Voter Fraud – Court Ordered

A Letter to Congress

I received an email claiming that the Republican party is banned from objecting to election fraud and has been since 1991.  The email says:  The RNC also agreed that the RNC, its agents, servants, and employees would be bound by the Decree, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”  As modified in 1987,  the Consent Decree defined  “ballot security activities”  to  mean  “ballot integrity, ballot security or other  efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”  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.  Why hasn’t anything been done since 1991 ?  You traitors let the Communists take over the country !

Norb Leahy

Source: November 13, 2012, that during the weekly True the Vote webcast, Catherine 

Engelbrecht 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.  The answer?  Nothing.  They aren’t legally able to.

The Rest of the Story:

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 “ Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee ,” 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. §§ 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 “National 

Ballot Security Task Force” 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, the RNC and RSC entered into an agreement or  

Consent Decree , which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’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 toward  districts 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, “whether acting directly or indirectly through other party committees.”

As modified in 1987,  the Consent Decree defined  “ballot security activities”  to  mean  

“ballot integrity, ballot security or other  efforts to prevent or remedy vote fraud.”

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.

U.S. District Judge Dickinson R. Debevoise 

In 2010, the RNC unsuccessfully appealed “to vacate or modify” the Consent Decree  

in “Democratic National Committee v Republican National Committee,” 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 FOTM’s media library.

This is  a summary of the appeals judge’s ruling , filed on March 8, 2012: 

In 1982, the Republican National Committee (“RNC”) and the Democratic National 

Committee (“DNC”) entered into a consent decree (the “Decree” or “Consent Decree”), which is national in scope, limiting the RNC’s ability to engage or assist in voter fraud prevention unless the RNC obtains the court’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 RNC’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 Court’s judgment.

Surprise! The judge who denied the RNC’s appeal to “vacate” the 1982 Consent Decree 

is  an Obama appointee , Judge  Joseph Greenaway, Jr. , of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

Judge Joseph Greenaway, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit 

Guy Benson of Townhall.com  points out that in last Tuesday’s election, 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 experienced  problems with voting machines.

This election was stolen by the Democrats via vote fraud. Despite all the evidence of 

fraud, the Republican Party has been strangely silent about it.

Now you know why. I’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, “a substantial proportion of racial or ethnic populations.” The term “substantial proportion” 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 “perfect candidate” — in the words of Sen.  Harry Reid  

(D-NV) in 2008, a “light-skinned” black Democrat who has “no Negro dialect unless he wanted to have one.”

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 “light-skinned” black with “no Negro dialect”, this perfect candidate would get 

the support of white Americans perpetually guilt-ridden about America’s original sin of slavery.

It doesn’t matter if this “perfect candidate” 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 — his passports, school and college records, draft registration, and medical records (so we’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. Fife, a U.S. government contractor, claims that in 1992 while he was visiting Moscow, a woman with undying allegiance to Soviet Communism (the Soviet Union had recently collapsed, on December 31, 1991) told him that a black man named Barack, born of a white American woman and an African male, was being groomed by communists 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: “Obama was selected before he was elected.”

In 2008, this “perfect candidate” 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 — and with it, the U.S. two-party system as well — and 

the sooner we voters recognize that the better.

The question that remains is whether the American Republic is also dead.   

Comments:

Voter fraud was found in the states that had no ID requirements.  The other States 

need to sue those States to adopt these safeguards.

Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader