Warning Your Voter ID Is Controversial And As Dangerous As A Concealed Weapon!

Warning Your Voter ID Is Controversial And As Dangerous As A Concealed Weapon!

Missouri Voter Refuses Illegal Demand to Show Photo ID at Poll, Gets Thrown in Jail

BLOGGED BY Brad Friedman ON 8/7/2008 9:29AM

The charge on the citation: "Did knowingly cause a disturbance/disorderly conduct to wit: acts in a violent or tumultuous manner toward another, placing such person(s) in fear of safety by refusing to show proper I.D. when voting".

This story is unfrickin'-believable. Or maybe it isn't. It took place in Thor Hearne country, after all. And though she didn't get arrested and thrown in jail, a similar incident happened to the Missouri Secretary of State during the 2006 election.

A voter in Kansas City on Tuesday --- one I happen to know, because he's an Election Integrity advocate in the Show Me State --- was arrested and sent to jail after he refused to show a driver's license at the polling place before attempting to vote during the state's Primary Election.

The voter is Phil Lindsey of ShowMeTheVote.org and he posted the details of his harrowing tale over at DemocraticUnderground.com, where he posts as "galloglas", after being released on Tuesday night.

The charge on the citation: "Did knowingly cause a disturbance/disorderly conduct to wit: acts in a violent or tumultuous manner toward another, placing such person(s) in fear of safety by refusing to show proper I.D. when voting".

He told me, via email late last night, that he's been in close touch with MO's Secretary of State Robin Carnahan following the incident, and that both local media and folks such as nationally syndicated radio host Thom Hartmann have been in touch with him since the story broke last night. He was surprised, but pleased, that the incident has received so much coverage already.

Never mind that requiring a voter to show a driver's license in MO before they can vote was found unconstitutional in 2006. Never mind that he showed the pollworkers a perfectly legal and proper precinct-issued voter ID card when he went to vote. Never mind that he had even called to check with the local Board of Elections before going to vote, to make sure that the ID would be acceptable. Never mind that he even brought a copy of the MO law to show the pollworkers who had demanded a driver's license (much as they had done, illegally, in a previous election he'd voted in).

The cops were called, and he ended up going to jail anyway. The charge on the citation: "Did knowingly cause a disturbance/disorderly conduct to wit: acts in a violent or tumultuous manner toward another, placing such person(s) in fear of safety by refusing to show proper I. D. when voting"...

BRAD BLOG readers may remember that Carnahan herself was told, three times, by a pollworker in 2006, that she had to show a driver's license in order to vote. Never mind that she's the Sec. of State and had some familiarity with the law in this case.

My father, as I'm originally from St. Louis, also had a similar incident, (sans the being arrested part) at the polls in 2006, which he documented for us here at the time.

Moreover, a report from the MO SoS after the 2006 election listed a number of incident reports [PDF] where voters were illegally asked for Photo ID's, and even reports of polling places illegally posting signs claiming that Photo ID was required to vote. Clearly, it wasn't an accident that so many poll workers were instructed to do exactly that. Looks like not much has changed in the two years since.

Here's how Lindsey recounts the moments after the cops arrived at the polling place, where Lindsey held his ground in refusing to proffer a different ID to the pollworkers:

One officer then turned to me and said, "This is your last chance. Leave and never come back here." I said, "You're kidding, surely. Never? And where do I vote in November?"

"Are you going?" he asked again. I asked, "You mean leave without even having an answer as to why I am not allowed to cast my ballot?"

His answer was nonverbal; but he leaned in close, and I knew he was waiting for an answer. "Uhhh... with all due respect, officer... I feel that if I did so, I would be betraying my own conscience, and setting a bad precedent for all those citizens who share my right to vote."

About two nano-seconds after finishing my sentence, an officer behind me grabbed my wrists, handcuffed me, pulled me by the arm and pushed me into the back seat of a caged police car.

Once he was finally released from jail, he went to the Eastern Jack Election Board upon the suggestion of both the Republican and Democratic Election Directors who had called his son (he had gone to vote with his father, and was similarly denied his right to vote) after he'd notified them of the incident.

Lindsey writes that Republican Director Charlene Davis was particularly hostile when she greeted him, but she and her Democratic counterpart eventually offered him another chance. Sort of...

The final attempt by the Board to mollify my son and I was to offer us the chance to actually vote (it was about 3:30PM then). I asked, "At our precinct?"

"No," I was told, "I'll give you a ballot right here to cast."

"Why can't we vote at our precinct?" I asked. "You have acknowledged that we were correct, and should have been allowed to vote. Why can't we."

"Well," she said, "if you go back out there, you may be arrested again."

"For what?"

"Well those judges filed a complaint the first time. I'm can't guarantee it won't happen again."

Thinking for a second, I suggested, "Why don't you go out with us? Or send someone."

Well, that was as far as she would go. The offer to cast a ballot at the Board Office. And I told her I would not be willing to vote a provisional ballot but she replied that it would not be provisional. I suggested she give me a moment to consult, by phone, with the SoS's Office. I was told that I would have to leave the building to do so.

I did so, checked on the status of the complaint I had already filed with the SoS by phone, then decided (since I doubt any race would be decided by my vote) that I did not want to chance setting any precedent by voting at the Board after having misdeneanor [sic] charges filed against me by the Election Judges.

Lindsey's story is remarkable and a chilling sign of what is likely to come --- in spades --- this November.

Missouri has historically been a fierce battleground. McClatchy's Greg Gordon called it "Ground Zero" for the GOP's voter fraud/suppression campaign in 2006, in no small part, because it's home to master GOP "voter fraud" scamster, Mark F. "Thor" Hearne, of the now-defunct (though they've just slithered back underground) "non-partisan" front group "American Center for Voting Rights" (ACVR). The BRAD BLOG first outed Hearne and his sick scheme in early 2005 and, we've been following the democracy terrorist closely every since. It remains a mystery where Hearne, the national general counsel for Bush/Cheney '04 Inc., close friend of Rove, received the $1 million dollars to start up his tax-exempt vote suppression outfit, even though they are legally required to disclose that information. ACVR operatives were also found to be at the center of the U.S. Attorney Purge scandal where Bush-appointed USA's were fired by the Bush-DoJ after refusing to prosecute phony voter fraud charges.

Lindsey noted in his email tonight, in regard to his fellow Missourian Hearne, "from his looks the last time I saw him, the years are wearing on him." Well, gosh, we're so sorry to hear that. Perhaps the guilt from helping to keep 90 year-old nuns, U.S. Army veterans and untold numbers of students and minority voters who don't even try anymore, is beginning to wear on him. But I doubt it.

Lindsey's full story, as he posted it (typos and all) at Democratic Underground Tuesday night after he finally got home, has got lots of detail, but it's well worth the read. Don't say you haven't been warned.

Ohio Sues Diebold (It's About Time!) (Open this link. There is a treasure Chest Inside)

04 OH Election Case Revived: Case Reignited, Attnys Cite Evidence of Fraud

GOP High-Tech Guru 'At Scene of Every Crime (Serial Vote Killer Still At Large)

So we learned last week that new information concerning Republican high-tech guru Mike Connell's alleged participation in computer-aided fraud from Florida to Ohio to the Swiftboaters to RNC headquarters to Congress has helped lead Ohio attorney Cliff Arnebeck to reignite a long-standing federal lawsuit concerning Ohio's 2004 Presidential Election.

We learned this week that Connell may have been threatened by Karl Rove should the GOP's "high IQ Forrest Gump" --- so described for his uncanny ability to be found "at the scene of every [GOP] crime" --- fail to "take the fall" for election fraud in Ohio, according to a letter sent by Arnebeck to AG Michael Mukasey asking for Connell's protection.

But who exactly is this exceptionally successful, yet largely-below-the-radar-until-now Republican operative?

The following clip (appx 6:45 mins) from the new documentary film, FREE FOR ALL! (downloadable in full, free for all at www.freeforall.tv) by filmmaker John Ennis, gives us a small taste of who Connell is, and how he fits into the big picture.

The High-Tech HighJack of Ohio

Rove Issues Threat, Protection Sought

Even The Kids Are Smarter Than O’Reilly

O'Reilly thinks he can teach our children proper behavior, and we can't think of a worse father figure than an angry, hate-filled shock jock notorious for telling guests to "Shut up!" We wondered what would happen if kids read O'Reilly's book and then saw the real O'Reilly for themselves. So we put together a video to illustrate O'Reilly's duplicity.

http://www.stopfascism.com Join Today!

Scaring Up Votes: Tell the FEC to Investigate Wal-Mart's Partisan Political Meetings

Scaring Up Votes: Tell the FEC to Investigate Wal-Mart's Partisan Political Meetings

In case you missed it, we just sent out an e-mail to our members asking them to write to the Federal Election Commission and demand an investigation into Wal-Mart's shady tactics. If you haven't heard, the Wall Street Journal broke a story on Friday about mandatory meetings Wal-Mart was having where they were telling their employees not to vote for Democrats. This is, hands down, a disgusting abuse of power, and it may just be illegal too! So take a minute or two to write to the FEC.

Below is the full message that went out to our members, if you didn't get it, you should sign up!

Wake Up WalMart's diary :: ::

Mandatory political indoctrination, Democrat-bashing, voter intimidation. Yes, it's business as usual at Wal-Mart.

This summer, Wal-Mart has organized mandatory meetings across the country, all with one purpose: to intimidate rank-and-file employees into voting Republican. The company's workers have been forced to attend ideologically-charged, Wal-Mart-sponsored rants against Democrats, Barack Obama, and landmark legislation that would allow workers to vote for or against representation.

We have received several calls from workers, their stories are very similar and similarly unsettling. As one worker put it, "they were telling me how to vote." Another Wal-Mart worker, Beth from Alabama, was told by Wal-Mart management that if she "voted for John McCain, then everything would be okay."

We believe that ideological indoctrination and political scare tactics are completely inappropriate for the workplace. Yet again, Wal-Mart’s management has crossed the line, possibly breaking the law in the process. In light of these developments, we are calling for an immediate FEC investigation into Wal-Mart's political bullying at work, but we need your help to make a real impact.

Please tell the FEC to investigate Wal-Mart’s mandatory political meetings today.

Outright political intimidation may seem too risqué for a global corporation. Not for Wal-Mart. Stories like the above are actually an emerging part of Bentonville's corporate culture.

Take 2006, when Wal-Mart organized a "voter education program" for employees. The company placed Terry Nelson at the helm: formerly George W. Bush's political director, and later fired for making racist ads about a Democratic politician. Unsurprisingly, Wal-Mart's "education" program amounted to a thin veneer over strident attacks against Democratic candidates nation wide.

Why has Wal-Mart made such an effort to control its workers' voting habits? For one, The company is terrified that Democratic gains will ensure passage of the Employee Free Choice Act. For Wal-Mart, an organized workforce could spell higher wages and better benefits—two things the company has fought tirelessly to avoid.

In the end, Wal-Mart's motives are a moot point. The company has crossed the line, again, and it's time to hold them accountable. You can help us end Wal-Mart's sleazy political schemes by taking a moment to write the FEC today.

Please write the FEC and demand an investigation into Wal-Mart's mandatory employee meetings

Thanks for joining us in support of justice in the workplace, for Wal-Mart workers everywhere,

The Team WakeUpWalMart.com

MoveOn.org: Impeachment (If Not Now, When?)

MoveOn.org: Impeachment (If Not Now, When?)

Moveon.Org Has A Lot Of Questions To Answer For Its Members If Expects To Keep Its Membership And Support!

And I am one of those members who will not ante up another dollar or make a move to support or join another street action in Washington DC until they do so.

I will not, as of this day, even post an announcement or a request from MoveOn until our questions are answered.

1) What is the organization’s official position on Impeachment?

(If not now, when?) ( are you going to continue burying the issue in confusing survey forms, the dating of which has given rise to the wide spread resurfacing of this issue as they seem to be little more than lazy Performa recycling of previous documents.) I am not prepared to pay for that form of advocacy.

2) Given the fact that the House Committee on the Judiciary has already conducted one hearing on the efforts of Mr. Kucinich and his supporters nationwide; is MoveOn prepared to join the battle and make a real difference.

An unwillingness or failure to do so would say to me that MoveOn is no longer an advocacy organization of the people but a submissive collaborator and wholly owned subsidiary of the Pelosi-Reid Democratic leadership.

3) Has MoveOn bought into the “spin lines” that it’s too late to do anything now, and that there are other things more important at the moment than the restoration of Constitutional Law in this land and Executive Accountability, (like doing anything controversial might endanger the election of Democrats in November regardless of whether they are worthy of election or reelection)?

4) Is MoveOn prepared to explore or support the exploration of the Suskind allegations?

5) Is MoveOn prepared to act on the clear fact that this administration has engaged in Torture, contrary to our own laws and in total arrogance and defiance of The Geneva Conventions?

6) Has MoveOn become a co-opted organization, co-opted by the Democratic Party leadership to the point where it will sit out any issue that the leadership deems to be uncomfortable and represent that position as the will of the membership of MoveOn as determined by survey techniques designed to provide cover for the leadership of the organization while it enjoys the fruits of the members donations?

These questions need and deserve candid “no spin” responses. In Google groups and organizations across America serious questions are being raised as to the value and integrity of MoveOn. When Members raise such questions; something is very wrong; trust has been lost.

I am not pleased to have to raise these matters in such a public forum.

But when you do not answer my email inquiries and I get a telephone run around after having to do some serious searching even to initiate some calls; I have no other choice.