By Nicholas Contompasis
Yesterday, Attorney General Eric Holder made it perfectly clear to the American people that he will do anything to get President Obama reelected in 2012. With Fast and Furious, Obama's attempt to undermine the Second Amendment (the right to bear arms) looming over his head like a gallows rope, four more years of Obama would ensure a Presidential pardon for Holder's criminal acts.
Eric Holder announced yesterday that he would do everything in his power to block states that are trying to prevent voter fraud by tightening up on voter registration and enforcement of new photo identification laws.
If you're wondering how Obama can disrupt the 2012 Presidential Election and swing it his way, this is how.
As states enact more restrictions ensuring the integrity of elections, look for Eric Holder to file suits against these states under the grounds of discrimination.
By doing so, he can in effect temporally invalidate the results of a state's election by court injunction.
Imagine on election night 2012 Newt Gingrich wins a close election against President Obama due to one swing state or even many. Nice right? Not so fast!!! The Attorney General, Eric Holder springs into action, files suits against most states that carried Gingrich that have enforced new voter regulations.
These suits could last several years and would eventually go to the Supreme Court individually.
It would cause a constitutional crises that would make the Bush vs Gore hanging chad issue look like a walk in the park. Holder would do everything possible to drag this constitutional disaster past Inauguration Day leaving Obama in place as President while waiting for a final decision from the courts.
One could only imagine the anger from the vast majority of Americans who voted against Obama. In essence our government would come to a standstill with massive consequences.
The disruption of the 2012 election would initially be subtle and would be fought in the courts. But one wonders how patient the American people will be under such a scenario.
In 2012 our republic will face its most dangerous year since its inception.
The strength, unity and resolve of the American people must prevail or our Republic will be lost in this critical election.
Our Favorite Criminal: Holder Announces Attack on Election Integrity Laws
By Bob Owens
The man is a menace to the Republic. No wonder President Obama won’t fire him:
Holder’s announcement will have profound partisan results in the 2012 election because of his professed unwillingness to enforce laws to prevent voter fraud. Indeed, tonight he made clear his opposition to these laws, such as voter ID and even the requirement to register to vote in advance of an election.
Holder announced broad opposition to voter identification requirements and a ramped up effort to enforce voting registration laws in welfare agencies. He didn’t make any announcements about enforcing Section 8 of Motor Voter to ensure dead people don’t populate the roles. He also said that voter fraud “isn’t a huge problem,” perhaps marking the first time the nation’s chief law enforcement downplayed criminal behavior. Of course that is in vogue in this administration, starting with the New Black Panther dismissal and now with Fast and Furious.
Holder laid down markers which will excite his base and disturb law abiding citizens. He supported restrictions on political speech which will criminalize campaign falsehoods. He vowed hyper-scrutiny of voter integrity laws such as voter ID and vowed to run states like Texas through a nasty gauntlet on redistricting. If this doesn’t send a signal to Texas and South Carolina to pull their Voter ID laws out of Justice and go to court, nothing else will.
Eric Holder seems intent on corrupting the 2012 election as much as possible, which is entirely logical for a man that needs to do everything in his power to keep fellow Democrats in office so that he is not held to account for the hundreds of felonies he is actively trying to conceal in Operation Fast and furious alone.
Holders Fraudulent Attack on Voter Fraud Law
By Joel B. Pollak
Attorney General Eric Holder delivered a speech in Austin, Texas today in which he invoked the history of the civil rights movement in targeting state voter identification laws. His approach mirrors that of the NAACP, which considers such laws racist, and echoes Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who recently claimed that Republicans want to “literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws.”
Holder claimed that the Department of Justice would be “fair” in reviewing such laws, but also quoted a misleading charge made by Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), who claimed there was a “systematic attempt” to prevent minority voters from exercising their rights. Holder specifically singled out “new photo identification requirements” in Texas and South Carolina, and applauded Maine’s voters for preserving same-day registration.
The fact is that requiring voters to provide photo identification is standard practice in much of the democratic world–even, and especially, in poor countries with a history of struggle against racism and colonialism.
In South Africa, for example, where black people were denied the vote until 1994, the new democratic government requires every registered voter–black or white, rich or poor–to bring official photo ID to the polls.
India’s election commission issues a special photo identification card to voters when they register, which they must present at the polls:
The Election Commission of India has made voter identification mandatory at the time of poll. The electors have to identify themselves with either Electors Photo Identity Card (EPIC) issued by the Commission or any other documentary proof as prescribed by the Commission.
In Europe, the official EU Handbook for Election Observation acknowledges that voters are required to show identification in many countries, and suggests that observers verify that all voters are subject to the same ID check (166). Even the Carter Center for Human Rights, which monitors democratic elections all over the world, identifies “a requirement for identification” as a “reasonable limitation” on universal suffrage.
(Update: That’s not to say international practice should govern American practice at the federal, state, or local level, but it certainly undermines the notion that photo identification is somehow motivated by a desire to keep people from exercising their rights. The opposite is true: voter ID laws are intended to protect voters’ rights against fraud and manipulation by those who would subvert their will.)
The idea that requiring American voters to show photo identification when they vote is racist is simply absurd. It’s a requirement enforced regularly by Holder’s labor union allies. It’s also a requirement demanded by federal agencies that provide welfare and other benefits. If there’s no destitute South African too poor to obtain photo ID, there is surely no American who deserves pity for failing to obtain the same in order to vote.
Holder’s attack on photo identification is crude partisanship, a fact made clear by his attack on Texas’s new congressional map. The federal government, he proudly notes, is challenging Republican-controlled Texas for failing to provide adequate representation for Hispanic voters. Yet Holder has ignored Illinois, where his fellow Democrats have cut Hispanics out of redistricting, and Republicans have tried to challenge the map in court.
Holder cited a Republican in Maryland who was convicted of trying to trick black voters into staying home. Yet there is also ample evidence of voter fraud by Democrats–such as in the 2008 primary in Indiana, or in the ongoing effort to recall Republican governor Scott Walker in Wisconsin. Holder’s attack on sincere attempts to stop voter fraud is itself a fraud that abuses the civil rights legacy to disenfranchise the public at large.