The Usual Bozos will trumpet this, saying (artfully) that "there were no prosecutions, and no convictions."
total of 194 cases statewide where police determined a violation likely occurred have been closed because the commonwealth's attorneys in those localities declined to prosecute those individuals, police said.
See? No prosecutions, no convictions, ergo, no fraud.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Any idea how many of these "cases" were actually fraud and not mistakes by the voter? Or how many were voter impersonation or multiple voting, the only two types of fraud that voter ID might prevent?
Why did the attorney's not prosecute? Were the violations, minor, inadvertent, technicalities?
There is no story here, at least with what's been presented in your link.
The Polish would call this "pretty thin soup."
As you know, Tim, fraud--by its very nature--is SUPPOSED to be un-detectable; and because there are secret ballots, the challenge of proof is almost insurmountable.
Granted--so far, it's smoke.
You wanna bet your house that it's not a fire?
It's called LOCAL control, Dad29. Completely the discretion of the DA's. It's apparent that the EVIDENCE did not warrant charges. You are familiar with the Constitution, right?
Now, according to the link, NONE of the cases involved individuals who misrepresented their identity at the polls to vote.
The majority that resulted in arrests involved felons who illegally registered to vote--they gave proper ID--or who voted illegally, or both.
"As you know, Tim, fraud--by its very nature--is SUPPOSED to be un-detectable..."
Yada, yada, yada.
Yes, I'm sure the nice gentleman down the street from us who was told he couldn't vote in 2010 because "he" had already voted in early voting was just mistaken. And the person that had to go in, state his name and address and sign his name to get the ballot was probably just mistaken as well, right?
There are thousands of instances of this all over the country. They are not prosecuted because there is no way to know who impersonated you. So yeah, Voter ID would help.
There are thousands of instances of this all over the country.
Really? And your source for this "information" is what?
BTW, did nobody match the "early voter's" signature to the signature on the voter rolls? If they can't match a signature, how can they match an old photo? My driver's license photo is almost 10 years old.
fraud--by its very nature--is SUPPOSED to be un-detectable
A lot of crime is supposed to be undetectable. And yet we have local police forces, state police, FBI, grand juries, states attorneys, and courts full of cases being prosecuted and won. How do all the voter impersonators get away with it and the drug dealers, embezzlers, burglars, arsonists, et al get caught, tried, convicted and sent to jail.
When you go to sign, there is no signature to match. They don't put your original signature in the poll books/computer printouts.
So it'd would be a helluva lot easier to match a photo.
As far as proof - I know the guy here. That's all the proof I need. But you can also check out the Democrats in New York that are actually being prosecuting for requesting absentee ballots of valid voters and then casting the ballots themselves.
A couple of questions come to mind:
1. Since your example, with no link, has to do with absentee ballots, can you explain how a photo ID at the polling place would have prevented this crime?
2. If fraud is so hard to detect, how come all these people are being detected?
Extra credit: Where are the "thousands of instances"?
Maybe you should have to prove who you are to get an absentee ballot too, yes!
The New York example was because it was commonplace and they seemed to get stupid.
But I'm sure NC and New York are the ONLY place this has happened or dead people voted.
Until 2010. The Dems here have been An almost complete majority in charge since Reconstruction. Corrupt as the day is long, several convicted, quite a few went to prison.
So OK, the system seems to be working pretty well, then.
NeoMom: over at FreeRepublic, the best advice was "Don't Feed the Trolls."
Why don't you let Mom decide for herself, Dad?
In my state, I'm a legal registered voter. I get a postcard sent to the address on my registration asking if I want an absentee ballot. I vote, sign and mail back. Registrar compares my signature to roles.
I don't think someone should be able to walk up to a window and receive an absentee ballot without proving identity, EITHER a matching signature or a photo ID. If these people were able to get absentee ballots in any other way, then there is a problem with the system. If they intercepted them in the mail somehow, then they've committed not only voter fraud, but mail fraud or theft which I believe are federal crimes.
Your first link does not explain how a photo ID would have stopped the crime. But it certainly explains that the "meant to be undetectable" crime was detected. And prosecuted.
Looks like the second link refers to the same case(s) so same thing applies.
All the incidents I've heard about "dead" voters have been refuted because either the voter died after casting an absentee or early vote, or there was a clerical error in the birth date.
The NC cases you're referring to may be the fact that in 2008 thousands of voters 108 years old had voted and in 2010 thousands of voters who were 110 years old voted. Turns out when all the registration rolls were converted to computers, many legally registered voters did not have birth dates listed. And 1900 was the default. Go figure.
You HOPE the registrar compares your signature. How many registered voters are in your county Jim?
Everyone eligible should be able to vote, but the system - as you point out - can have a few loopholes. Voter ID is just one way to help close those up. The reasons the folks in New York were caught was because of how brazen they were. A single person here or there won't be detected.
But the system is not working. Because even in the slim chance these folks are caught and prosecuted, it is after the fact. The election is over, the damage is done. We want to stop it before it happens.
Al Franken ended up winning by about 300 votes. There were over a thousand convicted felons that were ineligible to vote that cast ballots. Just sayin'
Sorry mom, facts not correct. You guys are always bringing up the Franken/felon story.
Franken won in the end (officially) by 312 votes. There is no evidence that "over a thousand convicted felons that were ineligible to vote that cast ballots". The figure the the so-called Minnesota Majority came up with was 480. 270 of those ballots were immediately eliminated because they didn't match to actual felons and because some of those felons actually could legally vote. That leaves 210, far short of the margin of victory EVEN if you assume that 100% of the felons voted for Franken.
By the way, since felons have drivers licenses that don't indicate that they are indeed felons, it's unclear how a photo ID law would have stopped them.
Post a Comment