Posted on 09/23/2004 7:17:00 PM PDT by FairOpinion
Whoever, having devised any scheme or artifice to defraud transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. --- U.S. Criminal Code, Chapter 63, Section 1343.
That was no mere "dirty trick"; it could be a violation of the U.S. criminal code. If the artifice had not been revealed by sharp-eyed bloggers, a national election could have been swung by a blatant falsehood.
Who was the forger? Did others conspire with him or her to present a seeming government document -- with knowledge of its falsity and with intent to defraud, which is a felony in Texas? Who was to benefit and how?
We have hard evidence of crimes by low-level operatives here -- from wire fraud to forgery -- as well as the potential of high-level political involvement. Is no prosecutor prepared to enforce the law?
Both should focus on the lesson of the early '70s: From third-rate burglaries to fourth-rate forgeries, nobody gets away with trying to corrupt American elections.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
No different than the guy who tries to pass off a phony sawbuck, either.
Forgery's illegal for a good reason.
Rather and CBS were the dupers, not the dupees.
i agree bump
Forgery is the proper term. Like a forged check, it's not necessarily a copy of something that previously existed. But it is passed off as something that it is not, including the phony signature.
That was no mere "dirty trick"; it could be a violation of the U.S. criminal code. If the artifice had not been revealed by sharp-eyed bloggers, a national election could have been swung by a blatant falsehood.
NEWS FLASH !! CBS News and CBS 60 Minutes II suffer irreparable, Reality TV Infusion Prime Time Live -- Court TV Takes on Watergate II Using forged documents to influence the outcome of the 2004 Presidential election .That was the criminals' intent. Rather than report on the crime in progress, CBS and 60 Minutes II chose to embrace the criminals' intent. How could one of the premiere news agencies have blundered so badly? A crime occurs right under their noses and incorporates them into a master plan/crime yet CBS and 60 Minutes II management was supposedly oblivious despite how blatantly obvious the fraud is. |
bttt
No official investigation will take place, not by the feds and not by the state of Texas. Someone has to file a complaint and the only person with legal standing to do that is Pres. Bush. And I don't think he will, IMHO.
Thanks for the post. Domestic enemies are much harder to defeat than foreign enemies.
American Spectator, today, has an excellent discussion on this "experts" versus... freepers, for example. :)
So, whether or not the signature was forged or "cut'n'paste" would be entire separate trial day's discourse?
Right. But maybe two days.
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.