RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

mnottertail -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 2:17:56 PM)

so you are saying that activities that are not illegal but that could be found to be individually distateful should be prosecuted regardless of any law?



DomKen -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 2:26:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

So you are saying no activity that falls short of criminal charges should be prohibited outside a polling place, Ken? Or just trying to get the conversation away from what random assholes might feel inspired or empowered to do by the widespread publicity of that case?

I'm saying that, no matter how you complain, what the NBPP members were doing wasn't illegal. Therefore not prosecuting them did not have any effect on the DoJ's ability or moral authority to enforce election laws.



TheHeretic -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 2:36:46 PM)

I'm saying that there are both civil and criminal cases to address wrongdoing, Ron.

So, Ken, before I head off, care to tell us what you would do if a couple uniformed thugs stood in front of your polling place, calling voters by racist epithets. You said something about having folks speak to law enforcement earlier, but now you seem to feel the bar is a bit higher.



rulemylife -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 2:51:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

So you are saying no activity that falls short of criminal charges should be prohibited outside a polling place, Ken? Or just trying to get the conversation away from what random assholes might feel inspired or empowered to do by the widespread publicity of that case?


No, what he is saying is their activity did not rise to the level of being prosecutable.

Something that has been shown here time and again, yet you want to dredge it up one more time.

And the Justice Department did obtain an injunction against Shabazz prohibiting him from polling places.

This is from your own link for God's sake:

At the department, Adams and his colleagues pushed a case that other career lawyers concluded had major evidentiary weaknesses.






DomKen -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 3:23:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I'm saying that there are both civil and criminal cases to address wrongdoing, Ron.

So, Ken, before I head off, care to tell us what you would do if a couple uniformed thugs stood in front of your polling place, calling voters by racist epithets. You said something about having folks speak to law enforcement earlier, but now you seem to feel the bar is a bit higher.

Now you're adding to the scenario.

In the actual events no such attempts at intimidation were reported.

In your imaginary scenario, once informed of or witnessing the attempted intimidation I'd assist the witness in swearing a complaint or swear a complaint myself, if I witnessed it, and then turn it over to the police (in Chicago a uniformed Police Officer is present at every polling place).

But once again that isn't what happened in PA in 2008.



TheHeretic -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 5:50:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

But once again that isn't what happened in PA in 2008.




So, just for example, say you had two Klan Klowns hanging out in front, carrying clubs and behaving like these two were, you wouldn't see a problem, Ken?

Or does the skin color of the perps matter to you as much as the article reports it does to DOJ?



DomKen -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 5:59:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

But once again that isn't what happened in PA in 2008.




So, just for example, say you had two Klan Klowns hanging out in front, carrying clubs and behaving like these two were, you wouldn't see a problem, Ken?

Or does the skin color of the perps matter to you as much as the article reports it does to DOJ?

I wouldn't like it and wouldn't assure their safety but legally there isn't a whole lot I ciould do if they were simply standing there not doing anything.

Maybe you need to reread the 1st amendment where it guarantees the rights of assembly and expression.



slvemike4u -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 6:23:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


My question would have to be, will the Black Panthers and other Democrat party favorites feel emboldened to carry out even more outrageous attacks on the civil liberties of dissenting American voters, knowing how the Black Panthers in the above mentioned case got a wink and a nod from this president.





You should be ok in Iowa big guy.....no need to be afraid [:)].



TheHeretic -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 6:41:23 PM)

LOL, Ken. I'm a bit of a nut when it comes to the First, but restrictions on activities at polling places aren't a problem for me. As long as the judges are drawing bright lines, with equal protection under the law, sometimes even the most important values must be balanced in a conflict.

You've answered the question, I just don't believe you.



Charles6682 -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 7:14:13 PM)

I have to agree,that video with the Black Panther's standing in front of a polling place is digusting.It's just as sick as when White racist's try to scare Black voter's away from the poll's as well.Racism in any form is wrong,period.The Black panther's and like minded group's are just as guilty as the White trash KKK skinhead's they say they hate.The only way racism will end is when ALL race's put aside their 3 cent hatred aside and move forward.Thanksfully,I do think in post-2000,America is in the right direction when it come's to race.A few bad apple's do not speak for any majority.Let those that still hate drown in their hatred while the rest of the world move's on.



truckinslave -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 7:18:12 PM)

I'm saying the decision not to prosecute was based not on the law but on race, regardless of what the racists at DOJ say.

The Republican-dominated hearings should be fun.
Oprahs BF will cut and run before they are sworn in.



slvemike4u -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 7:50:44 PM)

Basically what you mean here is....depite the facts of the matter.....you're mind is made up and you are not about to let niggling little maters such as truth and facts screw around with your position.
Gotcha.



truckinslave -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 7:56:31 PM)

quote:

depite the facts of the matter


Only the court can determine as a matter of fact whether a law has been broken.
Prosecutors at DOJ disagree on whether the law was broken...
Yet you use the word fact as though you knew what it meant. Funny.



slvemike4u -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 8:01:32 PM)

The facts,as presented by the lawyers at DOJ did not warrent a criminal prosecution.
Show me the error inherent in that statement.



truckinslave -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 8:19:40 PM)

quote:

The facts,as presented by the lawyers at DOJ did not warrent a criminal prosecution.


So say the Team 0bama0 political appointees who pressured DOJ not to prosecute.
So say some of the DOJ lawyers.

Adams and other former and current DOJ lawyers say otherwise; they quote a supervisor who said that DOJ was only interested in prosecuting "traditional" cases.

I think that the facts- as opposed to the ass-covering on one side and the accusations on the other- will come out under oath.
In House hearings, at least. Hopefully in court as well.
Until then we just have statements.
And a video that I think is both shocking and crystal-clear.



MrRodgers -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 8:36:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

How many times do we have to go through this before the issue gets put to rest?


How about until the lefty talking points match the facts of the case, Ken? Besides, my question deals with the fallout of the matter into the Nov. 2 election, and I notice you don't wish to address that at all.

What lefty talking points ? Hey, we could just...torture them ?

'Fallout' ? Do you mean more right wing propaganda ? This isn't the first Bush policy nobody liked they want to try to attach to Obama and his admin. and in anyway they can.



DomKen -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 9:09:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

I'm saying the decision not to prosecute was based not on the law but on race, regardless of what the racists at DOJ say.

The Republican-dominated hearings should be fun.
Oprahs BF will cut and run before they are sworn in.

The Bush DoJ said no law was broken. What law do you think they broke?



DomKen -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 9:15:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

LOL, Ken. I'm a bit of a nut when it comes to the First, but restrictions on activities at polling places aren't a problem for me. As long as the judges are drawing bright lines, with equal protection under the law, sometimes even the most important values must be balanced in a conflict.

You've answered the question, I just don't believe you.

Of course you don't believe me. I don't fit into your neat little biases. Of course no liberal I've ever met fits your biases.

Of course activty, as in actions, at polling places can be controlled. But simply standing in front wearing any garment that does not violate the electioneering rules? This has been the failure of your argument from the beginning. If the NBPP members had done anything that could be taken as intimidation or interference with the voting process then they could have been arrested and prosecuted. But they were simply standing out front of a polling place and they were not interacting with the voters in any way. When we start prosecuting people for wearing indentifiable clothes, no matter the venue, then we may as well toss the entire Constitiution



truckinslave -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 9:16:25 PM)

There was clearly an intent and an attempt to intimidate voters.
The law was broken whether actual intimidation occurred.
That is my opinion, and that of Mr Adams and others.
For a detailed legal opinion I'm sure you would enjoy the testimony of Mr Adams et al.



DomKen -> RE: Polling Place Shenanigans (10/24/2010 9:18:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: truckinslave

There was clearly an intent and an attempt to intimidate voters.
The law was broken whether actual intimidation occurred.
That is my opinion, and that of Mr Adams and others.
For a detailed legal opinion I'm sure you would enjoy the testimony of Mr Adams et al.

Voter intimidation requires an overt act. There was no overt act therefore no voter intimidation.

Otherwise Republican poll watchers could routinely be declared to be intimidating voters and arrested.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125