We are the 99%

January 13, 2012

VOTERFRAUDVOTERFRAUD!! VOTER FRAUD!

So voter fraud does exist!

James O'Keefe and his Project Veritas proved it.

By committing it.

The story starts here:
A mystery man trying to vote in the New Hampshire primary using a dead man’s name got caught by an eagle-eyed voting supervisor in Manchester, then disappeared before police could corral him.

“We take a lot of pride in this primary,” Gloria Pilotte, the Ward 9 supervisor who stopped the voter fraud, told the Herald.
And:
The man, who admitted being from Texas, almost got away with the fraud. He came in to the polling place and gave election officials the name of a man who was still on the voter list. Voters here don’t have to present ID if they are registered.

But Pilotte recognized the name and knew the man had died within the past 10 days. Pilotte said the voter list wasn’t updated because the man had died so recently.
That turned into this:
Another time, the would-be voter left after poll workers started asking question about the name he gave, Manchester City Clerk Matt Normand said.

“It just so happens the ward moderator recognized the name as not being that person,” Normand said.

The moderator, Gloria Pilotte, asked to speak to the undercover voter to see if there was some mistake.

He left before they had a chance to speak.

“He never got a ballot,” Normand said.
That article, from the Union Leader, begins with:
The New Hampshire Attorney General has launched a comprehensive review of state voting procedures, after people obtained ballots of dead voters during the presidential primary on Tuesday.

No fraudulent votes were actually cast. But in nine instances, clerks readily handed over ballots after a would-be voter implied he was the city resident, recently deceased, still listed on the voter checklist, according to a video posted on the Internet.
And how do we know it was O'Keefe and his Project Veritas?  He said so.  From the Boston Herald:
The guerrilla gotcha artist who punked New Hampshire says his latest ploy — using dead people’s identities to get ballots in the Granite State primary — is no different than what any hard-hitting network news operation does.

It’s just another kind of investigative journalism, insists conservative video activist James O’Keefe, who is now facing a state investigation.
And why a state investigation? The U-L explains:
State law makes it a crime to use a false name to obtain a ballot. State law also prohibits the audio-recording of a person without consent.
Talkingpointsmemo goes further and states that it's against Federal Law even to procure a ballot under false pretenses.  Title 42 of the US Code:
A person, including an election official, who in any election for Federal office...knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to deprive or defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by...the procurement or submission of voter registration applications that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held...shall be fined in accordance with title 18 (which fines shall be paid into the general fund of the Treasury, miscellaneous receipts (pursuant to section 3302 of title 31), notwithstanding any other law), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
And that's what they did - on numerous occasions. They got it on tape and everything.

Arrest and prosecute James O'Keefe and all the other members of Project Veritas for violating the law in New Hampshire.

5 comments:

Heir to the Throne said...

State law also prohibits the audio-recording of a person without consent.
Only the Democratic bastions of Illinois and Massachusetts do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy exception in their wiretapping laws.
or are you are a police supporter/union hack who believes the public has no right to film public officials.

Odd the Democrats/progressives whose talking points on Fast and Furious is the illegal gunwalking by the ATF/DOJ proves the need for more gun control would object to blaming a law to prove a point.

gtl said...

What's your point here, httt, as it relates to O'Keefe?

Heir to the Throne said...

gtl,
It is not wiretapping when you film a public official with no reasonable expectation of privacy except in the Democratic bastions of Illinois and Massachusetts.

EdHeath said...

HTTT, in Pennsylvania poll workers are hired for the day. To call them public officials is a huge stretch.

And once again you ignore O'Keefe's fraud to try to make some tiny point.

But then, you support vote fraud when it is done on behalf of Republicans. You conservatives hate the constitution and democracy, and want us all to be rules by corporations.

Since O'Keefe has no editor or official news outlet, he does not qualify as an investigative journalist. That and the fact that he continually breaks the law, relying on the fact that conservatives would scream bloody murder if some law enforcement person got past the intimidation and actually did his job. Just like conservatives do not want the hacker who stole private emails from the University of East Anglia to be caught and arrested.

Ol' Froth said...

IL's and MA's "wiretapping" laws will be overturned as soon as a relevent case makes it way to the Circuit Court. As to the "two-party consent" angle, as Ed Heath points out, its hardly relevent to the O'Keefe's case, its just a minor point, as federal, as well as state laws, make it a crime to procure a ballot under false pretenses. Just another LOOK OVER HEEEEEEEERRRRR!!! from HTTT, but that's what I've come to expect from him.