Posted on 11/14/2020 6:55:14 AM PST by gspurlock
Please note 2 of the links in the body of this text no longer work. There should still be enough information for you to do additional research to verify or contradict.
Following is the original text from my blog post of December, 2, 2012:
In the Presidential election of 2012, I experienced the longest lines at early voting that I have ever seen. I read articles from different parts of the country reporting the same phenomenon. On election day there were excessive lines with many polling places required to stay open hours longer than normal to accommodate all of the voters who were in line at closing time.
Yet, I am expected to believe that there were millions fewer voters than in 2008 when we did not see the same phenomena. I am told the base did not turn out, even though Romney/Ryan rallies drew 10,000 in an unheard of town in Pennsylvania and an Obama rally in Cleveland, Ohio, a major Democrat stronghold, only drew a few hundred.
Even United Nations poll watchers were baffled at the absence of voter identification.
Now, I read that the Republican Party is legally prohibited from engaging any efforts to ensure voter integrity.
I have to ask not whether we should initiate a 3rd party, but is it necessary? If the Republican Party is prohibited from any activity to prevent voter fraud and has been since 1982, might this explain the leftward lurch of most branches and levels of government despite the fact that 40% of the population is conservative, 21% liberal and 35% moderate?
I must ask, is the Republican Party not only impotent to challenge any of the illegal activities of the Democrat Party, but is it actually complicit in undermining our Constitution and our liberty? Are the speeches and the ritual of crafting a party platform just theater while behind the scenes our Republican legislators, executives and party leaders make toasts with the socialist Democrats to the demise of our liberty, and laugh heartily at our naivety?
For 30 years the Republican Party has willingly complied with a judicial decree to violate the rule of law and has not challenged it.
Is the Republican Party going to step up to the plate or does it need to be replaced with a new party not so willingly constrained from upholding the Constitution and protecting our liberty?
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2012/11/06/un_poll_watchers_baffled_us_doesnt_require_id_to_vote
http://www.gallup.com/poll/152021/conservatives-remain-largest-ideological-group.aspx
Per the following article from Judicial review:
http://judicialview.com/Court-Cases/Civil-Procedure/Democratic-National-Committee-v-Republican-National-Committee/10/201975
“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.”
The relevant text from the decree is:
(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.
Basically the consent decree imposed in 1982 has left the Democrat with pretty much free reign to engage in and perfect voter fraud for nearly 40 years.
Here is a link to the original post: https://backyardfence.wordpress.com/2012/12/02/democrat-voter-fraud-and-republican-complicity/
If they get away with stealing it more power to them.
99.999% of people who smoke pot have never been arrested for smoking pot; just because only a tiny number of people are arrested for smoking pot doesn’t mean there aren’t millions doing it.
It is the same for vote fraud. Vote fraud is systematic!
It won’t be fixed b4 2022 or even 2024.
This is no longer in effect. The judge that kept renewing it either retired or died, and he was the only one that could keep it going.
Until the Republicans start stuffing the hell out of the ballot boxes ...no one will really care about vote fraud.
Can you imagine the Dem party abiding by a consent decree for 36 years, my GOD the Republican Party is totally made up of wimps.
Correction. It won’t be fixed.
America will go the way of Venezuela.
Sure, we have some great military tech. It will all be sold (by Republicans and Democrats alike) to China.
We have some great infrastructure. It will all crumble.
We have some great companies. They will flee our shores.
We’ll be plundered and looted, and the Great American Experiment will end.
Well, we lasted 244 years. I suppose that’s a pretty good run.
I’m glad I’m old.
the communists destroy everything in their path
None of this makes a lot of sense to me. To me it is saying that the Democrats have a right to commit voter/election fraud & the Republicans have no right to try to prevent it. That’s insane! Is this actually in effect? It certainly seems to be.
That is not the actual statement, but only that the Republican party was prohibited from engaging in voter fraud investigations because the then Dem narrative was that Republicans were trying to suppress the black vote. I think they still say that. So, in effect, if the Republican party needs a judge’s approval before investigating voter fraud, the effect was to permit Democrat election fraud. Per another post reply, it looks like that may be a different consent decree than the one that was recently revoked. But, maybe not, my research back in 2012 was pretty thorough.
Katie Pavlich tipsheet from 2012:
Precedential opinion from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 2012 following an RNC appeal from the kangaroo courtroom of Peanut Boy judge "What A Dick" Dickinson Debevoise in the District of New Jersey [Dirty Dem Corruption Central]. Dickinson sat on this case like a poisonous toad for 33 years, till he croaked in 2015 at 91:
Vazquez ruled in early 2018 that the DNC had not shown a violation of the consent decree and that the consent decree was expired as of 2017, as it was written.
The DirtyDems appealed the new Vazquez ruling to the Third Circuit [the prize they were going for was an extension of the consent decree for ANOTHER eight years - till 2025].
It was a Dubya judge and a Grabby Poppy judge, along with an Obama judge, that turned the DNC down flat in 2019:
See my posts #13 & 14
Thank you so much for the updated research!!!
Most people don't know enough about the "consent decree".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.