Aide implicates White House in "caging" scam

[gabosaurus]

As part of an investigation by Greg Palast, Dept. of Justice aide Monica Goodling told of department "caging" of voters in 2004, and the subsequent cover-up of such. No wonder Rove is still sweating.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4594

[avatar4321]

How exactly is this a scam? They don't live at the address. If they did, there would have been no reason to return to the sender or to forward the mail. If they don't live at the address they are registered to vote at they are illegally registered to vote.

So you are telling us that its a crime to remove people who are falsely registered to vote from the register. So apparently preventing Democrats from illegally voting is illegal. That makes so much sense.

[Gunny]

How exactly is this a scam? They don't live at the address. If they did, there would have been no reason to return to the sender or to forward the mail. If they don't live at the address they are registered to vote at they are illegally registered to vote.

So you are telling us that its a crime to remove people who are falsely registered to vote from the register. So apparently preventing Democrats from illegally voting is illegal. That makes so much sense.

It is only legal to prevent Republicans from voting illegally. Where Dem votes are concerned, the importance of the votre trumps the law.

Where've you been the last few elections?:poke:

[Mr. P]

Jim, is this possible?


Recently, we at GeorgeWBush.org happened to notice that our mail server had a default "catch-all" mailbox, which for the past several months had been quietly gathering any and all e-mails addressed to [INSERT-ANYTHING-HERE]@georgewbush.org.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

How exactly is this a scam? They don't live at the address. If they did, there would have been no reason to return to the sender or to forward the mail. If they don't live at the address they are registered to vote at they are illegally registered to vote.

So you are telling us that its a crime to remove people who are falsely registered to vote from the register. So apparently preventing Democrats from illegally voting is illegal. That makes so much sense.

What's possible is that troops are called up into service but they still live at that address by federal law. Mail is returned even though the place may be rented out and the military member is still the legal resident at that address. The GOP doesn't give a shit about our military troops so it disenfranchises them in addition to all the other indignities it heaps upon them when they are on active duty.

It's a crime for appointed officials to strip the voting rights away from people for partisan purposes. If you can really sit there and claim that what Goodling did was not partisan, you need to go back and watch her testimony before Congress where she admitted she broke the law on numerous occasions. Palast just caught her doing it and you're pissed because another one of your chosen people has been made out to be a fraud.

[Mr. P]

What's possible is that troops are called up into service but they still live at that address by federal law. Mail is returned even though the place may be rented out and the military member is still the legal resident at that address. The GOP doesn't give a shit about our military troops so it disenfranchises them in addition to all the other indignities it heaps upon them when they are on active duty.

It's a crime for appointed officials to strip the voting rights away from people for partisan purposes. If you can really sit there and claim that what Goodling did was not partisan, you need to go back and watch her testimony before Congress where she admitted she broke the law on numerous occasions. Palast just caught her doing it and you're pissed because another one of your chosen people has been made out to be a fraud.

Geeezzzz...If military folks were disenfranchised, do you think there would have been such a fuss about counting their absentee votes by the DNC in 00? :laugh2:

I'm starting to think this whole story is BS..but if true, do you think the DNC does it too? NO DOUBT.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Why do you think there was such a fuss? Because appointed officials were determining who was eligible to vote. Trouble is, in 2000, that many absentee voters did not comply with the law further complicating the matter.

I really don't give a rat's ass what the DNC thinks because they I don't march in lockstep with anyone. Greg Palast has done the research and brought the facts to the front. THAT'S why I believe him more than you, the DNC, or anyone else. Prove him wrong. Don't keep throwing red herrings out for all to see.

[Mr. P]

Why do you think there was such a fuss? Because appointed officials were determining who was eligible to vote. Trouble is, in 2000, that many absentee voters did not comply with the law further complicating the matter.

I really don't give a rat's ass what the DNC thinks because they I don't march in lockstep with anyone. Greg Palast has done the research and brought the facts to the front. THAT'S why I believe him more than you, the DNC, or anyone else. Prove him wrong. Don't keep throwing red herrings out for all to see.

They, the DNC, didn't want them counted..why?

Oh, and they were in lockstep with Al.

Working on the proof..so far I have doubts.

[JohnDoe]

well, it appears that the republicans are over stepping.


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."

[Mr. P]

well, it appears that the republicans are over stepping.

Both the DNC and GOP should insure voters are legal.

[avatar4321]

What's possible is that troops are called up into service but they still live at that address by federal law. Mail is returned even though the place may be rented out and the military member is still the legal resident at that address. The GOP doesn't give a shit about our military troops so it disenfranchises them in addition to all the other indignities it heaps upon them when they are on active duty.

It's a crime for appointed officials to strip the voting rights away from people for partisan purposes. If you can really sit there and claim that what Goodling did was not partisan, you need to go back and watch her testimony before Congress where she admitted she broke the law on numerous occasions. Palast just caught her doing it and you're pissed because another one of your chosen people has been made out to be a fraud.

If that is their address, then it wont be returned or forwarded. If its not their address, then they are illegally registered.

Its not very tough to figure out.

[avatar4321]

Why do you think there was such a fuss? Because appointed officials were determining who was eligible to vote. Trouble is, in 2000, that many absentee voters did not comply with the law further complicating the matter.

I really don't give a rat's ass what the DNC thinks because they I don't march in lockstep with anyone. Greg Palast has done the research and brought the facts to the front. THAT'S why I believe him more than you, the DNC, or anyone else. Prove him wrong. Don't keep throwing red herrings out for all to see.

Yeah heaven forbid the public officials do their job to prevent voting fraud.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

If that is their address, then it wont be returned or forwarded. If its not their address, then they are illegally registered.

Its not very tough to figure out.

Wrong. Military people own houses. When they are sent overseas, they rent those houses out. Mail sent to that address with a renter in it that is marked "DO NOT FORWARD" is then sent back to the sender when the military member is still registered to vote at that address. It's federal law that allows the military member to do that. It's not very tough to figure out.

Having some political appointees stripping military folks of their right to vote is about as un-American as it gets. I'm not too surprised that you condone it.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Yeah heaven forbid the public officials do their job to prevent voting fraud.

If you had proof of that there was vote fraud be sure and bring it the next time you make that specious claim.

[avatar4321]

Wrong. Military people own houses. When they are sent overseas, they rent those houses out. Mail sent to that address with a renter in it that is marked "DO NOT FORWARD" is then sent back to the sender when the military member is still registered to vote at that address. It's federal law that allows the military member to do that. It's not very tough to figure out.

Having some political appointees stripping military folks of their right to vote is about as un-American as it gets. I'm not too surprised that you condone it.

Genius. If they own the house, the mailing isnt going to be returned because they still live there. They don't have to forward it because it's still their address.

[avatar4321]

If you had proof of that there was vote fraud be sure and bring it the next time you make that specious claim.

If someone is registered to vote at an address they don't live at and attempts to vote, that is by definition voting fraud. And it is something you are advocating.

[Gunny]

Both the DNC and GOP should insure voters are legal.

The voice of reason.:salute:

[Baron Von Esslingen]

If someone is registered to vote at an address they don't live at and attempts to vote, that is by definition voting fraud. And it is something you are advocating.

Ignoring what the federal law ALLOWS makes you clueless in this argument. You didn't read what I posted, did you? How else are military members supposed to vote? Fly back on election day? Refuse to accept an overseas assignment because they could be stripped of their voting rights by an unscrupulous appointed official? Tell me how, in your infinite genius, how a military member is supposed to vote if they cannot claim a home address?

Like I said, when you have PROOF of that fraud, come back and see me. All you have is an ignorance of federal law and an undying love for the most corrupt administration in our nation's history and the illegal actions of their appointed officials. You have nothing else.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Genius. If they own the house, the mailing isnt going to be returned because they still live there. They don't have to forward it because it's still their address.

That's not what the post office does, genius. If it is addressed to the military member that owns the house but he/she no longer lives at that address because they are over in Iraq and the house is rented out to someone else, the post office BY LAW cannot leave correspondence there especially correspondence that says DO NOT FORWARD. The military member still owns the house and it is their legal residence and it shows up as the address on their driver's license BUT they cannot get their mail there if the house is rented out to someone else. I guess you wouldn't know about that if you are still living at home with Mommy and Daddy.

Republicans used that to disenfranchise military members without the military members knowing they did it. Little Monica was instrumental in helping the Bushies screw over the military. Again.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Both the DNC and GOP should insure voters are legal.

Actually, that's the government's job until it started being politicized and voters were being disenfranchised because they belonged to a particular political party. Taking it out of the hands of the parties and putting into a non-partisan category with non-partisan officials overseeing it is the ONLY way to insure that everyone who wants to vote and is legally eligible to vote can vote on election day or by absentee ballot.

[Psychoblues]

I don't think any of these people really understand what "caging" means. I would suggest that you all read "Armed Madhouse" by Greg Palast. It will at least get you to think about this horrible assault on American values and voting rights.

[JohnDoe]

If someone is registered to vote at an address they don't live at and attempts to vote, that is by definition voting fraud. And it is something you are advocating.

You are Joking, right?

In case you are not joking, it is not a fraud to vote in the town or county you live in....your address being different IS NOT FRAUD. Jesus Jimminnee!

These are American citizens that have the right to have their voices heard via their vote.

[avatar4321]

You are Joking, right?

In case you are not joking, it is not a fraud to vote in the town or county you live in....your address being different IS NOT FRAUD. Jesus Jimminnee!

These are American citizens that have the right to have their voices heard via their vote.

Hello?!?! If its not your address you dont live there! How freakin difficult is this to understand?

If you are registered in a district you don't live in by definition it is voting fraud.

[Baron Von Esslingen]

Instead of spouting the same stupid response, Avatar, answer the question I posed to you.


Tell me how, in your infinite genius, how a military member is supposed to vote if they cannot claim a home address?

You are the one that doesn't understand. It's so fucking obvious you haven't left home yet because you have no clue how the real world works yet.

Just answer the question, genius.