True The Vote Announces New Finding Of Voter Fraud In OH, NY, FL, RI (Absentee Ballot)

True The Vote found more than 19,000 Ohio voters claiming Florida mailing addresses, according to state records. More than 6,390 people hold registrations in both states. True The Vote identified 534 individuals allegedly casting ballots in both Ohio and Florida. Today 34 cases were turned over to federal and state authorities.

“To his credit, Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted has indicated he is taking steps to address the situation with respect to voter roll maintenance,” Engelbrecht said. “However, these findings are particularly troubling given Ohio’s wholesale approach to dispensing absentee ballots for all this year. …The last thing we want is a repeat of the 2000 Election – this time by mail.”

New York & Florida

True The Vote offers new findings of absentee voter fraud between New York and Florida. Citing a new sample of less than one (1) percent of upstate New York voters, TTV found 48,630 voters claiming Florida mailing addresses. Of that sample, more than 19,000 are registered to vote in both states. Today federal and state officials were alerted to 32 new cases of interstate fraud between the Empire and Sunshine States.

Rhode Island & Florida

True The Vote also reports instances of voter fraud between Rhode Island and Florida. After the comprehensive cross-reference process, TTV found 53 Rhode Island voters claimed Florida addresses. More than 15 are currently registered in both states, with two (2) having voted.

Federal and state laws were potentially violated as a result of these activities. Ohio, New York, Rhode Island and Florida each require voters to cast ballots corresponding with their permanent residential addresses. Federal law, specifically 42 U.S.C. § 1973i(e) clearly states that voters cannot cast more than one ballot in the same election.

Read more at canadafreepress.com

ACORN Whistleblower and Ex-Liberal Anita Moncrief Discusses Voter Fraud and Racism at CPAC

By Kasey Jachim

I know everyone is busy and inundated with political videos and articles, I know I am.  However, I recently took time to watch the following two videos of Anita Moncrief, a former ACORN employee and whistleblower, at CPAC last September.  She discusses her journey of idealism and staunch liberalism to cynicism and disillusion of the liberal left – her journey from liberalism to conservatism.  She claims she was ignored by every liberal, and supposedly unbiased, news media she attempted to contact regarding ACORN’s voter fraud efforts and Obama’s small donor list.  ACORN was supposed to contact these small donors who legally maxed out on their donations to Obama and convince them to donate to ACORN.  ACORN would then use the funds to elect Obama.  The only one who paid attention to her was FOX News – no surprise there!

She also discusses racism and that, as an insider, she realized that racism was coming from the left and not the right.  Although she voted for Obama and wanted him to succeed, she realized that he had surrounded himself with Socialists like Hilda Solis (Card Check), Kathleen Sebelius (Universal Health Care), and Leon Panetta (ACORN and Socialist ties).  “I started to think ‘if everyone around you is corrupt, how can you be a good guy?’  I realized that Obama wasn’t being basically railroaded by these Socialists – he was a Socialist.”

Please take the time to watch the following two videos (Part I and Part II) of her speech – she lays it all out there.  Each video is around ten minutes and well worth your time!
Part I

Part II

The Party of Fraud at work in Wisconsin

By Judson Phillips via Tea Party Nation

 

English: Scott Walker, 45th Governor of WisconsinThe polls have not even closed in Wisconsin, yet the Party of Fraud is already out trying to steal the election, one way or another.

What are they doing?

From Wispolitics.com:

With only about four hours into the Election Day voting, members of the Milwaukee Democratic Party claim that calls are going out to voters telling them if they’d signed the recall, they didn’t need to vote today.

 Milwaukee County Dem Chair Sachin Chheda said that Walker supporters can’t get through the day without “cheating.”

 “This latest lowlife sleaze comes on the heels of countless reports from around the state of various Republican dirty tricks on behalf of Walker,” Chheda said in a statement. “For instance, reports surfaced last weekend that Walker supporters are paying homeowners to post Walker signs on their lawns.”

 A state GOP source dismissed the claims, saying it was expected from Dems who have made voter suppression claims part of their playbook.

“That’s just what they do, they’re simply setting the stage for a close election,” the source said. “The story doesn’t exist until they provide evidence.”

While on its face, this is one of the stupidest things coming from a Party that regularly manages to produce some really incredibly stupid statements; there is something here.

No, the Republicans are not trying to steal this election.  They are winning this election.  Scott Walker will pull in over 50% of the vote in this election.

The purpose of this is to create the meme, much as they did in 2000, that the election was stolen.

If Walker and the GOP win, it breaks the back of the unions and the far left.  Their only recourse is to claim the election was stolen.  Much as crazy liberals still believe George W. Bush stole the 2000 election, this is the legacy the left wants to leave here.

The most disturbing part of this story is the attitude of the left.  Elections no longer matter to them.  They cannot accept the verdict of the voters.  Either the election must be relitigated until the left wins or it must be totally tainted.

Liberals no longer accept the will of the people and move on to the next election.  This bodes very badly for the future of democracy in America.

The simple truth is Democrats no longer believe in the validity of elections.  Elections for them are simply a tool to gain power.  They are not the voice by which the people speak.

To say this is dangerous is a major understatement.

It is this type of attitude that breeds tyrannies.   We must not only defeat but also totally destroy this attitude if our Republic is to survive.

For more click here.

The coming tsunami of voter fraud!!!

By Judson Phillips via Tea Party Nation

 

When the Democrats, aided and abetted by the RINO establishment, pushed the  Motor Voter law through, they had one thing in mind.  They wanted to get as many unlawful voters registered so they could steal elections.

With Florida probably being THE swing state this year, we should all be alarmed by this news.

From Reuters:

Florida election authorities are examining about 180,000 people who they say may not be U.S. citizens but are registered to vote in the state, an official said on Friday.

State officials are updating Florida’s voter rolls ahead of the U.S. presidential election in November. Florida is home to a large Latino population and is expected to be a critical swing state in the contest between Democratic President Barack Obama and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney.

Florida’s Division of Elections said it is checking the citizenship of voters by comparing its databases with those of the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, which keeps track of whether a licensed driver is also a U.S. citizen.

Similar efforts have been carried out by state authorities in Colorado and New Mexico, which also have large Latino communities.

“We’re going to vet a list of 180,000 people to try to come up with a real number,” said Chris Cate, a spokesman for Florida’s Division of Elections. “We don’t want to jump to conclusions without a thorough investigation.”

Officials in Florida have so far identified more than 2,600 potential voters who may not be U.S. citizens and sent their information to local election authorities, Cate said.

Drivers in Florida are required to show proof of their legal status when they get a driver’s license or renew an old one.

Cate said cross-referencing voter rolls with the highway department information could help better determine whether voters are U.S. citizens, but he added the information was sometimes incomplete.

“Their last contact with the highway department may have been four or five years ago and they could have had the chance to become a citizen since then,” he said.

Potential non-citizen voters are notified by mail and given 30 days to respond.

You can bet your last dollar the Obama campaign and the Party of Treason are going to pull every trick out to try and steal this election this fall.    This is why we need voter ID laws.

Americans must have confidence our elections are fair.   If the Obama Regime tries to or even manages to steal this election this fall, all bets are off.

It is up to we the people to make sure they do not steal this election and make sure we get voter ID laws in all 50 states to make sure the Democrats never steal another election.

For more information click here.

Obama’s Legal Humiliation

By via Western Journalism

Part 2 of: Barack Obama Foreign Student – American Media Threatened into Silence

Today, there is no American news outlet factually covering the illegal actions of the sitting President of the United States in context. Nor is there one consistently exposing the laws his administration has flagrantly broken, though this corruption now demonstrably permeates every level of the federal system.

Attorneys General Tom Horne, Arizona; Pam Bondi, Florida; Sam Olens, Georgia; Bill Schuette, Michigan; Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma; Marty Jackley, South Dakota; Alan Wilson, South Carolina; Greg Abbott, Texas; and Ken Cuccinelli of Virginia produced a joint memo on March 5th, 2012 detailing 21 blatant violations of law committed by the Obama administration.

By now it is unsurprising the media has by and large ignored this announcement, although AG Cuccinelli did appear in an extended segment with CSPAN (the relevant segment can be found here) on March 18th.

Fortunately, The Tea Party Tribune published the Attorney’s General memo, “A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law” in full the same day it was released. It is nothing short of a flashing legal headline story, yet cannot be found at the Washington Post or the New York Times.

“Whether it is through the EPA, NLRB, Office of Surface Mining, FCC or other entities, the Obama Administration has aggressively used administrative agencies to implement policy objectives that cannot gain congressional approval and are outside of the law.” – A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law

An abbreviated list of broken laws includes:

  • PPACA (Obamacare): Individual Mandate; To be heard by Supreme Court of the United States in March
  • FCC: Regulation of the Internet in the face of a court order from Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. stating that the FCC does not have the power to regulate the Internet
  • EPA 1: GHG (Green House Gas) lawsuit; EPA’s own Inspector General reported last September that EPA failed to comply with its own data standards; Heard in Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. in February
  • OSM: Attempting to impose regulatory requirements on the 19 states with authority for exclusive regulation of their coalmines for the first time in more than 30 years
  • DOJ: South Carolina & Voting Rights Act: Rejecting voter ID statutes that are similar to those already approved by the Supreme Court of the United States; DOJ ignored section 8 of the Voting Rights Act which calls for protections against voter fraud, and used section 5 to administratively block measures to protect the integrity of elections passed by state legislatures in preclearance states including South Carolina; South Carolina voter ID law merely requires a voter to show photo identification in order to vote or to complete an affidavit at the pain of perjury if the voter does not have a photo ID
  • DOJ: Arizona & Voting Rights Act: Rejecting voter ID statutes that are similar to those already approved by the Supreme Court of the United States
  • DOE: Yucca Mountain; In 2009, Administration arbitrarily broke federal law and derailed the most studied energy project in American history when DOE announced intent to withdraw 8,000 page Yucca Mountain licensing application with prejudice.

A Report on Obama Administration Violations of Law

14 more violations of law are listed in the AGs’ memo. At one time or another, many of these violations have made the news, yet the full list is never presented to the public. When compiled, it is apparent even at a glance that the federal government as led by Barack Obama has no respect for the law. Clearly, the Obama government is acting as it deems fit. Much as a monarchy would. As if the States did not exist. As if the Constitution of the United States did not apply.

Indeed, when it comes to Obama and his government, the Constitution is a barrier to be removed. As Obama stated in a 2001 interview with NPR, “generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties.”  Undeniably, the Constitution limits government negatively; it states what the government cannot do. From the point of view of someone attempting to expand government powers beyond that which the Constitution limits it to, it is extraordinarily (and negatively) limiting. It was designed that way. It is the keystone, the cornerstone, the foundation of a free people; one freed and protected from government tyranny.

The M-1/A-2 tank in the room

If more evidence were needed to delineate the obvious disrespect coming from the Oval Office for the Law, on Monday, April 2nd 2012, President Barack Obama attempted to erase 200 years of legal history, stating in a press conference with world leaders that the law codified in the Supreme Court Case Marbury v. Madison (5 U.S. 137) 1803 is not valid:

“Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress.” – Barack Obama 4-5-2012

Hundreds of bills have passed out of Congress and been found unconstitutional, overturned by the Supreme Court, since Marbury V. Madison established in 1803 the Supreme Court’s right of judicial review.

The Supreme Court has been the final arbiter of law, determining the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress for over two hundred years. There is no article or section in the Constitution which specifically bestows this power within the Court. Instead, Marbury was the court’s interpretation of the Constitution; furthermore, the legal precedent it set in that decision still stands as good law today.

This is not the first time Mr. Obama has attempted to re-write history to his liking. The difference here lay in the fact that the media is in a feeding frenzy over this one.

The day following this massive falsehood, April 2nd, Eric Holder was ordered to address Obama’s statements by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, forcing the administration to publicly acknowledge the law established in Marbury.

Attorney General Eric Holder stated in the department’s court ordered response: “The Department has not in this litigation, nor in any other litigation of which I am aware, ever asked this or any other Court to reconsider or limit long-established precedent concerning judicial review of the constitutionality of federal legislation.” Even the Attorney General of the United States is hanging Obama out to dry on this issue.

Marbury V. Madison is not just an elephant in the room; it’s more like M-1/A-2 tank running flat out, but not for the reasons most immediately apparent. What is missing from this conversation, so ravenously devoured by the press, is this: Marbury was decided in 1803, it’s has been cited hundreds of times. It has never been overturned. The Attorney General of the United States affirms that it is good law. There is absolutely no question it is binding law, so commonplace it wasn’t even a discussion piece outside first year law school until the president tried to undo it in a press conference.

So far, so good, but what’s missing here?

If Marbury has never been overturned and is binding law with decades of citable history behind it, what makes it different from a case decided in 1875 which has also never been overturned and has been cited to for decades?

Nothing. They are both still law.

Minor V. Happersett in 1875 decided that Ms. Virginia Minor did not have the right to vote. While originally a Women’s Suffrage (voting) case, the Court in Minor interpreted the Constitution, determining that citizenship itself did not give right to vote, unequivocally stating in the final paragraph of the decision: “Being unanimously of the opinion that the Constitution of the United States does not confer the right of suffrage upon any one”Minor V. Happersett (88 U.S. 162).

Constitutional Amendments against discrimination preventing a person from voting based on race (15th), sex (19th) and age (26th)., are taken for granted as being a constitutional rights to vote; yet in reality, there is no constitutionally protected “right” to vote (there are amendments against discrimination.)

To re-state this immeasurably important distinction, there is nothing in the Constitution which gives Americans the right to vote; instead, the Constitution eliminates circumstances such as gender and race from preventing voting. This is a legal distinction perhaps only a lawyer can properly love, yet the fact remains that the difference between the two is as great as the difference between lead and gold.

This is why the Minor Case has never been overturned; its conclusion is a statement of fact. Because it has never been overturned, the basic definitions of citizenship made in Minor still apply today because they are the independent grounds upon which the court made its decision.

To use a metaphor, ‘The light bulb turned on because there is electricity. Electricity is the flow of electrons in a current which heats a wire making a light bulb glow.’ The definition of electricity is the independent ground upon which we can say the light bulb turned on.

This is not an issue of dictionary semantics or the meaning of words changing over time. The Minor court defined natural born citizenship as part of its independent ground for deciding the case, making it a part of the “holding” – for deciding the case as it did. “Citizenship does not give the right to vote. Citizens are…” These definitions were codified in law which, like those made in Marbury V. Madison, makes them inviolate.

The court in 1875 chose to define through its specific wording what natural born citizens were and still are today, just as in 1803 it decided the right of judicial review lay with the Supreme Court and nowhere else.

Illegal governments do illegal things

Why is the Minor case relevant in 2012 as it applies to the federal government breaking laws left and right?

The answer is not only insidiously dangerous, but terribly simple. The man at the head of that government is there illegally. How can this be? Because Minor V. Happersett is still law, it has not been overturned any more than Marbury V. Madison has.

“At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their [p168] parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.” Minor V. Happersett (88 U.S. 162)

The Court did not need to decide if Virginia Minor was a citizen because she was obviously a natural born citizen, born in the United States to two parents who were its citizens. The Minor case instructs clearly and concisely that those not born to two citizen parents will have doubts cast on their citizenship status, which in some circumstances, such as qualification under Article 2 Section 1 of the United States Constitution, will demand answers.

Simple logic tells us that where there is doubt about something, proofs must be offered to confirm its status. The proof offered by Barack Obama of his Natural Born Citizenship and placed by him on the White House website has been found to be a “probable forgery” by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona, in a legitimate law enforcement action undertaken at the written insistence of the Citizens of Maricopa County and presented to them in person on March 31, 2012. The Sheriff is a five time, popularly elected law enforcement official who has served 20 years in that office.

This is the M-1/A-2 tank roaring through the room. If Marbury V. Madison is still law, so too is Minor V. Happersett.

If Barack Obama was completely wrong to state: “…the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress…”, then he is equally incorrect to claim Natural Born Citizenship because he was not “born in a country of parents who were its citizens.” He has offered no legitimate proof that he could be a citizen; his father was a British subject of Kenya and was never a citizen of the United States. What proof Obama has offered has been proven a forgery by law enforcement officials.

The simplest of conclusions is unavoidable: Illegal governments do illegal things. Expect nothing less.

Mrs. Cotter is a senior at American Military University, recipient of the Outstanding Student Essay of 2009, a member of Delta Epsilon Tau and Epsilon Pi Phi Academic Fraternities and on the Dean’s and President’s Lists for academic achievement. She has published at American Thinker, Examiner.com, Accuracy in Media, Family Security Matters, Post and Email, English Pravda, Tea Party Tribune, Patriot Action Network, and The Western Center for Journalism.

For more information click here.

Asking For I.D. Before Voting Is ‘Racist’, But You Need A Govt. I.D. To Buy Drain Cleaner?

By Mike Opelka via The Blaze

Got a clogged drain? Before you can buy that liquid drain cleaner, I need to see some ID.

Does that sound like a joke?

It’s not a joke. It‘s the reality in President Obama’s home state.

Illinois has a new law that took effect on January 1 requiring all people who purchase drain cleaners or any caustic substances to provide a government issued photo ID. And retailers now must ask for identification from those buying drain cleaners and maintain extensive records of which caustic products have been purchased, in what amounts, and by whom.

The law came about after two Illinois women were burned by acid attacks back in 2008. One of the women later admitted to burning herself with acid, but the law was still pushed through the system.

And so, because of one random crime where acid was used to burn a victim, thousands of people will be forced to show identification when they purchase drain cleaners, and countless hours of business time will be spent filling out, maintaining and monitoring the government mandated forms associated with each purchase. Additionally, any person carrying caustic chemicals can be charged with a Class 4 felony in Illinois. (Class 4 felonies can carry fines up to $25,000 and 1-3 years in jail.)

The Illinois drain cleaner law is just one of the 40,000 new laws that took effect in the new year. For the record, the 40,000 new laws are a 29% increase over the previous year.

Among the mass of new laws are a few that are intended to strengthen election security and protect the integrity of each vote in the upcoming elections by demanding that all voters show a photo ID before entering the voting booth. The Wall Street Journal covered this story as 2011 came to a close…

Kansas, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Texas will require voters to prove their identities at the ballot box, bringing the total number of states that require some form of voter identification to 30…

MSNBC has covered the topic of the new laws and specifically the voter ID laws, starting in July of 2011.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOy2dw9hM64&feature=player_embedded

The voter suppression issue was also part of MSNBC’s review of the 40,000 new laws of 2012.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/45828217#45828217

If it is considered “racist” or “discrimination” to ask a voter for a photo ID before they are allowed to cast a ballot, why is it not racist to ask for a government issued ID card when you want to buy drain cleaner or pay for your gasoline with cash?

Feel free to take our poll on this subject and submit your own question on the topic.