READER COMMENTS ON
"California Democratic State Senator Convicted of False Residency Voter Fraud"
(16 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
...
leftisbest
said on 1/30/2014 @ 10:55 pm PT...
Hey Brad. Glad to hear you're on the mend. Excellent reporting, perspective and history. By citing historical violations by high-profile people, it gives readers "the rest of the story" as Paul Harvey loved to say.
Thanks for doing what you do and please, don't give up!
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
...
Lew
said on 1/31/2014 @ 11:31 am PT...
Explain to me why this guy is tried but the cons that committed the same crime are not?
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
...
Steve Snyder aka WingnutSteve
said on 2/1/2014 @ 5:51 pm PT...
The only thing more stunning than finding this piece on bradblog.com is seeing that Ernie is the author. And although the piece quickly conformed to the acceptable bradblog standard, i.e. it turned into a GOP hit piece, I must express my thanks. Now Ernie, you have something to refer to in your defense just like Brad has his Joe Miller piece from several years ago. Hot dang this place is about right vs. wrong!
To answer Lews question: One of the "cons" has been convicted. The others have not because there is no evidence to convict. Anybody can make an accusation, thankfully our legal system has a higher standard than Ernies "an accusation = guilt if they're a Republican".
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
...
Brad Friedman
said on 2/1/2014 @ 6:42 pm PT...
WingnutSteve came out of his bunker long enough to mutter @ 3...
Now Ernie, you have something to refer to in your defense just like Brad has his Joe Miller piece from several years ago.
I'm sorry you seem to have no clue about what Ernie has written here, much less me. But they don't call you guys "low information voters" for nothin'.
One of the "cons" has been convicted. The others have not because there is no evidence to convict.
Again, that would also be grotesquely incorrect. But, again, see the part above about "low information". (For those who don't know of Steve and his Wingnut World, yes, every single GOP voter fraud case detailed above is very well documented. None of them even questionable. Moreover, in almost every single case above, the complainant was also a Republican. Just FYI. But "Wingnuts" like Steve count on you being like them and, therefore, unable to click on an actual link to read actual information before forming an inaccurate opinion about it.)
Anybody can make an accusation, thankfully our legal system has a higher standard than Ernies "an accusation = guilt if they're a Republican".
By "higher standard", you mean, for example, an old boyfriend who's in the FBI inappropriately interceding in a local case to prevent a voter fraud conviction? I guess, as a two-time George W. Bush voter, insider backscratching, power-brokering and blatant corruption is Steve's idea of "higher standards". Amirite, Steve?
I'd ask if you were embarrassed to make such an ass out of yourself here, but you've answered that question (over and again) years ago. So, I'll just say, enjoy the SuperBowl, Wingnut! Christie 2016!
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
...
Ernest A. Canning
said on 2/1/2014 @ 8:54 pm PT...
WingnutSteve @3, alluding to the fact that this article begins by addressing the felony false residency voter fraud conviction of a Democrat, writes:
Now Ernie, you have something to refer to in your defense just like Brad has his Joe Miller piece from several years ago.
I guess you didn't bother to click on the link I provided to my earlier piece, False Residency: Epidemic Form of Elite Voter Fraud That Cannot Be Prevented by Photo ID, in which I wrote:
On October 2, a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge ordered that "Los Angeles City Councilman Richard Alarcon [D] and his wife will face trial on 23 felony counts of perjury and voter fraud" when the couple allegedly used a false address to both vote and qualify for elective office within LA's 7th district.
How sad that you are incapable of removing your ideological blinders. Instead of ignoring the "R" and the "D" someone places at the end of their name and examining each case based upon the facts, you insist that any criticism of Democrats is good reporting and criticism of Republicans amounts to biased reporting, facts be damned!
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
...
Steve Snyder aka WingnutSteve
said on 2/2/2014 @ 8:52 am PT...
Yes Brad, it's been "well documented" and the "evidence" isn't even questionable. That is, if left wing blog sites of known conspiracy theorists such as yours are to be believed. Reality on the other hand would lead most reasonable people to believe that if there existed well documented and unquestionable evidence there would be a conviction.
Ernie, you made my point with the exact same link to the exact same piece which you have used before to somehow prove that you are fair in your "journalism". One sentence buried in the middle of a Republican hit piece in which you proclaim all the Republican folks to be criminals when the truth is that most of those folks have never even been charged with a crime let alone convicted. Now in future days you don't have to copy and paste that one sentence (as you did in your comment) to ensure people actually read it. Now you can just link to this piece and the headline says it all.
Back to my bunker i.e. reality.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
...
Ernest A. Canning
said on 2/2/2014 @ 9:17 am PT...
WingnutSteve @6 wrote:
Yes Brad, it's been "well documented" and the "evidence" isn't even questionable. That is, if left wing blog sites of known conspiracy theorists such as yours are to be believed.
Hmmm! I guess all those Republicans who alleged that fellow Republicans had committed false residency voter fraud, including the 'Tea Party' supporters of Richard Mourdock, were members of "left wing blog sites of known conspiracy theorists."
Another epic swing and miss by our ideologically blinded, resident wing nut.
While we are on the subject of "conspiracy theorists," WingNutSteve, what are we to make of Republicans who insist that there is a need for polling place Photo ID restrictions because of an "epidemic" of voter fraud despite irrefutable evidence that in-person voter impersonation --- the only type of voter fraud that can be prevented by their proposed Photo ID laws --- are a scarce as hen's teeth?
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
...
Steve Snyder aka WingnutSteve
said on 2/2/2014 @ 2:04 pm PT...
Nice job changing the subject ernie.
Short answer: I'm against any law which may disenfranchise any legal voter.
Long answer: We live in a world where elections are decided by the smallest of margins. A local election in Texas within the last year or so was decided by one vote so I believe we need to ensure everyone who votes is a legal voter. I don't buy your excuse that this type of fraud is rare so we should ignore it. Take that, and the fact that almost all of the polling place ID horror stories come from extremists on the left such as the MSNBC turds and you and Brad, and I don't buy the horror stories. It's already been established in this thread that, if it's against someone in the GOP, you willingly accept any accusation as fact. Add to that the facts that even thinkprogress.org considers Brad and his site to be nothing more than conspiracy theorists, and that MSNBC almost always puts a racism angle to their accusations... well that brings your claims about photo ID laws into question. Far left ideology doesn't equal facts. If people don't have an ID, they should get one.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
...
Ernest A. Canning
said on 2/2/2014 @ 2:58 pm PT...
Amongst his latest illogical mumblings, WingnutSteve @8 offers up the hopelessly inconsistent statements that, when it comes to polling place Photo ID laws, he doesn't "buy" the "excuse that this type of fraud is so rare so we should ignore it," yet tells us that he is "against any law which may disenfranchise any legal voter."
Wow! Either Steve is utterly dishonest (which I believe is the most probable descriptor) or he has his head buried so deep inside the right wing disinformation bubble that he can't recognize reality when it smacks him in the face.
For example, in PA Photo ID Law Found Unconstitutional; State Court Issues Permanent Injunction, I covered a Photo ID bill, that according to the GOP's own expert, threatened to disenfranchise as many as 300,000 otherwise eligible voters even though the Republicans who insisted on passing the law could not point to a single case of in-person voter fraud have occurred at any time in the now more than 200 year history of what is one of our nation's founding states.
Get that, Steve. Zero cases of voter fraud were used to justify a Photo ID law that disenfranchised 300,000 perfectly lawful voters!
Next, Steve emerges from the wing nut netherworld long enough to eloquently inform us:
almost all of the polling place ID horror stories come from extremists on the left such as the MSNBC turds and you and Brad
I see, so the three judges of a unanimous U.S. District Court who offered up this polling place Photo ID "horror story" were obviously "extremist left wing turds:"
While a 200 to 250 mile trip to and from a DPS office would be a heavy burden for any prospective voter, such a journey would be especially daunting for the working poor. Poorer citizens, especially those working for hourly wage, will likely be less able to take time off work to travel to a DPS office --- a problem exacerbated by the fact that the wait times in DPS offices can be as long as three hours during busy months of the year.
Those three judges made a judicial determination that the TX Photo ID law disproportionately had a retrogressive impact on the voting rights of minorities and the poor. But, of course, those "factual findings" are in Steve's warped worldview, simply "left ideology."
Although those three judges said that a "law that forces poorer citizens to choose between their wages and their franchise denies or abridges their right to vote," Steve disingenuously says, "if people don't have an ID, they should get one."
Steve adds, "I don't buy the horror stories."
No one is trying to "sell" these "horror stories" to brain dead wing nuts. Attorneys, who amass significant factual records and expert testimony, present those "horror stories" as established fact to astute jurists, like those on the Missouri Supreme Court who saw through the GOP "voter fraud" deceptions in declaring the "Show-Me State's" Photo ID law unconstitutional.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
...
JoeinSyracuse
said on 2/3/2014 @ 6:19 am PT...
Brad and Ernie, take some biblical warnings to heart. Please stop casting your pearls to swine. My experiences with my dearly departed brother in exchanges such as your here never proved fruitful. At the moments in debate when cornered and forced to deal with realities, he would always fall back on how he 'feels' abouth things. You will never win over Wingnuts as they simply can't admit what they've learned is garbage.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
...
Steve Snyder aka WingnutSteve
said on 2/3/2014 @ 10:07 am PT...
You're right ernie. No one is trying to sell the horror stories to brain dead wing nuts. Conspiracy theorists like Brad are trying to sell the horror stories to a couple dozen or so people (based on the lack of almost any comments on most pieces here) who frequent this site. Earth to Brad! You don't have to sell anything to them, they bought in lock stock and barrel years ago. This site was a great idea at one time. But it has become so idealogically biased that a piece can't even be written about a CA dem being convicted of a crime without the story quickly turning into the typical GOP hit piece where no evidence is necessary for you boys. The squeeky wheel has lost his way into the abyss of conspiracy theory and slander. Continue pandering to leftists who feed on hate, and cast aside any attempt to maybe change a mind or two along the way by attempting some legitimate journalism. THAT'S a success story!!!
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
...
Brad Friedman
said on 2/3/2014 @ 2:17 pm PT...
WingnutSteve continued his long sad continuing spiral into wingnut irrelevancy @ 6 with:
Yes Brad, it's been "well documented" and the "evidence" isn't even questionable. That is, if left wing blog sites of known conspiracy theorists such as yours are to be believed. Reality on the other hand would lead most reasonable people to believe that if there existed well documented and unquestionable evidence there would be a conviction.
Thanks for confirming, once again, that you didn't bother to click on any of the links documenting the evidence in the story that you either don't understand or didn't bother to read before commenting on it. (Ya know, evidence from folks like a former GOP candidate for President of the United States, "Tea Party" candidates, etc. etc. But, hey, MSNBC! "Leftists"!)
In any case, as I'm nothing if not a uniter, I'll thank you for "proving" in your graf above you're a RW loon conspiracy theorist. After all, you've charged over and over and over again that BENGHAZI!!! and the IRS "scandal" aren't pretend scandals at all, but are very very serious crimes by the Obama Administration. Well, I guess not. By your own admission, "most reasonable people" would "believe that if there existed well documented and unquestionable evidence there would be a conviction."
Huh. No conviction, then obviously no crime at the IRS or in regard to BENGHAZI!!! Yet you keep pulling that nonsense out here (without even any evidence at all, much less unquestionable evidence) time and time again, choking the same silly chickens year after year. Nutty. It's almost as if you can't even keep your own bullshit straight or something.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
...
Brad Friedman
said on 2/3/2014 @ 2:31 pm PT...
WingnutSteve stayed out of his survival bunker long enough to say @ 8:
almost all of the polling place ID horror stories come from extremists on the left such as the MSNBC turds and you and Brad, and I don't buy the horror stories.
Heheheh...Just had to comment on that one. MSNBC are "extremists on the left"? Seriously? Much less me? Really???
Sigh. You. Are. Darling, Steve-o.
BTW, those "horror stories" about your fellow Americans being denied their right to vote come from sources like the courts, the people kept from voting, actual independently verifiable statistics from databases, etc. Surely you will learn, some day, before or after you have your stroke, that simply because Fox "News" doesn't report it to you, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
As to your lie that you are "against any law which may disenfranchise any legal voter," you've made that lie clear all by yourself. Virtually zero evidence of voter fraud that would be deterred by polling place photo ID, mountains of evidence showing that hundreds of thousands of legal voters are, in fact, disenfranchised by such laws. But, since Fox "News" doesn't tell you about such evidence, it doesn't exist! It's "extreme leftist"!
If people don't have an ID, they should get one.
The question is not about whether "people...have an ID", or whether Big Government loons like you demand they must get one. The problem for those legal voters is not "an ID". Seriously, have you failed to read any of our reporting on this matter over the last 10 years? How about anybody else's reporting, for that matter?
Aren't you even a little embarrassed to keep getting things so wrong here, so often, over and over and over?
Sigh...
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
...
JoeinSyracuse
said on 2/4/2014 @ 5:21 am PT...
Hey Steve, lookie over there, Black Panthers!
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
...
Dam Spahn
said on 2/5/2014 @ 12:46 pm PT...
Looks like voter fraud is only a prosecutable offence if a Democrat does it. Romney's criminal act of lying about his residence and illegal voting will go unpunished, since millionaire narcissists are well-known dwellers of unfinished basements.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
...
AlmaPatrick
said on 2/5/2014 @ 3:33 pm PT...
Two weeks before the Republican convention in 2000 Dick Cheney changed his address from Texas to Wyoming, as the Constitution requires the president and vice to represent different states. Did he move from Texas, or just change his mailing address? He certainly represented Texas business and political interests (see Halliburton no-bid contracts etc), and I always wondered if this constituted voter fraud and if we had 8 years of a Constitutionally illegitimate Executive Branch.