Investigation launched after dead people are registered to vote in Harrisonburg

Bill

Malarkeyville
Harrisonburg officials and the FBI are investigating allegations of voter registration fraud after officials say almost 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.

Harrisonburg Registrar Debbie Logan said Thursday that investigators have found from 18 to 20 potentially fraudulent registrations. The Rockingham County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office confirmed Thursday that an investigation is underway, but offered no additional details on the case.

The applications were turned in by a voter registration group called HarrisonburgVOTES, officials said. The group’s representatives could not be reached for comment Thursday. No charges have been filed.

The Breeze, the student newspaper of James Madison University, reported that the applications were submitted by a student working for the group. The problem came to light when an employee in the registrar’s office noticed a new registration had come in from Richard Claybrook Sr., the late father of a well-known local judge.

“When they used a distinguished resident of Harrisonburg’s name and address, it came to the attention of an employee who has worked in the city for many years,” Logan said.

“We were pretty disgusted that they would use his name,” Richard Claybrook Jr. said of his father, who died in 2014. “He was a retired educator and had served in World War II. He was always a law-abiding citizen.”

Logan said applications using a deceased person’s real name and address but a false social security number would not be flagged in the voter system.

The fraudulent voters are still technically registered as the investigation continues, Logan said, but if her office receives an absentee ballot from one of the dead voters, it would react appropriately. Logan said she expects the State Board of Elections and her local electoral board will allow her to cancel the registrations before the Nov. 8 election.

Republican lawmakers held a news conference call Thursday to call attention to the investigation, which they said proves voter fraud is real and validates their push for strong voter ID laws.

“Often times we hear our Democrat colleagues suggest that voter fraud doesn’t exist in Virginia or is a myth,” said House Speaker William H. Howell, R-Stafford. “Well it does indisputably exist.”

“If it hadn’t been for the vigilance of a citizen, this fraud effort may never have been uncovered until it was too late,” said Del. Mark L. Cole, R-Spotsylvania, who chairs the House Privileges and Elections Committee.

Others weren’t convinced that the case represents a close brush with election fraud.

Del. Marcus B. Simon, D-Fairfax, said it’s “very disingenuous” to suggest the applications were part of a large-scale fraud, because votes would have to be cast either in person by elderly impostors or through absentee ballots sent to real home addresses.

“There’s no way any reasonable person could conclude that this was part of an effort to actually cast votes for people that aren’t able to cast votes,” Simon said.


They need to roll out the taco trucks to Harrisonburg & get those potential voters registered....
poster-wanted-dead-alive-2054003.jpg


EBDAB32D-D70B-4BBB-81A4-F2B3E33BF9FB_cx0_cy6_cw0_w987_r1_s_r1.jpg
 
Harrisonburg officials and the FBI are investigating allegations of voter registration fraud after officials say almost 20 voter applications were turned in under the names of dead people.

Harrisonburg Registrar Debbie Logan said Thursday that investigators have found from 18 to 20 potentially fraudulent registrations. The Rockingham County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office confirmed Thursday that an investigation is underway, but offered no additional details on the case.

The applications were turned in by a voter registration group called HarrisonburgVOTES, officials said. The group’s representatives could not be reached for comment Thursday. No charges have been filed.

The Breeze, the student newspaper of James Madison University, reported that the applications were submitted by a student working for the group. The problem came to light when an employee in the registrar’s office noticed a new registration had come in from Richard Claybrook Sr., the late father of a well-known local judge.

“When they used a distinguished resident of Harrisonburg’s name and address, it came to the attention of an employee who has worked in the city for many years,” Logan said.

“We were pretty disgusted that they would use his name,” Richard Claybrook Jr. said of his father, who died in 2014. “He was a retired educator and had served in World War II. He was always a law-abiding citizen.”

Logan said applications using a deceased person’s real name and address but a false social security number would not be flagged in the voter system.

The fraudulent voters are still technically registered as the investigation continues, Logan said, but if her office receives an absentee ballot from one of the dead voters, it would react appropriately. Logan said she expects the State Board of Elections and her local electoral board will allow her to cancel the registrations before the Nov. 8 election.

Republican lawmakers held a news conference call Thursday to call attention to the investigation, which they said proves voter fraud is real and validates their push for strong voter ID laws.

“Often times we hear our Democrat colleagues suggest that voter fraud doesn’t exist in Virginia or is a myth,” said House Speaker William H. Howell, R-Stafford. “Well it does indisputably exist.”

“If it hadn’t been for the vigilance of a citizen, this fraud effort may never have been uncovered until it was too late,” said Del. Mark L. Cole, R-Spotsylvania, who chairs the House Privileges and Elections Committee.

Others weren’t convinced that the case represents a close brush with election fraud.

Del. Marcus B. Simon, D-Fairfax, said it’s “very disingenuous” to suggest the applications were part of a large-scale fraud, because votes would have to be cast either in person by elderly impostors or through absentee ballots sent to real home addresses.

“There’s no way any reasonable person could conclude that this was part of an effort to actually cast votes for people that aren’t able to cast votes,” Simon said.


They need to roll out the taco trucks to Harrisonburg & get those potential voters registered....
poster-wanted-dead-alive-2054003.jpg


EBDAB32D-D70B-4BBB-81A4-F2B3E33BF9FB_cx0_cy6_cw0_w987_r1_s_r1.jpg


This isn't a case of voter fraud, it's a case of voter REGISTRATION fraud.

Two totally different crimes.

But of course, the local dimbulb Righties want to create laws covering voter fraud.
 
why do you right wing fucks never accept the cold hard fACTS that PROVE you have cheated black voters for decades then
 
http://articles.latimes.com/1986-10-25/news/mn-7435_1_republican-national-committee





GOP Memo Admits Plan Could 'Keep Black Vote Down'
October 25, 1986|From the Washington Post







NEWARK, N.J. — A Republican National Committee official calculated that a so-called ballot security program in Louisiana "could keep the black vote down considerably," according to documents released in federal court Friday.
The documents and court hearing were the latest developments in a controversy over the GOP's ballot program that Democrats maintain is aimed at reducing minority turnout. The Republicans say the program's sole purpose is to purge ineligible voters from voting roles.
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."


Unseals Document
She said in the memorandum that the program had been approved by Gregory Graves, deputy political director of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
The document, called Exhibit 13, was unsealed by U.S. District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise when lawyers for the Democratic National Committee said it was needed to question Wolfe.
Wolfe testified that she wrote about the possibility of keeping the black vote down to remind Griffith that there "might be a political situation he might want to consider. . . . I wanted him to be aware of the political considerations."
The Democrats are suing the Republican Party for $10 million, charging that the Republican National Committee ballot security programs--a method of assuring that voters reside at their listed addresses--violated a 1981 consent agreement signed by both parties.
Under the agreement, the Republican committee would "refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial composition of such districts is a factor."
Debevoise refused to issue a restraining order requiring the GOP to stop all similar activity.
Accepts Lawyers' Word
The judge said he accepted the word of Republican lawyers who told him all ballot security programs have been stopped, including an effort the Democrats say singled out predominantly black and Latino precincts in Pontiac, Mich.
In testimony Friday, Mark Braden, the Republican National Committee's chief counsel and the organizer of the ballot security program, said he repeatedly sought to make it clear to subordinates that "race was a factor that could not be used. I would instill the fear of God in them. . . . I'm not an idiot, this is a big press issue, and it's a big legal issue."
The committee's ballot security program was conducted in Louisiana, Indiana and Missouri. Before it became controversial, GOP political strategists said they planned to use it in other states.
'Insidious Scheme'
Louisiana state District Court Judge Richard E. Lee issued an injunction against the program on Oct. 14. In his order, Lee said: "This was an insidious scheme by the Republican Party to remove blacks from the voting roles."
 
This isn't a case of voter fraud, it's a case of voter REGISTRATION fraud.

Two totally different crimes.

But of course, the local dimbulb Righties want to create laws covering voter fraud.


lol. Like there was no intention to vote. Nah, they just wanted to register
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File




Florida Central Voter File
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
The Florida Central Voter File was an internal list of legally eligible voters used by the US Florida Department of State Division of Elections to monitor the official voter lists maintained by the 67 county governments in the State of Florida between 1998 and January 1, 2006. The exclusion of eligible voters from the file was a central part of the controversy surrounding the US presidential elections in 2000, which hinged on results in Florida. The 'Florida Central Voter File' was replaced by the Florida Voter Registration System on January 1, 2006 when a new federal law, the Help America Vote Act, came into effect.



Private involvement[edit]
At the time, Florida was the only state that paid a private company to purge the voter file of ineligible voters, in effect allowing a private company to make the administrative decision of who is not eligible to vote.[1] The State of Florida's Division of Elections was required to contract with a private entity to purge its voter file by chapter 98.0975 of the Florida statutes, which had been enacted by the Florida legislature to address voter registration fraud found during the 1997 Miami mayoral election.[2]
Previously, voter purging had been conducted (sometimes controversially) by local elections officials. During the US Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, local elections officials in southern states, including Florida, were the subjects of lawsuits, marches and civil disobedience as African-Americans attempted to register to vote. This led to the passage of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965, banning discriminatory practices that kept African-Americans off the voter rolls.
The first firm hired on 1998 to purge the voter rolls was Professional Service Inc., which charged $5,700 for the job. Later in the same year, the state placed an open request for tenders to bid for the job. The contract was assigned to DBT Online, despite the fact that its bid was the highest-priced. The state gave the job to DBT for a first-year fee of US $2,317,800 with total fees eventually reaching US $4 million [3] The Florida Department of Elections terminated Professional Service Inc.'s contract in 1999. DBT Online was acquired by ChoicePoint in early 2000.
Problems in the cleansing process[edit]
At first, Florida specified only exact matches on names, birthdates and genders to identify voters as felons. However, state records reveal a memo dated March 1999 from Emmett "Bucky" Mitchell, a lawyer for the state elections office who was supervising the felon purge, asking DBT to loosen its criteria for acceptable matches. When DBT representatives warned Mitchell that this would yield a large proportion of false positives (mismatches), Mitchell's reply was that it would be up to each county elections supervisor to deal with the problem.[4]
In February 2001, in a phone conversation with the BBC's London studios, ChoicePoint vice-president James Lee said that the state "wanted there to be more names than were actually verified as being a convicted felon".[5][6]
James Lee's testimony[edit]
On 17 April 2001, James Lee testified, before the McKinney panel, that the state had given DBT the directive to add to the purge list people who matched at least 90% of a last name. DBT objected, knowing that this would produce a huge number of false positives (non-felons).[4]
Lee went on saying that the state then ordered DBT to shift to an even lower threshold of 80% match, allowing also names to be reversed (thus a person named Thomas Clarence could be taken to be the same as Clarence Thomas). Besides this, middle initials were skipped, Jr. and Sr. suffixes dropped, and some nicknames and aliases were added to puff up the list.
"DBT told state officials", testified Lee, "that the rules for creating the [purge] list would mean a significant number of people who were not deceased, not registered in more than one county, or not a felon, would be included on the list. DBT made suggestions to reduce the numbers of eligible voters included on the list". According to Lee, to this suggestion the state told the company, "Forget about it".
"The people who worked on this (for DBT) are very adamant... they told them what would happen", said Lee. "The state expected the county supervisors to be the failsafe." Lee said his company will never again get involved in cleansing voting rolls. "We are not confident any of the methods used today can guarantee legal voters will not be wrongfully denied the right to vote", Lee told a group of Atlanta-area black lawmakers in March 2001.[7]
 
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/14/news/la-pn-supreme-court-rnc-voter-fraud-20130114



Supreme Court denies RNC bid to end voter fraud consent decree
January 14, 2013|By David G. Savage





The Supreme Court refused to lift a consent decree that bars the Republican… (Caroyln Kaster / Associated…)
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has refused to lift a 30-year consent decree that bars the Republican National Committee from targeting racial and ethnic minorities in its efforts to end fraudulent voting.
The justices without comment turned down an appeal from RNC lawyers who said the decree has become “antiquated” and is “increasingly used as political weapon” by Democrats during national campaigns.
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.
 
lol. Like there was no intention to vote. Nah, they just wanted to register

Regardless...

UNTIL someone tries to cast multiple votes using information from the voter registration cards they filled out, there is NO VOTER FRAUD.

As it stands, the incident from the OP is voter REGISTRATION fraud.
 
same thing the acorn temp emloyees did to fake they were working so they could screw Acorn out of the money



not one produced a bad vote
 
the emloyees cheated ACORN


ACORN turned them in and flagged the BAD regs


the republicans then attacked and killed Acorn for their honesty in reporting those crimes
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_New_Hampshire_Senate_election_phone_jamming_scandal



2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal



The 2002 New Hampshire Senate election phone jamming scandal involved the use of a telemarketing firm hired by that state's Republican Party (NHGOP) for election tampering. The tampering involved using a call center to jam the phone lines of a get out the vote (GOTV) operation. In the end, 900 calls were made for 45*minutes of disruption to the Democratic-leaning call centers.
During that state's 2002 election for the United States Senate seat being vacated by Republican Bob Smith, the NHGOP hired GOP Marketplace, based in northern Virginia, to jam another phone bank being used by the state Democratic Party and the firefighters' union for efforts to turn out voters on behalf of then-Governor of New Hampshire Jeanne Shaheen on Election Day. John E. Sununu, the Republican nominee, won a narrow victory. In addition to criminal prosecutions, disclosures in the case have come from a civil suit filed by the state's Democratic Party against the state's Republican Party (now settled).
 
https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-high-court-refuses-reinstate-north-carolina-voter-194138281.html




RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — A divided U.S. Supreme Court refused Wednesday to reinstate North Carolina's voter identification requirement and keep just 10 days of early in-person voting.
The decision — a victory for voting rights groups and President Barack Obama's Justice Department — means voters won't have to show one of several qualifying photo IDs when casting ballots in the presidential battleground state. Early voting also reverts to 17 days, to begin Oct. 20.
The court rejected a request by Republican Gov. Pat McCrory and other state officials to delay a lower court ruling that found the state law was tainted by racial discrimination.
"Hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians will now be able to vote without barriers," Allison Riggs, an attorney representing some of the groups and voters who originally sued over the 2013 law, said in a release.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down several parts of the law July 29, saying they were approved by Republican legislators in 2013 with intentional bias against black voters. Lawyers for McCrory and the state officials disagreed with the 4th Circuit ruling that there was "discriminatory intent" in passing the law and wanted a delay while they drafted an appeal.
The high court divided 4-4 on most of the challenged provisions, with the four more conservative justices supporting the state's bid to enforce them in the upcoming election. The split illustrates again how closely divided the Supreme Court is on voting rights and how the outcome of the presidential election essentially will determine the court's direction.
The court has been operating with only eight members since Justice Antonin Scalia died in February.
 
http://www.brennancenter.org/issues/voting-rights-elections




Issues






The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law is a non-partisan public policy and law institute that focuses on the fundamental issues of democracy and justice. Our work ranges from voting rights to campaign finance reform, from racial justice in criminal law to Constitutional protection in the fight against terrorism. A singular institution — part think tank, part public interest law firm, part advocacy group — the Brennan Center combines scholarship, legislative and legal advocacy, and communications to win meaningful, measurable change in the public sector.





Celebrating Justice Brennan






Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. is universally regarded as one of the most influential and liberal justices of the second half of the 20th century. His 34 years on the U.S. Supreme Court was one of the Court's longest tenures, spanning eight presidencies and 17 Congresses. During that time he served with 22 justices, wrote 461 majority opinions, 425 dissents, and 474 other opinions. Brennan's legacy was so powerful and far-reaching that even those who disagreed with his opinions still recognized his singular influence. According to the conservative National Review in 1984, "there is no individual in this country, on or off the Court, who has had a more profound and sustained impact upon public policy in the United States."
Born in 1906 to Irish immigrants, Brennan grew up as witness to the economic hardships and indignities of those in his hometown. "What got me interested in people's rights and liberties," Brennan would later recall, "was the kind of neighborhood I was brought up in. I saw all kinds of suffering—people had to struggle."
Despite his humble beginnings, Brennan excelled academically. He completed his law degree at Harvard and entered private practice in his home state of New Jersey. But when his practice intruded on his devotion to his family, Brennan opted for service as a trial judge. He was promoted to the state's highest court in 1952 and was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1956 by President Dwight D. Eisenhower.
Justice Brennan's devotion to core democratic freedoms was unwavering. He authored important opinions in the areas of free expression, criminal procedure, and reapportionment. As a result of his leadership, Brennan imparted his constitutional vision to a broad coalition of his colleagues. He resigned on account of health in 1990.
 
that site does a great job of documenting all the republican party cheating in elections for decades
 
Regardless...

UNTIL someone tries to cast multiple votes using information from the voter registration cards they filled out, there is NO VOTER FRAUD.

As it stands, the incident from the OP is voter REGISTRATION fraud.

Well the Cascade Mall shooter voted in multiple elections, so fuck off.
 
https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/voter-fraud




Myth of Voter Fraud
It is important to protect the integrity of our elections. But we must be careful not to undermine free and fair access to the ballot in the name of preventing voter fraud.*
The Brennan Center’s ongoing examination of voter fraud claims reveal that voter fraud is very rare, voter impersonation is nearly non-existent, and much of the problems associated with alleged fraud in elections relates to unintentional mistakes by voters or election administrators. Our report "The Truth About Voter Fraud" reveals most allegations of fraud turn out to be baseless — and that of the few allegations remaining, most reveal election irregularities and other forms of election misconduct. Click here for additional resources on fraud.
Voter fraud is not acceptable in our elections, but we must find a balance and not impose solutions that make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to participate in our democracy.







Myth of Voter Fraud
It is important to protect the integrity of our elections. But we must be careful not to undermine free and fair access to the ballot in the name of preventing voter fraud.*
The Brennan Center’s ongoing examination of voter fraud claims reveal that voter fraud is very rare, voter impersonation is nearly non-existent, and much of the problems associated with alleged fraud in elections relates to unintentional mistakes by voters or election administrators. Our report "The Truth About Voter Fraud" reveals most allegations of fraud turn out to be baseless — and that of the few allegations remaining, most reveal election irregularities and other forms of election misconduct. Click here for additional resources on fraud.
Voter fraud is not acceptable in our elections, but we must find a balance and not impose solutions that make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to participate in our democracy.
Sign up for our Election 2016 newsletter.
Recent Research
Debunking the Voter Fraud Myth

Claims have circulated this election season about the extent of voter fraud. But putting rhetoric aside to look at the facts makes clear fraud is vanishingly rare, and does not happen on a scale even close to that necessary to “rig” an election.
September 1, 2016Voting Rights & ElectionsMyth of Voter Fraud
The Truth About Justice Stevens and the Voting Rights Act
Andrew Cohen
Justice Stevens cannot plausibly be cited today for the proposition that North Carolina’s oppressive new voting laws are justifiable by virtue of some form of voter fraud.
October 11, 2013Voting Rights & ElectionsRestricting the VoteMyth of Voter Fraud
View More Research

Recent Commentary
Debating Election Integrity
Jennifer L. Clark

In any other year, asking presidential candidates whether they’d accept the election outcome were their opponent to win would be odd. But not in 2016. That's why it's more important than ever for voters to know the facts and understand their rights.
September 28, 2016Myth of Voter Fraud
Texas Photo ID Trial Update: Closing Arguments V
Carson Whitelemons
Finally, following Texas’s closing argument, the Court heard brief rebuttal arguments from the plaintiffs.
September 22, 2014Voting Rights & ElectionsRestricting the VoteMyth of Voter Fraud
View More Commentary

Recent Litigation
Crawford v. Marion County Election Board
Determining which American citizens are able to exercise their right to vote and which Americans are not, the Indiana voter ID case is the most important voting rights case since Bush v. Gore.
April 28, 2008Voting Rights & ElectionsRestricting the VoteMyth of Voter Fraud
FOIA Request to EAC Re: Commissioned Reports
In 2006 and 2007, the Brennan Center filed a FOIA request with the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to obtain documents pertaining to commissioned reports on voter fraud and voter intimidation and on voter ID.
March 14, 2008Other Voting IssuesRestricting the VoteMyth of Voter FraudVoting Rights & Elections
View More Litigation
 
http://www.brennancenter.org/legal-work/dnc-v-rnc-consent-decree


DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
April 1, 2009






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. The court denied the RNC's motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court's decision.* The RNC subsequently petitioned for rehearing en banc.
Click here to learn more about voter caging.




Related Court Documents
2012
Petition for Rehearing (2012)
Third Circuit Opinion (2012)
2009
RNC Brief in Support of Motion (2009)
DNC Brief Opposing Motion to Vacate (2009)
RNC Reply Brief (2009)
DNC Post-Hearing Brief (2009)
RNC Post-Hearing Brief (2009)
Debevoise Opinion (2009)
Debevoise Order (2009)
2008 (several states)
DNC Brief (2008)
DNC Brief Atty. Certification of Exhibits (2008)
OFA Intervention Memo (2008)
Minute Entry (2008)
2004 (Ohio)
Malone Motion to Intervene (2004)
Malone Intervenor Complaint (2004)
Malone Memo in Support of Intervention (2004)
Malone Intervenor PI brief (2004)
Malone Order (2004)
Malone Appellate Decision (2004)
Malone en banc Decision (2004)
Malone Dismissal (2004)
2004 (South Dakota)
Daschle SD Complaint (2004)
Daschle Temporary Restraining Order (2004)
2002 (New Jersey)
Order (2002)
1990 (North Carolina)
Order (1990)
1987 (several states)
Consent Decree (1987)
Original 1981 case (New Jersey)
Complaint (1981)
Consent Decree (1982)
*
 
Back
Top