Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

USAgate & Scars of Bush/Gore 2000: Follow the "Election Fraud"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 07:52 PM
Original message
USAgate & Scars of Bush/Gore 2000: Follow the "Election Fraud"
USAgate & Scars of Bush/Gore 2000: Follow the "Election Fraud" in Battleground States
If bringing down Nixon was about following the money, USAgate is about following the alleged "voter fraud" in battleground states. More specifically, it is about deep-seated "lessons learned"--namely that election law can tip close contests--from 2000 presidential election, which was decided by the Supreme Court. Gonzales was right last week when he told the House Judiciary Committee that the Justice Department has on obligation to prosecute voter fraud. But it is not okay to rig elections by manufacturing voter-fraud cases to suppress legit voter turnout by the disenfranchised--elderly, minorities, disabled, immigrants, former criminals who've paid their debt to society, those who can't drive (primarily Democrats) in key Republican battleground states.

Forgive me for sounding like a broken record, but more and more evidence of WHY USAgate occurred keeps coming out in dribs and drabs. Was it political? Yes. Was it to give Republican loyalists a shot at top jobs? Yes. But at the bottom of it was Rove's obsessive plan to increase prosecutions of alleged election law violations against Democrats in battleground states critical to Republicans.

FORMER U.S. ATTORNEYS:

SIX OF THE FAMOUS EIGHT
David Iglesias (U.S. Attorney, New Mexico)
He refused to speak with Conressional Representative Heather Wilson (R-N.M., who was in a tight re-election race, about a sealed case, and told Stnator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) that he Iglesias would not be bringing indictments before the elction in a corruption case that targeted a Democat.

Bud Cummins (U.S. Attorney, Arkansas)
To replace him with Tim Griffin, former aide to Bush's political advisor, Karl Rove. Mike Elston, chief-of-staff to Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty warned hm on 1/17 (after the firings) that he and the others should keep their mouths shut about their dismissals or suffer reprercussions.

John McKay (U.S. Attorney, Washington State)
Representative Doc Hastings' (R-WA) chief-of-staff, Ed Cassidy, asked about an inquiry into vote-fraud charges in the state's contested gubernatorial election in 2004. Harriet Miers had also asked him to explain whey had had "mishandles" the governor's race. Elston also threatened him on 1/17to keep his mouth closed.

Paul Charlton (U.S. Attorney, Arizona) Representative Rick Renzi's (R-Ariz) chief-of-staff, Grian Marray, asked about a federal investigation into theRenzi's role in a land deal that benefitted a former business partner and political patron.

Carol Lam (U.S. Attorney, California) Went after Republicans Duke Cunningham and Representative Jerry Lewis (R-CA)

Daniel Bogden (U.S. Attorney, Nevada):
Seen as weak on voter fraud in a "problem district" for Republicans. Unenthused about his efforts to suppress Democratic vote

OTHER LESSER KNOWNS

Todd P. Graves (U.S. Attorney, Missouri)
Replaced with Bradley J. Schlozmen, who as had of the Civil Rights Division clashed with Graves over a lawsuit involving Missouri's voter rolls that Graves refused sign off on and the DOJ ultimately did.

Thomas Heffelfinger (U.S Attorney, Minnesota)
Unclear about efforts to enforce election laws/prosecute voter fraud. To install Federalist Society, bible spouting Rachel Paulose

SLATED FOR REMOVAL

Steven Biskupic (U.S. Attorney, Wisconsin)Rove complained that he was not "doing enough" about voter fraud. Just before the midterm Elections, Rove sent Gonzales a detailed packet on Milwaukee's precinct-level voting data (this violates Justice rules against starting investigations right before elections for fear of discouraging turnout, among other reasons.)

Jesselyn Radack
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/14/73928/9835
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. Prosecuted a few people, election outcomes will be altered? Big maybe, not?
I doubt that, as you write, "at the bottom of it was Rove's obsessive plan to increase prosecutions of alleged election law violations against Democrats in battleground states critical to Republicans." Even if that was what Rove was "obsessing", there is far more to the USA firings.

Besides, where are those Rove prosecutions? Are you arguing that Rove is totally ineffectual?
Or, if they had prosecuted a few people, election outcomes would have been altered? Big maybe, not?
There are well-proven methods to impact election outcomes, like advertising, or the civil rights felonies.

Meanwhile, 30 USA had been investigating Medicare fraud, including Lam and Graves.

Read this thread: 30 U.S. attorneys investigate BILKING BILLIONS, Medicare, Medicaid, Military’s Healthcare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x877011

And today, Paul McNulty, "the principal driver of the Department’s policies and efforts to prevent corporate fraud" resigned.

Dec. 13, 2006
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1165917921963
... the Justice Department announced a number of immediate changes to its corporate-fraud charging policies Tuesday.....
The changes, announced ... by Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty ... are a step back from the government's aggressive anti-fraud prosecution tactics .... McNulty said the new guidelines were designed to address the "perception, well founded -- or not," that the Justice Department's policies were "chilling attorney-client communications" and hurting the effectiveness of corporate lawyers ...................

For certain types of sensitive attorney-client information, such as the advice a defense attorney gave to the management of a corporation facing a fraud investigation, prosecutors are now required to obtain the approval of the Justice Department's No. 2 official in Washington -- currently McNulty.

For privileged factual material a company has obtained through an internal investigation into an alleged fraud, such as transcripts of interviews with culpable employees, prosecutors will need to obtain the approval of the local U.S. Attorney in their district, who can only sign off on such a request with the approval of the head of the DOJ's Criminal Division in Washington, currently Alice Fisher.

Previously, prosecutors had wide latitude to issue such requests on their own ....

=============================
May 10, 2006 - Lam litigation: HHS Seeks to block Medicare payments to Tenet Hospital chain.
May 11, 2006 - Kyle Sampson e-mails deputy White House counsel William Kelley, re "the real problem we have right now with Carol Lam ....
May 17, 2006 - Tenet Healthcare Agrees to Divest Alvarado Hospital
May 18, 2006 - Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) provides false information to AP that Lam has prosecuted only 6% of 289 suspected immigrant smugglers.
Dec. 7, 2006 - Michael Battle, director of the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, calls seven U.S. Attorneys to ask for their resignations.
Dec. 13, 2006 - McNulty strips USAs and Prosecutors of their decision powers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 06:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC