Democrats Litigate To Block Freedom of Information

January 14,2005 | justthefactsmaam

[Justthefactsmaam]

The Democratic Party in Washington State is trying through litigation to prevent the GOP from accessing the State Patrol list of convicted felons.

More and more illegal votes are being uncovered up here every day, including those of convicted felons who have lost their right to cast a ballot. In an gubernatorial election where Gregoire pulled ahead for the first time in a third recount by 129 votes, the Dems are scrambling to cover-up the mess and prop up their illegitimate governor.

More and more registered DEMOCRATS are saying to pollsters that they are VERY uncomfortable with the legitimacy of this election and want a revote, whether they voted for Republican Rossi or not. Will the powers that be in the Democratic Party open their eyes and realize that they are disenchanting their base? Will they step up and defend democracy, free and true elections, and freedom of information? If not, they risk losing even more elections and falling farther behind.

[caisson71]

I hope a ton of Dimocraps go to jail over this!!!!!

[knarf]

disenchanting ... very interesting word.
I like it's usage here.

[SolidSupplySide]

Criminal convictions should be public information without a FOIA request.

Why would criminal convictions (obtained at a public trial or plea) ever be considered privileged information?

The Democrats cannot say they are protecting privacy here. Criminal convictions are very public events. What are the Democrats protecting?

[handy old one]

Unfortunately some never learn.

[SolidSupplySide]

The Democratic Party in Washington State is trying through litigation to prevent the GOP from accessing the State Patrol list of convicted felons.

The precedent here is so dangerous, that I am beginning not to believe this statement.

If the Democrats can prevent public inspection of criminal records, then there can be secret courts, secret trials, secret convictions and secret incarcerations.

Judgement suspended on this claim.

[ocr1]

ping

[lilylangtree]

Giving Fraudoire legitimacy over the illegal activities connected to this election makes me sick to my stomach.

[Road Warrior ‘04]

Is that the same as disenfranchanting?

[King Prout]

it just gets deeper up there, doesn't it?

[BenLurkin]

Interesting news. Do you have a source I can show to lib neighbors?

[snowsprite]

The Democratic Party in Washington State is trying through litigation to prevent the GOP from accessing the State Patrol list of convicted felons.

At the beginning of any trial in every state, It is "The people of the state of *** against" whoever. How do the Dem's think they alone have the right to withhold this information from anyone!

[Publius6961]

The Democrats cannot say they are protecting privacy here. Criminal convictions are very public events. What are the Democrats protecting?

FRAUD.

I thought that was self-evident.

[William of Orange]

Gregoremath:

Democrat voters
-/-
military ballots
+
illegal alien votes
+
dead votes
+
convicted felons
=
greGORE wins!

[CyberAnt]

The dems are protecting the repubs finding out how many of these felons VOTED illegally.

[SolidSupplySide]

The dems are protecting the repubs finding out how many of these felons VOTED illegally.

You have both raised similar points, so I will answer as one. I rather doubt that the Democrats will claim that the indentity of felons should not be released because they may have voted (another crime in and of itself). The Democrats will have to come up with another argument to keep felons' names private. I can't imagine what that argument would be.

[Not A Snowbird]

They're trying to say the discovery should have taken place before the lawsuit was filed.

I say the discovery should be ongoing, since the object of the exercise is to get to the TRUTH. Gosh... maybe that's why they're upset...?

[Justthefactsmaam]

Look at the front page of the Seattle Times today. It's available online at theseattletimes.com

[Justthefactsmaam]

You need to add 1) people voting more than once and 2) illegal provisional votes prematurely and suspiciously shoved into election machines to your equasion.

Now you have GregGORE math!

[vox_freedom]

The Democrats will have to come up with another argument to keep felons' names private. I can't imagine what that argument would be.

Perhaps they will base their argument that some of these felons are in the witness protection program and, therefore, shouldn't be identified. //sarc off