensure equal access to the ballot box in the November 7 election.

Senator Cardin then continued to inquire whether the Justice Department was doing anything at all in relation to a deceptive campaign flyer, which was distributed the day before the election in his district, laden with false endorsements. Ah, I thought - here in Southern California, I received one of those, too.
Senator Cardin mentioned that an inquiry on this matter was sent to Gonzales in a letter from Senator Schumer, and what I now personally believe to be a common response by Gonzales: simply ignored.

The familiar prelude of these soldiers of Bush in answering questions are the usual, of course it is one of "their biggest concerns", as they too, are minorities, and oh, how much they care personally of the fundamental equal right of a vote. Well, Mr. Gonzales, your actions speak louder than your empty words. The majority of this country now see, that time and again, comments such as yours reek of insincerity at best.

The excuse not to investigate starts with the State rights to conduct their own elections, oh, Senator Cardin bites back; "The Voting Rights Act is a federal law, is it not? Gonzales quickly escapes into the, "this is hard work" mode, not having the "tools" in such matters as enforcing "campaign tactics and rhetoric".
As Senator Cardin rightly points out, we here activists of election reform know and document, it is an orchestrated effort to deceive, and that it is not isolated to his district but we suspect in the entire nation. Well, I received mine. One would think, it is the obligation of the DOJ to investigate -unless it is de facto condoned. Mr. Gonzales don't embellish, we are well aware you gutted the staff at the Civil Rights Division, you deliberately removed your resources.

The entire hearing made one thing crystal clear to me. One of the US attorneys who was forced to resign in San Diego, Ms Lam, was in fact the prosecutor of Duke Cunningham's shenanigans. Dear San Diego, with the opinions of the appeal pending until April on CA-50, I am afraid you will have to fight harder, especially for the minorities, as you will not have an US attorney looking to enforce the Voting Rights Act in the near future. Gonzales duped Spector to insert a clause for no oversight for replacements of US Attorneys in the Patriot Act late last year. Combine that with the stance of Gonzales that judges are inferior to the Almighty Executive.

Who said that the Department of Justice represents the people? Mr. Gonzales made clear yesterday that the Department of Justice and it's US Attorneys are the Executive Branch, while denying, we know that you are executing the litmus test of loyalty to the president and not "We The People". In this regard, I was quite amused with the questions of another new member, Senator Whitehouse of Rhode Island, a former US Attorney himself. Perhaps it was a mere gut feeling of mine, or did I in fact see a glimpse of "oops" moment in the demeanor of Mr. Gonzales? I am looking forward to Senator Whitehouse's efforts.

No, Senator Cardin it is obviously not in the interests of the Executive Branch to enforce the laws on it's own party and or allies in any matter, including The Voting Rights Act, among many others. But I am grateful for you addressing this issue and I thoroughly applaud and agree with you: "Any form of intimidation should not be tolerated".

Mr Gonzales may I remind you that you and the president are on payroll graciously provided by "We The People".

Congratulations Maryland and Rhode Island, you have elected some fine people to represent you.

December 5, 2005

The Honorable Alberto Gonzales
Attorney General
United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530

Dear Attorney General Gonzales:

We are writing to follow up on Chairman Specter’s letter to you dated November 22, 2005 requesting a report to the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding the current priorities of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (“DOJ”). We want to re-emphasize the depth of concern regarding trends away from vigorous civil rights enforcement in light of recent news reports. The information reported in the press and available to the Congress shows an unacceptable decline in the number of traditional civil rights cases filed by the Division under this Administration, particularly in the important area of voting rights; a disturbing attrition of experienced attorneys from the Division, and an increasing diversion of the Division’s resources to non-civil rights issues, such as immigration enforcement.

We are particularly concerned about reports that the conclusions of experienced career DOJ attorneys have been overruled by DOJ officials for what appear to have been politically motivated reasons. The Washington Post recently reported that the Division overruled the recommendation of career DOJ attorneys by approving a Texas congressional redistricting plan that the career attorneys believed would discriminate based on race and ethnicity. As reported in the December 2, 2005 article by Dan Eggen, “Justice Staff Saw Texas Districting As Illegal: Voting Rights Finding On Map Pushed by DeLay Was Overruled,” six lawyers and two analysts in DOJ’s Civil Rights Division unanimously concluded that the Texas redistricting plan violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 because it eliminated several districts where minorities had substantial voting power and illegally diluted black and Hispanic voting power. However, according to the article, political appointees overruled their recommendation that the redistricting plan not be approved, and the approved redistricting plan resulted in significant Republican political gains.

This new revelation follows on other recent reports of political appointees overruling the conclusions of career employees regarding the pre-clearance provisions of the Voting Rights Act. Earlier this month, The Washington Post reported that Civil Rights Division officials overruled a 5-1 career staff recommendation against approving a Georgia voter photo identification requirement, which disadvantaged African Americans and other voters. As you know, the Georgia law, which The New York Times has called “a national disgrace,” was recently enjoined by a federal court.

These disclosures highlight the urgent need for your report and for increased oversight of the Civil Rights Division. We request that your report include an explanation of the decision-making process which led to the approval of the Texas redistricting plan and the Georgia voter ID requirements, in addition to an explanation of the decline in civil rights enforcement and the increase in attorney attrition. The vital work of the Civil Rights Division demands that the civil rights enforcement decisions made by experienced career attorneys not be curtailed for political reasons.

Thank you for your prompt response to this request regarding the protections of the Voting Rights Act, which guarantee that no individuals or groups are without a voice in this democracy.

Sincerely,

Sen. Patrick Leahy
Sen. Edward Kennedy
Sen. Christopher Dodd
Sen. Barack Obama
Rep. John Lewis

http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200512/120505.html

....and with that I apologize, I will not be able to post the usual collection of news as found on the net, today -
so I appreciate:

All members welcome and encouraged to participate.


Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.

If you can:

1. Post stories and announcements you find on the web.

2. Post stories using the "Election Fraud and Reform News Sources" listed here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph ...

3. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.

4. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.


If you want to know how to post "News Banners" or other images, go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph ...

Link to previous Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillYourVoteBCounted Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. Ohio elections workers on trial - recount rigged, prosecution says
The Ohio fraud is making the news rounds -




Associated Press
CLEVELAND - Three county elections workers conspired to avoid a more thorough recount of ballots in the 2004 presidential election, a prosecutor told jurors during opening statements Thursday.

"The evidence will show that this recount was rigged, maybe not for political reasons, but rigged nonetheless," Prosecutor Kevin Baxter said. "They did this so they could spend a day rather than weeks or months" on the recount, he said.

Jacqueline Maiden, the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections' coordinator, faces six counts of misconduct over how the ballots were reviewed. Rosie Grier, manager of the board's ballot department, and Kathleen Dreamer, an assistant manager, face the same charges.

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/16490602.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-19-07 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. Kick to the top.
Thanks rumpel!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
4. Kick. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
galloglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-20-07 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
5. K'n'R
And didn't Gonzalez squirm today.

I can't wait til he sweats bullets!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 02:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC