Hillary Clinton will stop at nothing to get her fat ass back into the oval office. Murder, extortion and blackmail will certainly be used. The pantsuit butcher of Benghazi has racked up another 5+ to her body count in the past 60 days alone. VoterÂ fraud is going to happen on a very wide scale. We know it, Trump knows it, Bernie Sanders is proof of it.
Our screaming and hollering about voter fraud isÂ to no avail. No one is listening to us. Not even the Republican Party.Â Hereâ€™s whyâ€¦.
The Republican Party made an agreement 30 years ago with the Democrat Party NOT to ensure voting integrity and NOT to pursue suspected voter fraud.
Yes. You read it correctly. Â In fact, legally the GOP cannot ensure voting integrity, nor can it prevent voter fraud.Â Hereâ€™s the astounding reason, which is kept from the American people.Â November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine EngelbrechtÂ related a meeting she had with Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee (RNC), asking what the GOP would do about voter integrity.Â The answer?
Nothing.Â They arenâ€™t legally able to.
This all goes back to a lawsuit 31 years ago, in 1981. The following is compiled from an account on The Judicial View, a legal website specializing in court decision research and alerts, and from â€œDemocratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,â€ Case No. 09-4615.
In 1981, during the gubernatorial election in New Jersey (NJ), a lawsuit was brought against the RNC, the NJ Republican State Committee (RSC), and three individuals (John A. Kelly, Ronald Kaufman, and Alex Hurtado), accusing them of violating the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA), 42 U.S.C. Â§Â§ 1971, 1973, and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
The lawsuit was brought by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the NJ Democratic State Committee (DSC), and two individuals (Virginia L. Peggins and Lynette Monroe).
The lawsuit alleged that:
- The RNC and RSC targeted minority voters in New Jersey in an effort to intimidate them.
- The RNC created a voter challenge list by mailing sample ballots to individuals in precincts with a high percentage of racial or ethnic minority registered voters. Then the RNC put the names of individuals whose postcards were returned as undeliverable on a list of voters to challenge at the polls.
- The RNC enlisted the help of off-duty sheriffs and police officers with â€œNational Ballot Security Task Forceâ€ armbands, to intimidate voters by standing at polling places in minority precincts during voting. Some of the officers allegedly wore firearms in a visible manner.
To settle the lawsuit, in 1982 â€” while Ronald Reagan was President (1981-1989) â€” the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or Consent Decree, which is national in scope, limiting the RNCâ€™s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the courtâ€™s approval in advance. The following is what the RNC and RSC, in the Consent Decree, agreed they would do:
[I]n the future, in all states and territories of the United States:
(a) comply with all applicable state and federal laws protecting the rights of duly qualified citizens to vote for the candidate(s) of their choice;
(b) in the event that they produce or place any signs which are part of ballot security activities, cause said signs to disclose that they are authorized or sponsored by the party committees and any other committees participating with the party committees;
(c) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their agents or employees to remove or deface any lawfully printed and placed campaign materials or signs;
(d) refrain from giving any directions to or permitting their employees to campaign within restricted polling areas or to interrogate prospective voters as to their qualifications to vote prior to their entry to a polling place;
(e) refrain from undertaking any ballot security activities in polling places or election districts where the racial or ethnic composition of such districts is a factor in the decision to conduct, or the actual conduct of, such activities there and where a purpose or significant effect of such activities is to deter qualified voters from voting; and the conduct of such activities disproportionately in or directed towarddistricts that have a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations shall be considered relevant evidence of the existence of such a factor and purpose;
(f) refrain from having private personnel deputized as law enforcement personnel in connection with ballot security activities.
The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, â€œwhether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.â€
As modified in 1987, the Consent Decree defined â€œballot security activitiesâ€to mean â€œballot integrity, ballot security or other efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.â€
Since 1982, that Consent Decree has been renewed every year by the original judge, Carter appointee District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise, now 88 years old. Long retired, Debevoise comes back yearly for the sole purpose of renewing his 1982 order for another year.
In 2010, the RNC unsuccessfully appealed â€œto vacate or modifyâ€ the Consent Decree in â€œDemocratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,â€ Case No. 09-4615 (C.A. 3, Mar. 8, 2012). (I paid The Judicial Review $10 for the PDF of Case No. 09-4615 and uploaded the 59-page document to FOTMâ€™s media library. To read Case No. 09-4615, click here!)
This is a summary of the appeals judgeâ€™s ruling, filed on March 8, 2012:
In 1982, the Republican National Committee (â€œRNCâ€) and the Democratic National Committee (â€œDNCâ€) entered into a consent decree (the â€œDecreeâ€ or â€œConsent Decreeâ€), which is national in scope, limiting the RNCâ€™s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the courtâ€™s approval in advance. The RNC appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey denying, in part, the RNCâ€™s Motion to Vacate or Modify the Consent Decree. Although the District Court declined to vacate the Decree, it did make modifications to the Decree. The RNC argues that the District Court abused its discretion by modifying the Decree as it did and by declining to vacate the Decree. For the following reasons, we will affirm the District Courtâ€™s judgment.
Surprise! The judge who denied the RNCâ€™s appeal to â€œvacateâ€ the 1982 Consent Decree is an Obama appointee, Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Obama only won by 406,348 votes in 4 states:
- Florida: 73,858
- Ohio: 103,481
- Virginia: 115,910
- Colorado: 113,099
Those four states, with a collective margin of 406,348 votes for Obama, add up to 69 electoral votes. Had Romney won 407,000 or so additional votes in the right proportion in those states, he would have 275 electoral votes.
All four states showed Romney ahead in the days leading up to the election. But on November 6, Romney lost all four states by a substantial margin, all of which have precincts that inexplicably went 99% for Obama, had voter registrations that exceeded their population, and had experiencedÂ problems with voting machines.
This election was stolen by the Democrats via voter fraud. Despite all the evidence of fraud, the Republican Party has been strangely silent about it.
Now you know why.
Iâ€™ll leave you with one last, even more disturbing thought:
The RNC and DNC made their Consent Decree 30 years ago, in 1982. The agreement in effect gives a carte blanche to the Democrat Party to commit vote fraud in every voting district across America that has, in the language of the Consent Decree, â€œa substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.â€ The term â€œsubstantial proportionâ€ is not defined.
The Democrat Party knew this 30 years ago, more than enough time to put a plan in place to identify and groom their â€œperfect candidateâ€ â€” in the words of Sen.Harry Reid (D-NV) in 2008, a â€œlight-skinnedâ€ black Democrat who has â€œno Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.â€
- Being a black Democrat, this perfect candidate would get the support of almost all black Americans (96% in 2008!) and other racial minorities (two-thirds of Hispanics in 2008).
- Being a â€œlight-skinnedâ€ black with â€œno Negro dialectâ€, this perfect candidate would get the support of white Americans perpetually guilt-ridden about Americaâ€™s original sin of slavery.
It doesnâ€™t matter if this â€œperfect candidateâ€ has dubious Constitutional eligibility to be president. They would see to it that his original birth certificate (if there is one) would never see the light of day. The same with his other documents â€” his passports, school and college records, draft registration, and medical records (so weâ€™ll never know why Obama has that very long scar running from one side of his head, over the crown, to the other side).
Now, we understand the significance of the account Tom Fife wrote during the 2008 presidential campaign.Â Fife, a U.S. government contractor,Â claims that in 1992 while he was visiting Moscow, aÂ woman with undying allegiance to SovietÂ Communism (the Soviet Union had recently collapsed, on December 31, 1991) told him that a black man named Barack, born of a white American womanÂ and an African male, was being groomed by communistsÂ to be, and would be elected, President of the United States.
Now, we finally understand the cryptic remark made in May 2010, by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan: â€œObama was selected before he was elected.â€
In 2008, this â€œperfect candidateâ€ won the presidential election. And despite his many failures in his first term, he would be reelected in 2012 for a second term via massive vote fraud. But nothing would be done about the vote fraud, because of that Consent Decree signed by the RNC 30 years ago.
The Republican Party is dead â€” and with it, the U.S. two-party system as well â€” and the sooner we voters recognize that the better.
The question that remains is whether the American Republic is also dead.
â€œWhat can I/we do about this?â€ Here are my suggestions:
- If you are a registered Republican, QUIT! Switch your voter registration ID to non-partisan Independent.
- Stop donating money, not even one penny, to the GOP. Tell them why.
- Spread the word. Please send the URL of this post
- EVERYONE on your email list.
- Media people for whom you have email addresses.
- Tea Party groups you know.
- Post the link on your Facebook page.
- Post the link as your comment on websites and blogs you visit.
- Write your stateâ€™s attorney general and ask him/her to investigate vote fraud in your state.Â Click here!