Balkinization: Want to understand the DOJ scandals? Just follow the voter suppression schemes

Want to understand the DOJ scandals? Just follow the voter suppression schemes

You may recall Monica Gooding's surprise statement volunteering that Deputy Attorney General McNulty knew something about allegations of vote caging by Tim Griffin. Vote caging, as Dahlia Lithwick explains, "is an illegal trick to suppress minority voters (who tend to vote Democrat) by getting them knocked off the voter rolls if they fail to answer registered mail sent to homes they aren't living at (because they are, say, at college or at war)."

Dahlia suggests why Gooding's statement was so interesting:

From the point of view of the ongoing DoJ scandal, perhaps what's most urgent about the vote-caging claims is that they go a long, long way toward explaining why Karl Rove and Harriet Miers were so determined to get [interim U.S. Attorney Tim] Griffin seated in the Arkansas U.S. Attorney's office, and to do so without a confirmation hearing. If, as the Justice Department has continued to insist, Griffin was eminently qualified for the position, why did he need to be spared the hearing at all costs? And once it became clear that he would undergo a hearing, why did Griffin sideline himself with the colorful observation that undergoing Senate confirmation would be "like volunteering to stand in front of a firing squad in the middle of a three-ring circus?" Griffin—who is now in job talks with the Fred Thompson campaign—sure looks like a guy hiding something, and if vote caging is that something, it becomes even more interesting that the White House was pushing him forward.

Next, look at Rick Hasen's roundup of stories on the firings of U.S. Attorneys in Minnesota and Missouri. The key issue: spurious claims of voter fraud designed to suppress the vote.

Finally, read about Jason Leopold's interview with David Iglesias, the former U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, one of the eight former USA's whose firing touched off the scandal.

Iglesias pulls no punches:

Iglesias said Rove, former White House Counsel Harriet Miers and perhaps other officials are likely responsible for placing his name and the names of his colleagues on a list of US attorneys to be fired, because he had refused to launch federal investigations and prosecute individuals purely for partisan reasons.

"If the Justice Department didn't have anything to do with placing presidential appointees such as me and my colleagues on a list to be terminated, the only other possible place would be the White House," Iglesias said. "Harriet Miers, Karl Rove or some of their underlings."

Iglesias also told me that, beginning in 2005, his office had come under pressure when a close confidant of Karl Rove had alleged there was widespread voter fraud in New Mexico. Iglesias said he had investigated those allegations tirelessly and found zero evidence to back them up. He added that, based on evidence that had surfaced thus far and "Karl Rove's obsession with voter fraud issues throughout the country," he now believes GOP operatives had wanted him to go after Democratic-funded organizations in an attempt to swing the 2006 midterm elections to Republicans.

And Hasen also links to an interview with Iglesias in which he accuses Rove, through an intermediary, of pressuring him to bring spurious vote fraud prosecutions. The identity of the intermediary is particularly interesting. It was Pat Rodgers from the American Center for Voting Rights, a faux grass roots organization which was essentially created by Republican Party operatives to trump up phony charges of voter fraud, to claim that the problem of voter fraud was pervasive, and to support various laws that would restrict voting rights in the name of preventing fraud. As Hasen pointed out, this organization suddenly and mysteriously disappeared off of the face of the earth following the 2006 elections when the Democrats regained both houses of Congress (and, concomitantly, the power to investigate the White House).

One theme keeps reappearing in the DOJ scandal: The Bush Administration wanted U.S. Attorneys who would push frivolous voting fraud claims that would discourage likely Democratic voters in close races. This is the big story behind the DOJ scandal; it's what the media should focus on.

During Watergate we were told to follow the money. In this scandal, you should follow the voter suppression schemes.

Posted 9:09 AM by JB [link]

Comments:

Professor Balkin:

One theme keeps reappearing in the DOJ scandal: The Bush Administration wanted U.S. Attorneys who would push frivolous voting fraud claims that would discourage likely Democratic voters in close races. This is the big story behind the DOJ scandal; it's what the media should focus on.

Exactly how does a voter fraud prosecution of those who are fraudulently registering imaginary voters at imaginary addresses or suits to compel states to scrub their voter lists to remove imaginary voters at imaginary addresses in any way discourage likely Dem voters?

Hell, given the nearly complete blackout by the Dem media of the eighty some, largely Dem voter fraud prosecutions other US attorneys besides Inglesias did perform, how exactly are likely Dem voters (who are not exactly the foremost news consumers) supposed to even know about these prosecutions in order to be "intimidated?"

This conspiracy theorizing has gone way past the absurd.

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 10:27 AM

Bart,

Which would you prefer:

One legitimate voter taken off the voter rolls or one illegitimate voter taken off the rolls.

Which is a greater disservice to democracy.

# posted by

Fraud Guy : 10:31 AM

An important article earlier in the week in the "Washington Post" focused upon Hispanic groups that supported Gonazles. Those disappointed say with little of any tact, that the AG scandal is about Gonzales "keeping us from voting".

Of greater import, perhaps -- and hopefully it will begin to make the national media -- are the questions asked of Goodling by the Representative from Minnesota, which qusetions provided remarkably detailed insight into what has been going on there. (Last night I read a blog, via a link by a poster on TPM, local to Minnesota with much detail about the AG issues there -- including the apparent reason Hiffelfinger "resigned": He put up resistance to the efforts to prevent Native Americans voting.

That portion of the transcript of the Goodling hearing is worth review.

As well, in response to comments to his summary on DailyKos, Rep. Conyers said he is well aware of and deeply concerned about the "caging" issue.

Hoever some might view it as heresy, I prefer Gonzales stay right where he is -- keeping the issues alive and front and center, and damaging both Bushit, et al., and the Republicns re. the upcoming elections. 'Course, as Waxman correctly says, "It's just a matter of time. By September, Republicans will be falling all over themselves in the rush to get on the other side of the line from Bushit, et al.

Bushit has finally acknowledged global warming. I suspect he's already feeling the unusaully high political golbal warming which will be even hotter next Summer.

"A lie is halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on." -- Mark Twain. It's a race between lie and truth -- which races truth always, eventually, wins. But my anxiety says of the unknown future that it's a race between sufficent exposure of the fuller facts to neutralize Bushit/Cheney, and Bushit/Cheney doing that some of us most fear: whatever it takes to stay in power, rule of law already demonstrated as being irrelevant to them.

# posted by

JNagarya : 10:32 AM

Just because DOJ policy says that prosecutors should not pursue or announce voter fraud cases in the weeks prior to an election, does not mean that prosecutors can't do that. It's not law, it's only policy. These voter fraud cases weren't an attempt to swing elections towards Republicans, they were merely the zealous efforts of diligent prosecutors. That these prosecutions happened to be almost entirely against Democrats merely proves just how crooked you liberals really are.

And are you really going to believe anything David Iglesias has to say? That's just sour grapes and liberal sensibilities. His reaction in recent weeks shows the wisdom of firing him in the first place.

# posted by

Bart Depalma Jr. : 10:44 AM

Fraud Guy said...

Bart, Which would you prefer: One legitimate voter taken off the voter rolls or one illegitimate voter taken off the rolls.

Huh? What is your point?

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 11:07 AM

Amen! Even Josh Marshall, who clearly and utterly gets it on the substance, still headlines some of his reporting on this matter by including -- even if in quotations -- the misleading, "war-is-peace," "Clear-Skies," Rovian/[depalma/]Luntz-speak hoohah of "voter fraud" prosecution. Rove's voter suppression schemes (thank you, Professor!), among other of his efforts to realize a "permanent Republican majority," are real efforts aimed at really disenfranchising real voters.

If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination.

~Thomas de Quincey

Once you've been chairman of the White House Iraq Group, conspiring to launch a "supreme international crime," hey, whose to notice a little voter suppression (among other things) here and there?

# posted by

manonfyre : 11:21 AM

Bart,

The point being that you are very happy to point out that an illegitimate voter on the rolls can be prosecuted, and you have no problem with that. Are you also concerned with the converse, where a legitimate voter is excluded from voting? Do you think that, vote value wise, these should be legally equivalent?

# posted by

Fraud Guy : 11:27 AM

Which conspiracy is more likely?

1) By order of the administration that they work for, the DoJ requires the US attorneys in their direct employment to investigate almost every reported instance of voter fraud--even when actual fraud is mostly unsupported and statistically insignificant--upon penalty of termination.

2) Various different media groups that compete for audience-share come together in some sort of conference to decide jointly that they won't mention the number of prosecutions that US attorneys were able to perform.

And a bonus question:
If the liberal news media is so dominant that they can cause a "blackout", but Dem voters "are not exactly the foremost news consumers," how exactly do they stay in business?

# posted by

PMS_CC : 11:58 AM

The irony in all of this is that the U.S. has the lowest voter participation of any democracy - less than 50% in some cases, especially during nonpresidential election years. To obtain a majority (with its' 30% of the population), the republicans have to suppress only a few votes to have an impact so a little suppression could go a long way.

Why isn't "caging" being prosecuted?

M. Royle

# posted by

Anonymous : 1:06 PM

Fraud Guy said...

Bart, The point being that you are very happy to point out that an illegitimate voter on the rolls can be prosecuted, and you have no problem with that. Are you also concerned with the converse, where a legitimate voter is excluded from voting? Do you think that, vote value wise, these should be legally equivalent?

Ahhh, OK I get you now.

Yes, denying a legal vote and allowing an illegal vote are legal and moral equivalents to me.

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 1:42 PM

Yes, denying a legal vote and allowing an illegal vote are legal and moral equivalents to me.

Then the fact that these pre-election roll-scrubbing actions result in far more legal votes than illegal votes being disqualified prior to an election should give you some cause to reconsider championing them.

# posted by

PMS_CC : 1:46 PM

PMS_Chicago said...

And a bonus question:

If the liberal news media is so dominant that they can cause a "blackout", but Dem voters "are not exactly the foremost news consumers," how exactly do they stay in business?

Most of the audience for the Dem media - even public broadcasting -were self described conservatives. However, now that there are alternative media sources - Fox, radio & internet - the Dem media is losing markets rapidly. In short, business sucks for Dem news.

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 1:47 PM

"Bart" DePalma keeps talking like no one has ever said anything back:

Exactly how does a voter fraud prosecution of those who are fraudulently registering imaginary voters at imaginary addresses or suits to compel states to scrub their voter lists to remove imaginary voters at imaginary addresses in any way discourage likely Dem voters?

Hell, given the nearly complete blackout by the Dem media of the eighty some, largely Dem voter fraud prosecutions other US attorneys besides Inglesias did perform, how exactly are likely Dem voters (who are not exactly the foremost news consumers) supposed to even know about these prosecutions in order to be "intimidated?"

This conspiracy theorizing has gone way past the absurd.

"Objection, your honour, asked and answered."

Cheers,

# posted by

Arne Langsetmo : 2:34 PM

"Bart" DePalma:

Yes, denying a legal vote and allowing an illegal vote are legal and moral equivalents to me.

A man without a moral compass. Killing an innocent and letting a guilty man go free are one and the same too, no doubt.

Not to mention, as pointed out previously to "Bart", you can prosecute a person ex post facto if they do cast an illegal ballot. There's other ways to deal with that problem.

In fact, "Bart"'s only moral compass is that anything good for the Republican party must be defended no matter how ethically absurd....

Cheers,

# posted by

Arne Langsetmo : 2:38 PM

PMS_Chicago said...

BD: Yes, denying a legal vote and allowing an illegal vote are legal and moral equivalents to me.

Then the fact that these pre-election roll-scrubbing actions result in far more legal votes than illegal votes being disqualified prior to an election should give you some cause to reconsider championing them.

You are assuming facts which are nowhere in evidence.

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 2:51 PM

Garth said...

I have a question for you Bart.

If Karl Rove could suppress the voters of the Democratic Party in key battleground states, do you think he would?

I am genuinely curious.

Genuinely, I doubt it.

Rove's claim to fame is his voter outreach efforts in 2002 and 2004 which brought out folks who do not normally vote GOP, not in voter suppression.

If Rove ever felt backed into a corner in an unfavorable electoral environment, it would have been in 2006 and I have yet to see any evidence that he attempted voter suppression in that election.

The fact that Dems have a hard time getting their voters out has more to do with the shortfalls in what they are selling rather than some massive conspiracy.

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 2:56 PM

Garth said...

"You are assuming facts nowhere in evidence." - Bart DePalma

then explain this Bart from the Washington Post 5/30/2001

These are a series of insinuations and allegations without evidence. Give me names of lawful voters who cast lawful ballots who were disenfranchised.

Actually, Bart I really am curious to know if you think that Karl Rove would resist the temptation to use caging or felon lists if he could?

Why would he? If I were the GOP, I would be making sure the Dems were not filling the voter rolls with fraudulent registrations and votes.

I am interested in your perception of his ethics. If you think he's a good man in the classic sense.

That depends on whether you believe a political operative can ever be "a good man in the classic sense." The last one I thought might be "a good man in the classic sense" was the choir boy Ralph Reed and then he was caught in bed with Abramoff. Therefore, the answer is no until Rove or any of these other hired guns is proven innocent.

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 3:15 PM

Garth said...

Here are three.

Kelvin King was turned away from the polls here in November when records showed that he was ineligible to vote as a convicted felon. County election officials learned days later that King's civil rights had been restored eight months earlier.

King's prior registration was null and void when he was convicted as a felon. It was King's responsibility to re-register when he regained his civil rights.

Sandylynn Williams had voted in every election since she was 18. But this time, election officials confused her with her sister -- a felon who had once used Williams's name -- and refused to let her vote.

I am sorry that her most likely Dem voting officials screwed up. This is not a conspiracy to deny her voting rights. It is a transposition of names.

Jeffrey Key, 37, who served time on a 1989 armed robbery charge, said he resumed voting in 1992 without applying to have his voting rights restored. He said he also voted in 1996, but in 2000, he was turned away from the polls.

"They sent me a letter of apology, and I just laughed," recalled Williams, 34, who said she had planned to vote for Democratic nominee Al Gore. "I was cheated out of voting."

I am unsure from this blurb whether the felon Williams illegally voted in 92 and 96 for the Clintons or was illegally denied the right to vote in 2000 for Gore. What state was this from? If it was from Florida, which barred felons from voting, then Williams was illegally voting until he was scrubbed from the rolls.

At what point does the stink get to be too much?

You have yet to present even an aroma of a conspiracy to suppress votes.

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 3:40 PM

"Bart" DePalma claims ignerrence of Karl Rove's modus operandi:

[Garth]: I have a question for you Bart.

If Karl Rove could suppress the voters of the Democratic Party in key battleground states, do you think he would?

I am genuinely curious.

["Bart"]: Genuinely, I doubt it.

Rove's claim to fame is his voter outreach efforts in 2002 and 2004 which brought out folks who do not normally vote GOP, not in voter suppression.

ROFLMAO. "Rove" and "voter outreach" in the same sentence!!!!

"Bart" ignores what has been a hallmark of Rove's career....

Even for nominally politically neutral factors on turnout, Rove is well aware that Republicans are favoured by lower turnout and Democrats by higher turnout. If there's something that specifically (or preferentially) targets Democratic voter turnout as opposed to turnout in general, that's just icing on the cake for Rove.

Rove is not the only Republican that knows this, to be sure. Republicans have consistently opposed such things as "motor-voter" laws....

Cheers,

# posted by

Arne Langsetmo : 4:16 PM

Garth:

A close examination suggests thousands of voters may have lost their right to vote based on a flaw-ridden list that included purported "felons" provided by a private firm with tight Republican ties.

Yet, after making this claim, your reporter does not presents any examination - close or otherwise - which shows us lawful voters who attempted to cast lawful ballots and were intentionally disenfranchised.

The rest of your posts offering allegations made after the Alabama election have nothing at all to do with voter suppression.

Don Henley's song "Dirty Laundry" perfectly describes this kind of bait and switch fraud posing as "reporting:"

We can do the innuendo

We can dance and sing

When its said and done we havent told you a thing

We all know that crap is king

Give us dirty laundry!

# posted by

Bart DePalma : 10:38 AM

Garth,

To continue on your point:

If part of the job of the Justice Department, and US Attorneys, is to prioritize the use of their resources, then US A's should be looking into the allegations of voter supression rather than that of individual unqualified voters.

My reasoning is that voter suppression efforts impact dozens, hundreds, or thousands of voters through acts by (usually) a group of partisan actors. Most US A's have extensive experience in peeling off one of a conspiracy to turn on the others and then, according to the logic Bart accepted, the value of that large number of suppressed voters would be restored (as well as the many statutes that could be used to prosecute such a conspiracy).

Going after individual fraudulent voters, as in the Wisconsin roundup, means that the US A's have to track down and prosecute many individuals, who likely only violated one or two statutes. (Of course, such individuals are unlikely [unless their initials are A C] have to resources to successfully defend against a Federal prosecution, so going after them as opposed to a politically backed organization may be less expensive in time and effort.)

# posted by

Fraud Guy : 1:28 AM

Vote Fraud? What Vote Fraud?

These hateful Republican conspirators, just trying to suppress votes. How shameful! Oh, wait...

Milwaukee woman accused of voter fraud

In what Milwaukee County prosecutors say is the first in a series of criminal cases alleging fraud in the November 2006 election, a Milwaukee woman was charged with two felonies for registering on Election Day and voting even though she was a felon on probation.

Her name was one of 30 forwarded to the Milwaukee County district attorney's office after being flagged by state elections officials as a possible instance of fraud from wards in Milwaukee.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=604176

Hundreds of illegal immigrants have registered to vote in Texas

According to San Antonio radio station 1200 WOAI, 303 illegal immigrants have registered to vote in Bexar County, Texas. The station also reports that at least 41 have actually cast ballots, effectively “canceling out the votes of U.S. citizens.” Bexar County Elections Administrator Jackie Callanan confirmed the figures, but expressed confidence that the new form of voter registration card, which requires a voter to swear they are a U.S. citizen when registering, will eliminate the problem because illegal aliens may be charged with perjury. This is another reason some officials are calling for a campaign to institute photo identification in Texas. Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst voiced his approval of the idea. “Considering that a photo ID is required to buy Sudafed, I can’t understand why anyone would argue that the same standard, if not a higher standard, should apply to voting.”
http://radio.woai.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=119078&article=2138213

Former ACORN worker pleads guilty in voter fraud case

A former voter registration worker for a community organization pleaded guilty in federal court on May 17 to filing false paperwork with the Kansas City election board.
Carmen R. Davis, 38, was charged in January with committing voter registration fraud and identity theft before the November elections. Davis subsequently was indicted. Earlier in May, Dale D. Franklin, who pleaded guilty in February to filing false voter registrations, received probation. Brian Gardner pleaded guilty in March and is awaiting sentencing. Kwaim A. Stenson is set for trial in July.
http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/112415.html

Activist gets year in jail for 2005 election fraud.

A leader of a 2005 effort to recall a Benton Harbor, MI city commissioner has been sentenced to one year in jail for election fraud. A jury on March 21 convicted Edward Pinkney, 58, of three counts of improper possession of absentee ballots and one count each of influencing voters while voting absentee and influencing voters with money.
"I'm here today to tell you that what they're saying, I didn't do," Pinkney told Berrien County Trial Court Judge Alfred Butzbaugh before Monday's sentencing.
Butzbaugh also gave Pinkney five years' probation. The maximum sentence would have been five years in prison. A judge cited widespread fraud in throwing out results of the election in which Glenn Yarbrough was removed from the commission by a vote of 297-246.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18667943/

# posted by

MJS : 12:52 PM

MJS, none of your examples except the last one constitutes "voter fraud". You're playing a linguistic game. It's not "voter fraud" unless someone actually casts an improper ballot. Until then, it's just a registration offense.

# posted by

Mark Field : 7:58 PM

A leader of a 2005 effort to recall a Benton Harbor, MI city commissioner has been sentenced to one year in jail for electoral fraud.
What can we do when the new version of the game released, we need to buy eden gold for the game, What does the gold's position in the game, like the RS Gold, why so many people need it ? How can get the cheap tera gold in a easy way and in a short time.

# posted by

Show you : 2:40 AM