SCOTUS says keep punishing the Rs for cheating

[Truthmatters]

For their part, lawyers for the Democratic National Committee had argued that recent campaigns show the “consent degree remains necessary today.”

The court’s action is a victory for the DNC, and it comes after an election year in which the two parties regularly exchanged charges over “voter fraud” and “voter intimidation.” But most of the recent battles have been fought on the state level, and it is not clear whether the long-standing consent decree has had much impact.

The case began in 1981 when the RNC created a “national ballot security task force” that, among other things, undertook mailing campaigns targeted at black and Latino neighborhoods in New Jersey. If mailers were returned undelivered, party activists put those voters on a list to be challenged if they showed up to cast a ballot. In addition, the party was alleged to have hired off-duty law enforcement officers to “patrol” minority neighborhoods on election day.

The DNC sued the RNC in federal court, alleging its activities violated the Voting Rights Act and were intended to suppress voting among minorities. Rather than fight the charges in a trial, the RNC agreed to a consent decree promising to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities … directed toward [election] districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic minority populations.”

The consent decree has remained in effect, and DNC lawyers say they have gone to court in states such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Pennsylvania to challenge Republican activities that appear to target mostly black precincts. Both sides agree, however, that the consent decree does not forbid “normal poll watching” by Republican officials.

The RNC has tried repeatedly to have the consent decree lifted, contending it interferes with its efforts to combat voter fraud. But a federal judge in New Jersey in 2009 ruled that it should remain in effect, and the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed last year.




Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree - Los Angeles Times



1/2013



so last years SCOTUS decision just doesn't exist in your world huh?

this proves how bankrupt of morals the right in this country is.


how can you logically claim this is not real?

 

[Avatar4321]

is the 13th thread you've created on this?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

you have no credibility. you completely ignore democratic voter fraud. you're a worthless hack.

If she didn't have all this RNC stopping the vote shit to post, hell. She wouldn't post anything.

She could. At least, I think she could actually exercise her mind and try to have discussions with people in a civilized manner.

Of course, there may be some underlying mental issues that I am unaware of.

 

[Truthmatters]

the republican party has been held to this consent decree for decades BECAUSE they keep getting caught cheating in elections.


the SCOTUS looked at the case that spans decades and goes right up to today and they said fuck you to the Rs.


They said you don't deserve relief and need to be punished MORE

 

[Avatar4321]

Explain how you continue to pretend this SCOTUS decision didn't take place?

Where has anyone pretended anything TM? Simply because we don't reach the same conclusions you jump to, doesn't mean we are pretending anything.

 

[Truthmatters]

is the 13th thread you've created on this?

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

you have no credibility. you completely ignore democratic voter fraud. you're a worthless hack.

If she didn't have all this RNC stopping the vote shit to post, hell. She wouldn't post anything.

She could. At least, I think she could actually exercise her mind and try to have discussions with people in a civilized manner.

Of course, there may be some underlying mental issues that I am unaware of.

and you insult and ignore the facts given you.


You are a traitor to this country for backing your partys UnAmerican activities

 

[Avatar4321]

this proves how bankrupt of morals the right in this country is.


how can you logically claim this is not real?

Prove. You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

 

[Truthmatters]

The scotus said your party needs to be punished further for your cheating.


you lie about it.


your a traitor to this country

 

[Truthmatters]

this proves how bankrupt of morals the right in this country is.


how can you logically claim this is not real?

Prove. You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

US court documents that go all the way to the SCOTUS ?


how fucking evil can you get you piece of dog shit liar?

 

[Truthmatters]

It is PROOF


you just lie to defend traitorous actions by your party

 

[Avatar4321]

If she didn't have all this RNC stopping the vote shit to post, hell. She wouldn't post anything.

She could. At least, I think she could actually exercise her mind and try to have discussions with people in a civilized manner.

Of course, there may be some underlying mental issues that I am unaware of.

and you insult and ignore the facts given you.


You are a traitor to this country for backing your partys UnAmerican activities

I haven't insulted you at all. Im actually quite worried about you. Your posts indicate that you are highly unstable or that you just refuse to discuss things in a civilized and logical manner. Either way, I think you need to take time to work on your thinking and communication skills.

 

[Avatar4321]

The scotus said your party needs to be punished further for your cheating.


you lie about it.


your a traitor to this country

There is nothing in what you've shown that provides a finding of fact that any cheating occured. Nor is there any punishment involved. Someone voluntarily doing something isn't a punishment. In fact, parties very often negotiate out deals to settle agreements with no finding of fault and no punishment being involved just because it can often be far cheaper to do so.

TM the record doesn't reflect the conclusions you've drawn from it. You can troll the link for the next year and a half and it's not going to convince anyone that your conclusions are correct because they aren't proven.

 

[Truthmatters]

how can you be so fucking bold faced evil?


do you really think your insane lies make decades of court record non existent?


how fucking stupid can you be?

 

[Truthmatters]

For their part, lawyers for the Democratic National Committee had argued that recent campaigns show the “consent degree remains necessary today.”

The court’s action is a victory for the DNC, and it comes after an election year in which the two parties regularly exchanged charges over “voter fraud” and “voter intimidation.” But most of the recent battles have been fought on the state level, and it is not clear whether the long-standing consent decree has had much impact.

The case began in 1981 when the RNC created a “national ballot security task force” that, among other things, undertook mailing campaigns targeted at black and Latino neighborhoods in New Jersey. If mailers were returned undelivered, party activists put those voters on a list to be challenged if they showed up to cast a ballot. In addition, the party was alleged to have hired off-duty law enforcement officers to “patrol” minority neighborhoods on election day.

The DNC sued the RNC in federal court, alleging its activities violated the Voting Rights Act and were intended to suppress voting among minorities. Rather than fight the charges in a trial, the RNC agreed to a consent decree promising to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities … directed toward [election] districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic minority populations.”

The consent decree has remained in effect, and DNC lawyers say they have gone to court in states such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Pennsylvania to challenge Republican activities that appear to target mostly black precincts. Both sides agree, however, that the consent decree does not forbid “normal poll watching” by Republican officials.

The RNC has tried repeatedly to have the consent decree lifted, contending it interferes with its efforts to combat voter fraud. But a federal judge in New Jersey in 2009 ruled that it should remain in effect, and the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed last year.




http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/14/news/la-pn-supreme-court-rnc-voter-fraud-20130114

 

[Avatar4321]

this proves how bankrupt of morals the right in this country is.


how can you logically claim this is not real?

Prove. You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

US court documents that go all the way to the SCOTUS ?


how fucking evil can you get you piece of dog shit liar?

I could get a heck of alot more evil cause I am not really that evil at all. I could just treat you like everyone else around here and say there is no hope for you instead of trying to discuss things with you. I haven't given up on you and i dont intend to.

 

[francoHFW]

Pub dupes...course it helps to be a racist when your party subverts minorities' right to vote...

 

[Truthmatters]

For their part, lawyers for the Democratic National Committee had argued that recent campaigns show the “consent degree remains necessary today.”

The court’s action is a victory for the DNC, and it comes after an election year in which the two parties regularly exchanged charges over “voter fraud” and “voter intimidation.” But most of the recent battles have been fought on the state level, and it is not clear whether the long-standing consent decree has had much impact.

The case began in 1981 when the RNC created a “national ballot security task force” that, among other things, undertook mailing campaigns targeted at black and Latino neighborhoods in New Jersey. If mailers were returned undelivered, party activists put those voters on a list to be challenged if they showed up to cast a ballot. In addition, the party was alleged to have hired off-duty law enforcement officers to “patrol” minority neighborhoods on election day.

The DNC sued the RNC in federal court, alleging its activities violated the Voting Rights Act and were intended to suppress voting among minorities. Rather than fight the charges in a trial, the RNC agreed to a consent decree promising to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities … directed toward [election] districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic minority populations.”

The consent decree has remained in effect, and DNC lawyers say they have gone to court in states such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Pennsylvania to challenge Republican activities that appear to target mostly black precincts. Both sides agree, however, that the consent decree does not forbid “normal poll watching” by Republican officials.

The RNC has tried repeatedly to have the consent decree lifted, contending it interferes with its efforts to combat voter fraud. But a federal judge in New Jersey in 2009 ruled that it should remain in effect, and the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed last year.




Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree - Los Angeles Times

your a fucking liar

 

[Truthmatters]

You people are denying SCOTUS decisions now?



what do you think this gets you?

 

[Truthmatters]

facts are facts and calling me names for giving you undeniable facts just proves how fucking insane this countrys right is

 

[R.D.]

For their part, lawyers for the Democratic National Committee had argued that recent campaigns show the “consent degree remains necessary today.”

The court’s action is a victory for the DNC, and it comes after an election year in which the two parties regularly exchanged charges over “voter fraud” and “voter intimidation.” But most of the recent battles have been fought on the state level, and it is not clear whether the long-standing consent decree has had much impact.

The case began in 1981 when the RNC created a “national ballot security task force” that, among other things, undertook mailing campaigns targeted at black and Latino neighborhoods in New Jersey. If mailers were returned undelivered, party activists put those voters on a list to be challenged if they showed up to cast a ballot. In addition, the party was alleged to have hired off-duty law enforcement officers to “patrol” minority neighborhoods on election day.

The DNC sued the RNC in federal court, alleging its activities violated the Voting Rights Act and were intended to suppress voting among minorities. Rather than fight the charges in a trial, the RNC agreed to a consent decree promising to “refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities … directed toward [election] districts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic minority populations.”

The consent decree has remained in effect, and DNC lawyers say they have gone to court in states such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Pennsylvania to challenge Republican activities that appear to target mostly black precincts. Both sides agree, however, that the consent decree does not forbid “normal poll watching” by Republican officials.

The RNC has tried repeatedly to have the consent decree lifted, contending it interferes with its efforts to combat voter fraud. But a federal judge in New Jersey in 2009 ruled that it should remain in effect, and the U.S. Court of Appeals agreed last year.




Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree - Los Angeles Times

your a fucking liar

Sweetie, you just called yourself a fucking liar.

It's true but a bit harsh dont you think?

 

[Truthmatters]

dear fucking idiot,


you are too stupid to understand this debate so fuck you very much