Republicans repetedly keep blacks from voting

[Truthmatters]

GOP Challenging Voter Registrations (washingtonpost.com)


"Courts in the past found that Republicans used tactics that were aimed at intimidating minority voters and suppressing their votes. The consent decrees in New Jersey stemmed from several incidents in the 1980s.

In 1981, the Republican National Committee sent letters to predominantly black neighborhoods in New Jersey, and when 45,000 letters were returned as undeliverable, the committee compiled a challenge list to remove those voters from the rolls. The RNC sent off-duty law enforcement officials to the polls and hung posters in heavily black neighborhoods warning that violating election laws is a crime.

In 1986, the RNC tried to have 31,000 voters, most of them black, removed from the rolls in Louisiana when a party mailer was returned. The consent decrees that resulted prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that target minorities or conduct mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists.""




This is how the republican party works.

This is from an 2004 article in which it also outlines several things they were doing that year to keep black voters from voting.

The courts also found the Dems dont do this and no lawsuits have been filed against them.

 

[Truthmatters]

Jersey consent decree stands - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com




http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2009_12/021252.php

 

[hortysir]

GOP Challenging Voter Registrations (washingtonpost.com)


"Courts in the past found that Republicans used tactics that were aimed at intimidating minority voters and suppressing their votes. The consent decrees in New Jersey stemmed from several incidents in the 1980s.

In 1981, the Republican National Committee sent letters to predominantly black neighborhoods in New Jersey, and when 45,000 letters were returned as undeliverable, the committee compiled a challenge list to remove those voters from the rolls. The RNC sent off-duty law enforcement officials to the polls and hung posters in heavily black neighborhoods warning that violating election laws is a crime.

In 1986, the RNC tried to have 31,000 voters, most of them black, removed from the rolls in Louisiana when a party mailer was returned. The consent decrees that resulted prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that target minorities or conduct mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists.""




This is how the republican party works.

This is from an 2004 article in which it also outlines several things they were doing that year to keep black voters from voting.

The courts also found the Dems dont do this and no lawsuits have been filed against them.

This is how democrats think:

When the RNC attempts to determine whether voter fraud occurred, the DNC cries voter suppression.
Notice how suppression is never claimed until after fraud allegations?

It's a little tit-for-tat game they like to play with each other....

 

[Truthmatters]

DNC v. RNC Consent Decree | Brennan Center for Justice


Please read this and realize that is not how the courts see this.


On this page is a detailed list of the violations of the consent decree that the RNC has perpitrated over the years.

Many of you I have been talking to are still free to ignore facts, insult honesty and piss in your own eyes all day long like you always do.

 

[ConHog]

GOP Challenging Voter Registrations (washingtonpost.com)


"Courts in the past found that Republicans used tactics that were aimed at intimidating minority voters and suppressing their votes. The consent decrees in New Jersey stemmed from several incidents in the 1980s.

In 1981, the Republican National Committee sent letters to predominantly black neighborhoods in New Jersey, and when 45,000 letters were returned as undeliverable, the committee compiled a challenge list to remove those voters from the rolls. The RNC sent off-duty law enforcement officials to the polls and hung posters in heavily black neighborhoods warning that violating election laws is a crime.

In 1986, the RNC tried to have 31,000 voters, most of them black, removed from the rolls in Louisiana when a party mailer was returned. The consent decrees that resulted prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that target minorities or conduct mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists.""




This is how the republican party works.

This is from an 2004 article in which it also outlines several things they were doing that year to keep black voters from voting.

The courts also found the Dems dont do this and no lawsuits have been filed against them.

This is how democrats think:

When the RNC attempts to determine whether voter fraud occurred, the DNC cries voter suppression.
Notice how suppression is never claimed until after fraud allegations?

It's a little tit-for-tat game they like to play with each other....

not to mention that doesn't equal voter intimidation. It equals warning about breaking the law.

A ****** standing out in front of a polling place tapping his billy club to his hand, now THAT is voter intimidation.

 

[Jarhead]

GOP Challenging Voter Registrations (washingtonpost.com)


"Courts in the past found that Republicans used tactics that were aimed at intimidating minority voters and suppressing their votes. The consent decrees in New Jersey stemmed from several incidents in the 1980s.

In 1981, the Republican National Committee sent letters to predominantly black neighborhoods in New Jersey, and when 45,000 letters were returned as undeliverable, the committee compiled a challenge list to remove those voters from the rolls. The RNC sent off-duty law enforcement officials to the polls and hung posters in heavily black neighborhoods warning that violating election laws is a crime.

In 1986, the RNC tried to have 31,000 voters, most of them black, removed from the rolls in Louisiana when a party mailer was returned. The consent decrees that resulted prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that target minorities or conduct mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists.""




This is how the republican party works.

This is from an 2004 article in which it also outlines several things they were doing that year to keep black voters from voting.

The courts also found the Dems dont do this and no lawsuits have been filed against them.

This is how democrats think:

When the RNC attempts to determine whether voter fraud occurred, the DNC cries voter suppression.
Notice how suppression is never claimed until after fraud allegations?

It's a little tit-for-tat game they like to play with each other....

not to mention that doesn't equal voter intimidation. It equals warning about breaking the law.

A ****** standing out in front of a polling place tapping his billy club to his hand, now THAT is voter intimidation.

No it wasnt. Holder dropped the charges so it was a non event.
The film was doctored by some right wing GOP partisan fool. That gentleman was actually holding a pencil case with number 2 pencils for those voters that were clautsrophobic and afraid to go into a voting booth.

He was there to help. The GOP decided to make it look like he was breakling the law.

GOP. Bad people. Very Very bad people.

 

[Truthmatters]

http://brennan.3cdn.net/55c542f8931183a71e_43m6i2q5b.pdf




"the RNC responded to a discovery request by producing a memo from its Midwest Political Director to its Southern Political Director, in which the former stated that I would guess that this program will eliminate at least 60,000-80,000 folks from the rolls … If it‟s a close race … which I‟m assuming it is, this could keep the black vote down considerably.”“ See Thomas Edsall, Ballot Security Effects Calculated: GOP Aide Said Lousiana Effort “Could Keep the Black Vote Down,” Wash. Post, Oct. 24, 1986 at A1."


Now lets remember this is in a court document written by a the judge in his decision

 

[Immanuel]

D.N.J.: Republican National Committee Still Bound by Consent Decree Prohibiting Voter Suppression — NSCLC Website



"The RNC argued that the increase in minority turnout and an African-American President and Attorney General made the decree’s voter protections unnecessary.The court found these arguments entirely “inapposite” to the analysis. The relevant inquiry was whether the RNC had to be restrained from further vote suppression , not whether or not the Department of Justice would enforce the VRA . As minority voters continued to manifest a marked aversion to the GOP, the court found the RNC’s incentive to suppress their vote had not been lessened. The court also found no election law rendered the terms of the decree illegal or unnecessary and no law had led to an increase in voter fraud whose incidence could only be prevented by modifying the decree."



"While finding no evidence in support of vacating or significantly modifying the decree, the court did find that unforeseen unworkability allowed for a small change.Due to multiple allegations of voter suppression, the RNC has found itself defending intervenor lawsuits to enforce the decree. As theDNC does not face similar lawsuits , in the interest of equity the court changed the decree so only the DNC could seek to enforce it . The court also recognized that the requirement for the RNC to seek 20 day pre-clearance approval of any new “ballot security” tactics does not allow it to monitor new voter registrations in the few states that have adopted registration deadlines within 20 days of elections. The term was changed to a 10 day pre-clearance requirement. In response to the complaint that the decree’s prohibition on voter intimidation at the polls was too vague, the definition of this tactic was clarified.Finally, in the hope that the RNC might change its behavior toward minority voters in the future, the court added a contingent termination date to the decree of eight years. If the decree is violated again, the deadline will be extended."




The RNC has been determined by the court to have repetedly violated the decree.

That means they have repetedly acted to violate the rights of minority voters.


I know you people dont really care that your party violates the rigths of Americans (especially when they are not white).


You instead insist that because they did not have to admitt guilt for the original crimes everything is just fine.

Oh look she came back for more!

TM, Do you know what Innocent until proven guilty means? Answer the darned question. You have avoided it long enough. Yes or No?

Due to multiple allegations of voter suppression

Do you know what an allegation is? Simple yes or no.

An allegation is not proof of anything. This is an allegation: Last night I said that Neubarth was a cult leader. I made an allegation against Neubarth. Simply because I made that allegation does not mean that I am right. I simply accused him of being a cult leader.

Last night I made an allegation that you are a liar. I stand by that. If I cared to do so, I would have to present evidence of what I see to be fact. You would then be allowed to present evidence that I am wrong and a jury of your peers would be polled to determine who was right or wrong. If they side with me, then I have proven my case. If they side with you, then I did not prove my case.

We could agree to settle the argument which would entail you and I negotiating to drop the discussion which would require you to stop posting shit like this and I would probably have to agree to quit accusing you of lying. You might agree to do this simply because you are tired of reading me accusing you of lying and I would agree to it because I don't want to search through mountains of evidence to prove my case. Our coming to this agreement would not entail a finding by the jury that you are in fact a liar nor would it require you to admit that you are a liar. The actual facts would remain sealed. This settlement would not mean that you are a liar just as the consent decree does not mean that the RNC actually intimidated voters, but neither would the settlement between us prove that you are not a liar, just as the consent decree does not prove that the RNC did not intimidate voters.

It appears to me that the reason the RNC is the only side that has to defend itself is that maybe people on the right do not stoop to fraudulent lawsuits to hinder their opponents. Do you know what Intervenor lawsuits are by chance? They are lawsuit by people who are not parties of the original lawsuit or agreement against one of the parties involved.

Intervenor

In law, intervention is a procedure to allow nonparties to join ongoing litigation, either as a matter of right or at the discretion of the court, without the permission of the original litigants. The basic rationale for intervention is that a judgment in a particular case may affect the rights of nonparties, who ideally should have the right to be heard.

What this means is that while the Democrats have continued to push their unproven allegations by getting members of their party to file frivolous lawsuits against the RNC, the Republicans have not stooped to the petty ass bullshit tactics. And don't tell me there is not cause for having done so:

YouTube - "Security" patrols stationed at polling places in Philly

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-HK_VT81Pk&feature=related]YouTube - Philadelphia Voter Intimidation[/ame]

Black Panther Voter Intimidation in Philly? | NBC Philadelphia

"No voter has been denied the vote...this is the United States of America and unless [the men standing outside] break the law or do anything, they have the right to stand out there. We don't need anybody trying to trump up anything or generate any kind of excitement," said Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter.

How does he know? How does he know some didn't see those people and decide that voting was not worth getting their heads bashed in so they turned around and left?

Finally, in the hope that the RNC might change its behavior toward minority voters in the future, the court added a contingent termination date to the decree of eight years. If the decree is violated again, the deadline will be extended."

Not going to happen, because the Democrats will continue to use these deceptive tactics of filing frivolous lawsuits for as long as they can get away with it. You think the Democrats are saints... I think they are just as deceptive as the Republicans.

The RNC has been determined by the court to have repetedly violated the decree.

According to the Consent Decree, this is just another lie. The courts found no guilt!! Period.

But, then spout a lie long enough and people will begin to believe you TM.

Immie

 

[Charles_Main]

I honestly never met a chick who was that stupid. I figgered - gotta be some guy living out of his grandmother's garage.

I mean not that that's anything to be ashamed of.

guess up you haven't met ravi, sangha, or gslack or syrenn yet either, 4 of the dumbest bitches ever.

Whoa there. Syrenn and gslack are buds.

Sangha has got to be a guy - way too snotty to be anything but a full of himself SOB. Ravi I mix up with Zona.

Personally I think Sangha used to be sealybobo, and is a guy. All be it a really stupid one.

 

[Truthmatters]

Immie where is the lie in any of that court documentation?

 

[Charles_Main]

Immie where is the lie in any of that court documentation?

They lie comes when you imply that is proves anything. Allegations are allegations not proof.

 

[Immanuel]

DNC v. RNC Consent Decree | Brennan Center for Justice


Please read this and realize that is not how the courts see this.


On this page is a detailed list of the violations of the consent decree that the RNC has perpitrated over the years.

Many of you I have been talking to are still free to ignore facts, insult honesty and piss in your own eyes all day long like you always do.

In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.

The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. Most recently, in late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the Republican National Committee had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the Republican National Committee asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. A hearing on that motion is currently scheduled for May 5, 2009.

Appears to be a relatively neutral analysis.

Looking at the list of "detailed list of the violations of the consent decree that the RNC has perpitrated(sic) over the years", I find nothing but allegations and no proof of guilt.

You do realize that Tom Daschle is not a unbiased participant, I hope.

The Malone case? Hint!!! It was dismissed. Want to guess why? Might it have been frivolous?

This proves nothing TM. Unfortunately, I don't think you understand the concept of proof.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

This is how democrats think:

When the RNC attempts to determine whether voter fraud occurred, the DNC cries voter suppression.
Notice how suppression is never claimed until after fraud allegations?

It's a little tit-for-tat game they like to play with each other....

not to mention that doesn't equal voter intimidation. It equals warning about breaking the law.

A ****** standing out in front of a polling place tapping his billy club to his hand, now THAT is voter intimidation.

No it wasnt. Holder dropped the charges so it was a non event.
The film was doctored by some right wing GOP partisan fool. That gentleman was actually holding a pencil case with number 2 pencils for those voters that were clautsrophobic and afraid to go into a voting booth.

He was there to help. The GOP decided to make it look like he was breakling the law.

GOP. Bad people. Very Very bad people.

Oh that explains everything!

You realize that TM will quote you now as proof, don't you?

Immie

 

[Truthmatters]

http://brennan.3cdn.net/55c542f8931183a71e_43m6i2q5b.pdf




"the RNC responded to a discovery request by producing a memo from its Midwest Political Director to its Southern Political Director, in which the former stated that I would guess that this program will eliminate at least 60,000-80,000 folks from the rolls … If it‟s a close race … which I‟m assuming it is, this could keep the black vote down considerably.”“ See Thomas Edsall, Ballot Security Effects Calculated: GOP Aide Said Lousiana Effort “Could Keep the Black Vote Down,” Wash. Post, Oct. 24, 1986 at A1."


Now lets remember this is in a court document written by a the judge in his decision

'As proof that the protections contained in the Consent Decree remain necessary, the DNC points to decisions made pursuant to that agreement by this Court, which
Case 2:81-cv-03876-DRD-MAS Document 84 Filed 12/01/09 Page 2 of 79
3
found that the RNC had engaged in impermissible voter challenges as recently as the 2004 election."



That is from the court documents.


The Court found them guilty of breaking the consent decree.

 

[Kat]

GOP Challenging Voter Registrations (washingtonpost.com)


"Courts in the past found that Republicans used tactics that were aimed at intimidating minority voters and suppressing their votes. The consent decrees in New Jersey stemmed from several incidents in the 1980s.

In 1981, the Republican National Committee sent letters to predominantly black neighborhoods in New Jersey, and when 45,000 letters were returned as undeliverable, the committee compiled a challenge list to remove those voters from the rolls. The RNC sent off-duty law enforcement officials to the polls and hung posters in heavily black neighborhoods warning that violating election laws is a crime.

In 1986, the RNC tried to have 31,000 voters, most of them black, removed from the rolls in Louisiana when a party mailer was returned. The consent decrees that resulted prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that target minorities or conduct mail campaigns to "compile voter challenge lists.""




This is how the republican party works.

This is from an 2004 article in which it also outlines several things they were doing that year to keep black voters from voting.

The courts also found the Dems dont do this and no lawsuits have been filed against them.

This is how democrats think:

When the RNC attempts to determine whether voter fraud occurred, the DNC cries voter suppression.
Notice how suppression is never claimed until after fraud allegations?

It's a little tit-for-tat game they like to play with each other....

not to mention that doesn't equal voter intimidation. It equals warning about breaking the law.

A ****** standing out in front of a polling place tapping his billy club to his hand, now THAT is voter intimidation.

I wish you would not use that word. Please.

 

[Truthmatters]

I wish the republican party didnt try to keep people from voting to win elections

 

[gslack]

This is how democrats think:

When the RNC attempts to determine whether voter fraud occurred, the DNC cries voter suppression.
Notice how suppression is never claimed until after fraud allegations?

It's a little tit-for-tat game they like to play with each other....

not to mention that doesn't equal voter intimidation. It equals warning about breaking the law.

A ****** standing out in front of a polling place tapping his billy club to his hand, now THAT is voter intimidation.

I wish you would not use that word. Please.

Racial slurs are the fuel of the weak and frightened...

 

[Truthmatters]

GOP Memo Admits Plan Could 'Keep Black Vote Down' - Los Angeles Times





"In an Aug. 13 memo the court made public Friday, Kris Wolfe, the Republican National Committee Midwest political director, wrote Lanny Griffith, the committee's Southern political director, and said of the Louisiana campaigning:

"I know this race is really important to you. I would guess that this program will eliminate at least 60-80,000 folks from the rolls. . . . If it's a close race . . . which I'm assuming it is, this could keep the black vote down considerably."
"



Yeah they were not guilty huh?

 

[gslack]

I wish the republican party didnt try to keep people from voting to win elections

And I wish the democrats didn't have dead people voting and try and use the ignorance of the poor against them... but here we are, they do and they do.....

 

[Jarhead]

I wish the republican party didnt try to keep people from voting to win elections

Your wish has already been granted.
People claim they did, but people also claimed that Obama was not a citizen.