Okay, we need to talk about this U.S. Attorney story -- this is just EXPLOSIVE!

[beachmom]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/12/AR2007031201818_2.html

I'm sure you guys have all read this, but here's the part that FREAKS me OUT:

Bush mentioned complaints about voter-fraud investigations to Gonzales in a conversation in October 2006, Perino said. Gonzales does not recall the conversation, Justice Department officials said.

Bush "believes informally he may have mentioned it to the AG during the meeting discussing other matters," Perino said. "White House officials including the president did not direct DOJ to take any specific action with regards to any specific U.S. attorney."

Rove and other White House officials also forwarded complaints that U.S. attorneys were not doing enough to prosecute voter fraud.

Since the 2000 presidential election ended in dispute in Florida, Republicans have repeatedly raised concerns about possible voter fraud, alleging that convicted felons and other ineligible voters have been permitted to cast ballots to the benefit of Democrats.

...

Sampson sent an e-mail to Miers in March 2005 that ranked all 93 U.S. attorneys. Strong performers "exhibited loyalty" to the administration; low performers were "weak U.S. attorneys who have been ineffectual managers and prosecutors, chafed against Administration initiatives, etc." A third group merited no opinion.

At least a dozen prosecutors were on a "target list" to be fired at one time or another, the e-mails show.

No conspiracy theory is too outlandish for this crowd. This gang of criminals is trying to thwart democracy and the rule of law. Obviously, they have no regard for democracy or free and fair elections. This story is in the bloody hell Washington Post, not truthout.org or alternet or Democratic Underground, so the more "rational", "reasonable" me can't dismiss it out of hand. This sheds light on a dark and insidious conspiracy to take our democracy away just for power and greed. The Bush administration, in their quest for these two pillars of "faith", will stop at nothing to get it including destroying our country. And I don't know what we can do about it.

[MH1]

1. Notice the concern about "voter fraud" not "election fraud"

This is the repubs tactic - keep people away from the polls, shut out as many people as possible from eligibility to vote. Notice how the Drug War (and other "tough-on-crime" initiatives) with its increased felonization of drug offenses increases the effectiveness of the vote suppression when ex-felons are not allowed to vote. Hmm. Also note that since certain populations are targeted for stricter enforcement, there is an effect on the demographics of eligible voters. The end result is that the demographic profile of the electorate does not reflect the population. Is this what the founding fathers (and mothers) intended?


Edited to clarify last sentence.

[ProSense]

4. Exactly! Read this:

Another fired prosecutor, John McKay, of Seattle, tells NEWSWEEK that local Republicans pressured him to launch a criminal probe of voting fraud that would tilt a deadlocked Washington governor's race.

Seems Bush and his cronies wanted to stack the deck in their favor on a range of issues, primarily to influence the outcome of elections.

Remember JK contributed $250,000 to the Washington State Democratic Party to help finance the recount that led to Gregoire's win.

More on the McKay story here.

[ray of light]

13. I am guilty ...

of being swayed by the argument that felons shouldn't vote. I was at the Rainbow Push Conference in 05 and they were discussing that we needed to GOTV for prisoners and fight to get their voting rights reinstated. They were looking for volunteers.

I couldn't do it. I have too many prejudices against crininals and I'm not a friendly audience to them. While I know not everyone is guilty and I know that statistically, the prison terms are not metted out fairly to minorities vs whites. But I guess, this is one area where I am especially unwilling to give an inch. I will help anyone but I fall easy prey to the idea of crime and punishment and paying the price.

I do hope others have more good will than I have though and would help out.

[beachmom]

14. Agreed, unless all they were convicted of was smoking a joint.

I mean the last two presidents smoked pot, in addition to the good senator. I think if you get caught 3 times it becomes a felony, or am I wrong? I think that's what MH was getting at with the "war on drugs".

[MH1]

18. Not just smoking pot.

Recently I heard about a case where a guy was convicted of "distributing" for passing a joint to his friend. You can see the logic of that...but now it is a felony conviction.

There are scads of other laws that you would probably be surprised to find as felonies.

Then there is the wrongful conviction situation. You may be interested in the Justice Project (http://www.thejusticeproject.org/ccjr.html) - which mostly focuses on the unfairness of the death penalty, but figure if their claim happens in death penalty cases, what is happening in cases where the stakes are much lower?

The American criminal justice system is broken. Since the reinstatement of the death penalty in the 1970s, more than 120 people have been exonerated from death row in 25 states -- roughly one for every eight executed. The most comprehensive study of capital trials ever conducted found that nearly seven of every 10 death sentences handed down by state courts from 1973 to 1995 were overturned due to "serious, reversible error," including egregiously incompetent defense counsel, suppression of exculpatory evidence, false confessions, racial manipulation of the jury, snitch and accomplice testimony, and faulty jury instructions.

From prosecutors to victims' rights groups, from defense lawyers to judges to law enforcement, reasonable people agree that our system of justice must protect the innocent and punish the guilty -- not the other way around.

(actually, I think that statement that I bolded is considered radical in America today. Sigh.)

[MH1]

15. Disagree, strongly

The penalty for the crime is the prison term. And many who are convicted aren't guilty in the first place.

The right to vote should be sacred and should belong to EVERYONE in the society, even those who haven't done well with the other laws. Once the person has been released from prison, they have completed their sentence.

The only exception I might make is for multiple convictions for egregious election fraud. But even for that, a person could be set up.

I would not fight for the right of felons to vote from prison, only because I don't think the state should necessarily have to pay for it. But I wouldn't fight hard against their right to vote absentee, as long as not too many of my tax dollars were spent on it.

(For what it's worth, I am against "scarlet letter" sex offender registries except in the worst cases, too. I just don't think a mistake should follow someone forever. They should at least have a chance to turn their lives around.)

[beachmom]

16. I thank God for the Sex Offender Registry that informed me of the

pedophile who lives in my neighborhood (3 min. walk from my house). There is no cure for pedophilia -- they continue to do it over and over again. I know exactly where he lives, and my kids are never out of my sight. I understand the concept of a chance to turn your life around, but there is also the concept of keeping your kids safe. When they get old enough, I will have them memorize his face so as to know who to avoid. Nobody bothers this guy -- no witch hunt -- he lives with his parents (I think he's about 30 now), and the family keeps to themselves. But families like mine deserve to have the information necessary to know who our neighbors are in this one area of crime.

Probably an agree to disagree topic (after all we can't agree on everything), but thought I'd give you the other side of the argument.

As far as convicted felons voting, well, I don't feel that strongly one way or the other -- whether they do vote or are disallowed to vote. I think it's more that the "convicted felon" purge in Florida purged people who were not felons and just had names similar to felons.

[MH1]

17. Most "Sex Offender Registries" include more than pedophiles.

An 18 yr old caught having sex with his 17 year old girl friend can be convicted of statutory rape and end up on those lists. (in many states - I think some states have at least thought about fixing that, and some probably have) I guess that's a felony and in some states he wouldn't be able to vote then either.

That's the kind of stuff I have a problem with. In cases of definite pedophilia, I'm probably okay with notifying people who live within a certain range. But I don't think it belongs on a public internet site.

[blm]

2. It's because they know eventually their election fraud will become more widely known - so...

it is a pre-emptive tactic to smear the Democrats with the charges so it becomes an APPEARANCE of both parties do it.

In 2008, what will happen when the vote NUMBERS end up considerably LOWER than 2004? Where will Bush's 11 million MORE voters have gone that they claimed to gain in 2004?

[TayTay]

3. The Repubs have an agenda to cut off future Dem voters

They signalled how they wanted to do this over the course of the 109th Congress. They wanted to tie voting problems in with immigration reform and make it difficult for the poor and for immigrants to get the necessary documentation to register to vote. That was the plan because the problem with the voting machines themselves is going to prove temporary.

The US House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on this on 3/6. That hearing is online at: http://judiciary.house.gov/oversight.aspx?ID=279

Please read the testimony (or skim the testimony) of Rep Steve King, R-IA and Rep Brian Bilbray, R-CA. These docs spell it out in no uncertain terms. The Repubs are still heavily promoting the idea that the Dems are registering illegals in order to steal elections. It's all there, in public testimony in the House of Reps before John Conyer's Judiciary Committee. No tin-foil hats required.

[beachmom]

5. Sorry -- where is the testimony? When I clicked on a few links

it was only a press release.

Thanks.

[TayTay]

6. See if these work

http://judiciary.house.gov/OversightTestimony.aspx?ID=777
King

http://judiciary.house.gov/OversightTestimony.aspx?ID=771
Bilbray

OMG, read Digby this morning: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/

[rox63]

7. If this scandal doesn't bring down the * admin, I don't know what it will take

Edit to add: Josh Marshall's had some excellent posts on this as it's been developing: http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

[TayTay]

8. They have been brought down

They have no standing in the polls, they lost their majorities in both houses of Congress and they are unable to get anything new done. They are 'over' in that sense.

What they still have is the legal right, under the US Constitution, to certain acts and powers. The Dems can't do anything about that. That is how a democracy, under the Rule of Law, functions. We are stuck with this until a new President comes in.

Bush was effectively over in September of 2005 in the aftermath of the pitiful response of this Admin to Katrina. Everything since then is simply aftermath.

[beachmom]

9. One problem with your rule of law argument:

Evidence is mounting that this administration was not brought to power lawfully. Twice. Reading this pursuit of "voter fraud", and how Bush wanted ALL USAs fired, just sends a chill up my spine. Like everything we have believed in since 1776 has come to a halt, and we have a dictatorship on our hands. True, Bush will step down in '09 (good God, he better), but it appears his presence in the Oval Office has very little to do with the "rule of law" but instead to do with a corrupted party, government, and electoral system.

Sorry, if this comes across as too radical, but I am calmly stating the reality as I see it.

[TayTay]

10. Yup, that is what any democracy has as it's Achilles heel

Democratic principle rests on the grounds that an informed electorate will not put up with corruption and with tyranny and abuse of power. However, in practice, democracy is subject to trends and fashions of opinion that can defeat this. We are going through just such a period.

The problem is not that it happened, it happens to all democracies and is an embedded flaw in the system. The real problem occurs after this is known and what is done about it. That is the period we are in. We have just come off of a very, very militaristic period when the drums of war were beating constantly and patriotism was aligned with a single political party and with war itself. That period is passing. What happens next will determine what kind of country we leave to our children.

The Rule of Law is important. It must be restored. The Law is what stands between a free people and tyranny. The question gets ever sharper now, what kind of country will we live in?

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

http://imdb.com/title/tt0060665/quotes

St. Thomas More, patron saint of statesmen and politicians. (Really!)

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_20001031_thomas-more_en.html

[fedupinBushcountry]

11. These documents have just been released

3/13/07 Documents Regarding DOJ Firings, Part 1

http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/DOJdocsPt2070313....

3/13/2007 - Documents Regarding DOJ Firings, Part II

http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/DOJdocsPt1070313....

http://judiciary.house.gov/Text

Just started reading, mentioned in some of the documents are also Sen. Kyl and Ensign.

On Edit- Ensign was against the firing of his Attorney and stated he was doing a good job.

Domenici on the otherhand when his office was contacted responded: Domenici's COS was happy as a clam and will get us names forthwith.

[whometense]

12. I just heard that

Abu Gonzalez is holding a press conference at 2 - right now. Probably to say nothing...