Even Rush and Hannity are starting to talk more about the fraud of the loss.
Let's get this in to Drudge and to Greta van Susteren.
FReegards!
Because they’re izod-wearing, wussified country-club, girly men.
As much as I like slapping the Republicants for their perfidy to their oaths, I won’t play the blogpimp game. Post your entire essay here, or go on ignore.
LTC West never heard about it!
” - - - The Republican Party made an agreement 30 years ago with the Democrat Party NOT to ___ ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ , ALWAYS!
That was then, and this is NOW!
You can’t possibly believe that crap! Can you even imagine how many politicians would tell them to blow it out their a**?
So they each made an agreement to look the other way on fraud and corruption. Let me Think. Yup- It sounds right. From what I have observed then that policy applies to much more than vote fraud.
Even Rush and Hannity are starting to talk more about the fraud of the loss.
Let's get this in to Drudge and to Greta van Susteren.
FReegards!
OOPS! Thought there was an article here. Oh well.
There is now compelling and undeniable evidence that MAJOR vote fraud had been perpetrated in the November 2012 Election. See FOTM’s posts chronicling the extensive pervasive fraud by going to our “2012 Election” page below our FOTM masthead, and click on those post links colored neon green.
But our screaming and hollering are to no avail. No one is listening to us. Not even the Republican Party.
Here’s why….
The Republican Party made an agreement 30 years ago with the Democrat Party NOT to ensure voting integrity and NOT to pursue suspected vote fraud.
Yes. You read it correctly.
In fact, legally the GOP cannot ensure voting integrity, nor can it prevent vote fraud.
Here’s the astounding reason, which is kept from the American people.
PolitiJim writes for Gulag Bound, November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine Engelbrecht related a meeting she had with Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), asking what the GOP would do about voter integrity. The answer?
Nothing. They aren’t legally able to.
This all goes back to a lawsuit 31 years ago, in 1981. The following is compiled from an account on The Judicial View, a legal website specializing in court decision research and alerts, and from “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615.
In 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the RNC, the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).
The lawsuit alleged that:
The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.
The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.
The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with “National Ballot Security Task Force” armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.
To settle the lawsuit, in 1982, the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or Consent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The following is what the RNC and RSC, in the Consent Decree, agreed they would do:
[I]n the future, in all states and territories of the United States:
(a) comply with all applicable state and federal laws protecting the rights of duly qualified citizens to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice;
(b) in the event that they produce or place any signs which are part of ballot security activities, cause said signs to disclose that they are authorized or sponsored by the party committees and any other committees participating with the party committees;
(c) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their agents or employees to remove or deface any lawfully printed and placed campaign materials or signs;
(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;
(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed toward districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;
(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.
The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”
As modified in 1987, the Consent Decree defined “ballot security activities” to mean “ballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”
Since 1982, that Consent Decree has been renewed every year by the original judge, Carter appointee District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise, now 88 years old. Long retired, Debevoise comes back yearly for the sole purpose of renewing his 1982 order for another year.
U.S. District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise
In 2010, the RNC unsuccessfully appealed “to vacate or modify” the Consent Decree in “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” Case No. 09-4615 (C.A. 3, Mar. 8, 2012). (I paid The Judicial Review $10 for the PDF of Case No. 09-4615 and uploaded the 59-page document to FOTM’s media library. To read Case No. 09-4615, click here!)
This is a summary of the appeals judge’s ruling, filed on March 8, 2012:
In 1982, the Republican National Committee (“RNC”) and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”) entered into a consent decree (the “Decree” or “Consent Decree”), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’s approval in advance. The RNC appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denying, in part, the RNC’s Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent Decree. Although the District Court declined to vacate the Decree, it did make modifications to the Decree. The RNC argues that the District Court abused its discretion by modifying the Decree as it did and by declining to vacate the Decree. For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Court’s judgment.
Surprise! The judge who denied the RNC’s appeal to “vacate” the 1982 Consent Decree is an Obama appointee, Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit
Guy Benson of Townhall.com points out that in last Tuesday’s election, Obama only won by 406,348 votes in 4 states:
Florida: 73,858
Ohio: 103,481
Virginia: 115,910
Colorado: 113,099
Those four states, with a collective margin of 406,348 votes for Obama, add up to 69 electoral votes. Had Romney won 407,000 or so additional votes in the right proportion in those states, he would have 275 electoral votes.
All four states showed Romney ahead in the days leading up to the election. But on November 6, Romney lost all four states by a substantial margin, all of which have precincts that inexplicably went 99% for Obama, had voter registrations that exceeded their population, and had experienced problems with voting machines.
This election was stolen by the Democrats via vote fraud. Despite all the evidence of fraud, the Republican Party has been strangely silent about it.
Now you know why.
I’ll leave you with one last, even more disturbing thought:
The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” is not defined.
The Democrat Party knew this 30 years ago, more than enough time to put a plan in place to identify and groom their “perfect candidate” — in the words of Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) in 2008, a “light-skinned” black Democrat who has “no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.”
Being a black Democrat, this perfect candidate would get the support of almost all black Americans (96% in 2008!) and other racial minorities (two-thirds of Hispanics in 2008).
Being a “light-skinned” black with “no Negro dialect”, this perfect candidate would get the support of white Americans perpetually guilt-ridden about America’s original sin of slavery.
It doesn’t matter if this “perfect candidate” has dubious Constitutional eligibility to be president. They would see to it that his original birth certificate (if there is one) would never see the light of day. The same with his other documents — his passports, school and college records, draft registration, and medical records (so we’ll never know why Obama has that very long scar running from one side of his head, over the crown, to the other side).
Now, we understand the significance of the account Tom Fife wrote during the 2008 presidential campaign. Fife, a U.S. government contractor, claims that in 1992 while he was visiting Moscow, a woman with undying allegiance to Soviet Communism (the Soviet Union had recently collapsed, on December 31, 1991) told him that a black man named Barack, born of a white American woman and an African male, was being groomed by communists to be, and would be elected, President of the United States.
Now, we finally understand the cryptic remark made in May 2010, by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan: “Obama was selected before he was elected.”
In 2008, this “perfect candidate” won the presidential election. And despite his many failures in his first term, he would be reelected in 2012 for a second term via massive vote fraud. But nothing would be done about the vote fraud, because of that Consent Decree signed by the RNC 30 years ago.
The Republican Party is dead — and with it, the U.S. two-party system as well — and the sooner we voters recognize that the better.
The question that remains is whether the American Republic is also dead.
UPDATE (Nov. 16, 2012):
Since I published this post yesterday, we’ve been asking each other: “What can I/we do about this?” Here are my suggestions:
1. If you are a registered Republican, QUIT! Switch your voter registration ID to non-partisan Independent.
2. Stop donating money, not even one penny, to the GOP. Tell them why.
3. Spread the word. Please send the URL of this post (http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/why-the-gop-will-not-do-anything-about-vote-fraud/) to:
Ah, the conspiracists have finally figured out that we aren’t idiots, and that they need to explain why it is that politicians aren’t fighting voter fraud.
And I guess they figure 30 years is long enough ago that nobody will be able to check them. Of course, I imagine a good number of the conspiracists weren’t born 30 years ago.
Of course, the like a good conspiracy, it has vague generalities to keep from getting tripped up in the pesky reality of details. So “the GOP” made a deal with “the Democrats” “30 years ago” (That is 1982, 2 years into the great President Ronald Reagan’s 8 year presidential term).
I’m sure the conspiracists will explain how “the GOP” did this behind Reagan’s back, so as not to smear him with this charge.
Left unexplained is how a party who can’t keep their own members from jumping ship, endorsing democrats, keeping on message for more than 5 minutes, or basically doing anything they want, somehow HAS been able to keep an entire generation of politicians both docile and quiet.
And I wonder if anybody pushing this theory has ever been involved in an actual political campaign, or actually KNOWS anybody who has actually run for office.
I doubt it. Because if they did, they would know how absurd this argument is. People who run for public office are driven to win. They spend thousands of hours, put their lives on hold. They give up their jobs. They put their lives in public for ridicule. They spend vast sums of their own money, and they hit up all their friends, family, and aquaintances for more money. They go to hundreds of meetings talking people into voting for them, into supporting them, into primary or caucus victories, just to get to the general election.
And according to the conspiracists, when they lose by a few hundred votes, and are confronted with obvious fraud that proves they should have won, these people, having invested their blood, sweat, and tears, their lives, their livelyhood, their very being into trying to win, just lay down and walk away.
That, my friend, is a fantasy you couldn’t pay people to believe. They pretend Allen West is special — but he is the norm. People don’t give up because they feel obligated to support some clandestine 30-year-old agreement that is both secret, but also dictated to every single one of thousands of politicians who run under the GOP banner every 4 years. They give up because, when they actually look at the results, they realize they lost.
And no, I didn’t read the heavily excerpted BLOG ENTRY. If you want someone to read something, post it here.
DO IT ANYWAY!!!
I say a big BS. I say that the GOP are not bound by a consent decree 31 years ago if there is even such a thing. That is all baloney. Give it up.
Ronald Kaufman?
Would that be the same Republican political consultant Ron Kaufman who was on Romney’s team? (Long-time MA political operative).
Sorry I don’t know some of you don’t like to read at the links.
I thought I would save this website band-width by not posting the entire article.
So some of you think the reason the losers don’t challenge voter fraud is because they believe they have lost by looking at the numbers.
That could be so.
Unfortunately the numbers this year tell a different story - it tells of rampant voter fraud, at least at the battleground states.
We don’t know why there are so few challenges from the GOP losers.
But now we know why the RNC is so silent!
Could it be it hurts so much that we would rather deny it - call it conspiracy, unbelievable, ‘so-what?’....
We will never right the wrong if we don’t fight.
First we have to face the reality - the obama culture is a fertile ground for voter fraud.
We all find it unbelievable that the GOP losers just take it so silently.
There must be reasons - brutal lamestream media attacks, no support for them from their own party, no money, exhaustion, too afraid to be labelled ‘sore-losers’....
You have the right to doubt this.
Don’t you owe it to yourself to check it out and evaluate if something can be done about this?
So what your saying is........ only a moron would vote?......
!
Yes, and how many secretaries of state are democrats who, with the push of a button, can easily tweek results. I don’t trust any of them! A bunch of crooks and cronies. Our country has gone to the dogs.
“The article is inaccurate. The Consent Agreement between the RNC and the DNC is that neither can Monitor Poll stations MEANING they cannot send/be poll watchers. The Candidate’s Campaign or a 3rd Party CAN send poll watchers.
I spoke with the GOP Legal Department on this item specifically – so PLEASE – call them yourselves (the legal department) AND clean up the propaganda as we do NOT want to be like the Left. REMEMBER we are the party of FACTS.”
http://gulagbound.com/36046/no-joke-the-gop-can-not-legally-help-stop-vote-fraud/
The statist propagandists like to use the label “voter suppression” to describe any activity where free speech and free association dissuades a person from casting a vote for a democrat.
But no matter my intent, I’m free to “suppress” any voter I want to as long as I’m not threatening or committing fraud. And so is anyone else.
And I’m free to associate with any other person. The RNC, like any other organization that cannot ‘practically’ exclude members, is a free association.
As such, the association has the same rights collectively as the individuals that make up the association.
Whether or not some legal decision, consent decree, or law says differently does not make my opinion wrong.
In fact, I’m about fed up with people telling me right is wrong just because some left-wing statist court says so.