Your vote DOES NOT COUNT!
- Thread starter Grugore
- Start date
evince
Truthmatters
Definition of twat: someone who is considered stupid or obnoxious. There is nothing evil about calling a spade a spade. And even Jesus renounced evildoers. I believe you are evil. Don't like it? Too bad. God will sort it out. The outcome is certain.
Are you denying that dems consider voter ID laws voter suppression?
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
more christer revenge fantasies
evince
Truthmatters
so do the courts idiot
evince
Truthmatters
The left wing definition of a legal election is when we finally find enough fake votes to put us ahead.
montgomery
Verified User
Wow, nasty forum! Looks like pretty well everything is fair game here.
So, you don't need an ID to vote? I bet you liberal stooges just love that. Now all those illegals can vote.
That will change once it makes it to the Supreme Court.
Adolf_Twitler
Verified User
I can remember it being the Supreme Court who names the president without counting the votes! Went over like a Baby Ruth floating in the public pool!
So STFU already!
That was Trump's fantasy.. You have to prove your citizenship the first time you register to vote, you moron... and if you move or don't vote for a few years you have to prove it again.. Haven't you ever bother to read your state's voter registration procedure?
evince
Truthmatters
why would they
all the facts show they are an attempt at cheating voters like all the pther things the Republicans have been caught by the courts doing
cold hard court documented cases all they way to the SCOTUS
evince
Truthmatters
Republicans have been caught over and over for decades now
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
you kind is dying away with or without voter ID in place
evince
Truthmatters
https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-work/dnc-v-rnc-consent-decree
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. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC 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. A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree. On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.
Click here to learn more about voter caging.
Click here to learn more about ballot security programs.
Related Court Documents
2016
Order Denying Request to Extend Decree (11/05/2016)
RNC's Memorandum in Opposition to Order to Show Cause (10/31/2016)
DNC's Memorandum in Support of Order to Show Cause (10/26/2016)
2012
Petition for Rehearing (03/22/2012)
Third Circuit Opinion (03/08/2012)
2009
Debevoise Order (12/01/2009)
Debevoise Opinion (12/01/2009)
RNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
DNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
RNC Reply Brief (02/19/2009)
DNC Brief Opposing Motion to Vacate (01/19/2009)
RNC Brief in Support of Motion (11/03/2008)
2008 (several states)
DNC Brief (11/03/2008)
DNC Brief Atty. Certification of Exhibits (11/03/2008)
OFA Intervention Memo (11/03/2008)
Minute Entry (11/03/2008)
2004 (Ohio)
Malone Dismissal (02/03/2005)
Malone en banc Decision (11/09/2004)
Malone Appellate Decision (11/01/2004)
Malone Order (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor PI brief (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor Complaint (10/31/2004)
Malone Memo in Support of Intervention (10/28/2004)
Malone Motion to Intervene (10/28/2004)
2004 (South Dakota)
Daschle Temporary Restraining Order (11/02/2004)
Daschle SD Complaint (11/01/2004)
2002 (New Jersey)
Order (10/31/2002)
1990 (North Carolina)
Order (11/05/1990)
1987 (several states)
Consent Decree (07/27/1987)
Original 1981 case (New Jersey)
Consent Decree (11/01/1982)
Complaint (02/11/1982)
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. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC 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. A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree. On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.
Click here to learn more about voter caging.
Click here to learn more about ballot security programs.
Related Court Documents
2016
Order Denying Request to Extend Decree (11/05/2016)
RNC's Memorandum in Opposition to Order to Show Cause (10/31/2016)
DNC's Memorandum in Support of Order to Show Cause (10/26/2016)
2012
Petition for Rehearing (03/22/2012)
Third Circuit Opinion (03/08/2012)
2009
Debevoise Order (12/01/2009)
Debevoise Opinion (12/01/2009)
RNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
DNC Post-Hearing Brief (06/26/2009)
RNC Reply Brief (02/19/2009)
DNC Brief Opposing Motion to Vacate (01/19/2009)
RNC Brief in Support of Motion (11/03/2008)
2008 (several states)
DNC Brief (11/03/2008)
DNC Brief Atty. Certification of Exhibits (11/03/2008)
OFA Intervention Memo (11/03/2008)
Minute Entry (11/03/2008)
2004 (Ohio)
Malone Dismissal (02/03/2005)
Malone en banc Decision (11/09/2004)
Malone Appellate Decision (11/01/2004)
Malone Order (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor PI brief (11/01/2004)
Malone Intervenor Complaint (10/31/2004)
Malone Memo in Support of Intervention (10/28/2004)
Malone Motion to Intervene (10/28/2004)
2004 (South Dakota)
Daschle Temporary Restraining Order (11/02/2004)
Daschle SD Complaint (11/01/2004)
2002 (New Jersey)
Order (10/31/2002)
1990 (North Carolina)
Order (11/05/1990)
1987 (several states)
Consent Decree (07/27/1987)
Original 1981 case (New Jersey)
Consent Decree (11/01/1982)
Complaint (02/11/1982)
That is just so crazy. Why would an illegal vote? You haters are short on thinking and logic there. Assuming they are here to make a living and help their families, you geniuses think they would risk it all to vote in an election that does not impact their lives.Bet you reds who live in texas, go over the border to vote in Mexicans elections , dont you? I live in Michigan and have never tried to vote in canadian elections. What am I missing?
Bourdeaux Nights
Verified User
Tell it to the 3,000,000+ that voted for Hillary, ya piss pants crybaby. You have nothing to complain about.