Voters First Canvasser Arrested for Submitting Fraudulent Petitions [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Voters First Canvasser Arrested for Submitting Fraudulent Petitions


glockman66
08-18-2012, 00:10
Voters First should be called Voters Fraud.:rofl::supergrin: Timothy Noel Zureik was woking in Athens for Working America, a campaign arm of the AFL-CIO in Washington, DC. Read the end of the article, could be other investigations of Voters First/Fraud.


http://ohio.mediatrackers.org/2012/08/17/voters-first-canvasser-arrested-for-submitting-fraudulent-petitions/
17th Aug 2012 at 09:42 | By Jesse Hathaway
Voters First Canvasser Arrested for Submitting Fraudulent Petitions


.."A former Ohio University student paid to canvass for Voters First Ohio petition signatures was arrested August 14 by the Cincinnati Police Department. Timothy Noel Zureick was booked on 22 counts of signing false signatures and one count of election falsification, both fifth-degree felonies."..

janice6
08-18-2012, 00:22
Good. It's a start. NO fraudulent voter registration should be tolerated by anyone.

countrygun
08-18-2012, 00:25
I hope it is prosecuted under local laws. Anbody want to bet whether Holder's Justice Department would prosecute?

ERASER
08-18-2012, 08:25
But....but....but....this can't be! The Democrats keep insisting that Voter ID laws aren't needed because there is no voter fraud. It's just a plot to keep Granny from voting, don't you know?

Lethaltxn
08-18-2012, 08:30
But....but....but....this can't be! The Democrats keep insisting that Voter ID laws aren't needed because there is no voter fraud. It's just a plot to keep Granny from voting, don't you know?

And blacks, don't forget blacks.

Cavalry Doc
08-18-2012, 08:39
And blacks, don't forget blacks.

Don't forget the "dreamers" and other illegal aliens.

Lethaltxn
08-18-2012, 08:48
Don't forget the "dreamers" and other illegal aliens.

And the children, it's always for the children.

Brucev
08-18-2012, 09:10
The number one concern for election integrity is not voter fraud but election fraud perpetrated by those persons in charge of the process, etc.

Voter I.D. is a band-aid on a broken arm. What is needed is not a focus on the individual casting the ballot but strict scrutiny exercised over those who handle the various components of the process.

A high turnout of voters at the polls favors the demokrats. This is not in the interest of the republicans. Voter I.D. laws will serve the intended purpose of discouraging/depressing voter turnout/participation by those the republicans do not consider supportive of their candidates.

jakebrake
08-18-2012, 10:08
But....but....but....this can't be! The Democrats keep insisting that Voter ID laws aren't needed because there is no voter fraud. It's just a plot to keep Granny from voting, don't you know?

at last count, i think it was the elderly, minorities, women, and disadvantaged. that's who were going to be discriminated against.

translation, the dead, people who never existed, and repeat voters. all of whom, seem to vote democrat.

janice6
08-18-2012, 10:42
But the same people will willingly present their ID for liquor, Cigarettes, welfare, check cashing, gasoline purchase, any other thing, BUT voting. Interesting set of values.

kirgi08
08-18-2012, 11:40
I wonder whom he's gonna point a finger at.'08.

jakebrake
08-18-2012, 12:42
I wonder whom he's gonna point a finger at.'08.

the tea party comes to mind.

countrygun
08-18-2012, 12:45
But the same people will willingly present their ID for liquor, Cigarettes, welfare, check cashing, gasoline purchase, any other thing, BUT voting. Interesting set of values.

Amazing that you have to present the ID by law, but you don't have to show ID to vote on the law.

That is plain screwy

kirgi08
08-18-2012, 13:47
the tea party comes to mind.

:upeyes:


Pray tell,do go on.'08. :popcorn:

Bren
08-18-2012, 14:02
But....but....but....this can't be! The Democrats keep insisting that Voter ID laws aren't needed because there is no voter fraud. It's just a plot to keep Granny from voting, don't you know?

Which begs the question - what would voter ID laws hurt, if there is no voter fraud for them to catch?

They don't check you for warrants when you vote and you have to have an ID to get foodstamps, so I've never understood why the democrats are so concerned, if it isn't the fear of having to vote honestly.

Bren
08-18-2012, 14:06
A high turnout of voters at the polls favors the demokrats.

Must be great to belong to "the party most likely to sleep in on election day.":whistling:

Flintlocker
08-18-2012, 14:37
The difference in reactions on this thread compared to this one:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1437169

is hilarious. Hypocrites writ large.

rgregoryb
08-18-2012, 14:54
it's really because no one likes you , you are a self righteous prick and really nauseating to "listen" to..........sort of an Eddie Haskell type.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9b/Ken_Osmond_1962.jpg/220px-Ken_Osmond_1962.jpg

Lethaltxn
08-18-2012, 15:08
The difference in reactions on this thread compared to this one:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1437169

is hilarious. Hypocrites writ large.

Seems like it was condemned by pretty much everyone on that thread.
You may need to look up the word hypocrisy.

hogship
08-18-2012, 16:02
Which begs the question - what would voter ID laws hurt, if there is no voter fraud for them to catch?

They don't check you for warrants when you vote and you have to have an ID to get foodstamps, so I've never understood why the democrats are so concerned, if it isn't the fear of having to vote honestly.

Simple, really.........

The Democrats are the overwhelming beneficiaries of the voter fraud......

If it's a close race, the Democrats win.

:faint:

ooc

fwm
08-18-2012, 17:27
Voter I.D. laws will serve the intended purpose of discouraging/depressing voter turnout/participation by those the republicans do not consider supportive of their candidates.

I wholeheartedly disagree with this viewpoint. No one can live a legal life in this country without having valid ID. No cigarettes, booze can be bought without ID. No welfare checks cashed (! am assuming you are referring to the poor, as EVERYBODY else will have an ID)
Heck, where I live and vote, I have had to show ID for 43 years and no one has ever complained. (Just votes last week in the primaries, had to show ID) Seems to me most places require ID to vote, why so hard on the few places that are just trying to make it uniform.

countrygun
08-18-2012, 17:29
I wholeheartedly disagree with this viewpoint. No one can live a legal life in this country without having valid ID. No cigarettes, booze can be bought without ID. No welfare checks cashed (! am assuming you are referring to the poor, as EVERYBODY else will have an ID)
Heck, where I live and vote, I have had to show ID for 43 years and no one has ever complained. (Just votes last week in the primaries, had to show ID) Seems to me most places require ID to vote, why so hard on the few places that are just trying to make it uniform.

I'm still trying to figure out how "Obamacare" will work if no one has to show ID:dunno:

kirgi08
08-18-2012, 18:16
Id is required ta get inta the DNC this year.'08. :headscratch:

countrygun
08-18-2012, 18:24
Id is required ta get inta the DNC this year.'08. :headscratch:



Bravo for the irony.

Sharkey
08-18-2012, 18:27
Heck the only way they can win is with voter fraud hence the lawsuit in a swing state.

Makes you wonder how much occurred last year?

Brucev
08-18-2012, 19:27
at last count, i think it was the elderly, minorities, women, and disadvantaged. that's who were going to be discriminated against.

translation, the dead, people who never existed, and repeat voters. all of whom, seem to vote democrat.

So you endorse discriminating against elderly people, minorities, women and the "disadvantaged." At least your honest enough to say so.

The dead vote? Sounds like election fraud. A voter I.D. will not in any way deal with election fraud. It is not intended to deal with fraud of any kind... only to depress turn out among those groups that do not support republican candidates. It is that simple. All excuses to the contrary are simply smoke and mirrors.

Brucev
08-18-2012, 19:28
Must be great to belong to "the party most likely to sleep in on election day.":whistling:

Odd. I thought republicans were generally looking forward to the election. Are you a demokrat?

Brucev
08-18-2012, 19:36
I wholeheartedly disagree with this viewpoint. No one can live a legal life in this country without having valid ID. No cigarettes, booze can be bought without ID. No welfare checks cashed (! am assuming you are referring to the poor, as EVERYBODY else will have an ID)
Heck, where I live and vote, I have had to show ID for 43 years and no one has ever complained. (Just votes last week in the primaries, had to show ID) Seems to me most places require ID to vote, why so hard on the few places that are just trying to make it uniform.

You are not paying attention. I am not at all against voters being required to show I.D. I am simply pointing out that the so called voter fraud wildly shouted from the keyboards of many ill-informed/mis-informed people simply is not backed up by facts. The effort to require a photo I.D. is plain and simple part of the republican effort to depress the vote among those groups that traditionally support demokrats. It is no different than demokrats trying to set aside military votes since so many servicemen vote republican. Right or wrong, that's just the way it's done. Republicans know that a larger turnout of voters in the general election generally favors demokratic candidates, so they are doing everything they can to depress turnout... among demokrats. Of course at the same time they are doing all they can to encourage republican turnout in the general election. Again, right or wrong, that's just politics. If someone is cheated out of being able to cast a legitimate ballot, so what? It would only matter if it were a close election and the republican lost... right? :yawn:

fortyofforty
08-18-2012, 19:37
The number one concern for election integrity is not voter fraud but election fraud perpetrated by those persons in charge of the process, etc.

For Democrats, for whom voter fraud is viewed as a legitimate and excusable means to win elections.

Voter I.D. is a band-aid on a broken arm. What is needed is not a focus on the individual casting the ballot but strict scrutiny exercised over those who handle the various components of the process.

So you believe there is no strict scrutiny over those who handle the ballots? Did you have a problem with county officials deciding for whom a person intended to vote, without actually having cast a vote for that candidate, as was going on in Florida in 2000? Do you think that one fraudulent ballot cast is one too many? If it saves only one election, it's worth it, isn't it? Every illegal ballot cancels out a legal ballot, so isn't that important?

A high turnout of voters at the polls favors the demokrats. This is not in the interest of the republicans. Voter I.D. laws will serve the intended purpose of discouraging/depressing voter turnout/participation by those the republicans do not consider supportive of their candidates.

A high turnout of illegal voters favors the Democrats. A high turnout of greedy voters favors the Democrats. A high turnout of selfish, lazy voters favors the Democrats. When even that isn't enough, Democrats will fight to throw out military ballots. Still not enough? Wait for the mysterious missing ballot boxes to appear, just in time. Natsos use any and every means to win and hold power. We've seen it before. We'll see it again. It's been happening around the globe for a hundred years.

fortyofforty
08-18-2012, 19:38
You are not paying attention. I am not at all against voters being required to show I.D. I am simply pointing out that the so called voter fraud wildly shouted from the keyboards of many ill-informed/mis-informed people simply is not backed up by facts. The effort to require a photo I.D. is plain and simple part of the republican effort to depress the vote among those groups that traditionally support demokrats. It is no different than demokrats trying to set aside military votes since so many servicemen vote republican. Right or wrong, that's just the way it's done. Republicans know that a larger turnout of voters in the general election generally favors demokratic candidates, so they are doing everything they can to depress turnout... among demokrats. Of course at the same time they are doing all they can to encourage republican turnout in the general election. Again, right or wrong, that's just politics. If someone is cheated out of being able to cast a legitimate ballot, so what? It would only matter if it were a close election and the republican lost... right? :yawn:

Do you know any person of legal voting age who does not have a photo ID? Anyone at all? Just one. I'm sure the media would love to interview him or her.

sbhaven
08-18-2012, 20:20
And on CSPAN2 right now is a topic that dove tales with this thread's dicussion...
After Words: John Fund & Hans Von Spakovsky, "Who's Counting?: How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote at Risk," hosted by Linda Killian, Wilson Center (http://www.booktv.org/Program/13746/After+Words+John+Fund+Hans+Von+Spakovsky+Whos+Counting+How+Fraudsters+and+Bureaucrats+Put+Your+Vote+ at+Risk+hosted+by+Linda+Killian+Wilson+Center.aspx)
About the Program
The authors argue that there are serious problems with fraud within the U.S. election system that require scrutiny and investigation. States need to reduce illegal votes, they say, by requiring voter identification, as well as election monitors. They make their case to the author of "The Swing Vote," Linda Killian.
John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky are constantly correcting or refuting Linda Killian. :rofl:

countrygun
08-18-2012, 20:24
And on CSPAN2 right now is a topic that dove tales with this thread's dicussion...
. :rofl:

Shoot your spellchecker. It's "dovetails"

fortyofforty
08-18-2012, 20:27
Shoot your spellchecker. It's "dovetails"

What if those birds are talking?

sbhaven
08-18-2012, 20:29
Shoot your spellchecker. It's "dovetails"
:rofl: True.

This BookTV interview is turning out to be painfully embarrassing for Linda Killian who is from the Wilson Center. She keeps trying to bring up the basic liberal talking points and she keeps getting slapped down. Both guys are almost laughing to her face when they counter her claims/questions.

countrygun
08-18-2012, 20:29
What if those birds are talking?


If they are talking about making a woodworking joint then we might give them a pass:supergrin:

frizz
08-18-2012, 20:35
Good. It's a start. NO fraudulent voter registration should be tolerated by anyone.
He wasn't registering any voters. He was forging names on a petition. Hard to say which is worse

frizz
08-18-2012, 20:40
Must be great to belong to "the party most likely to sleep in on election day.":whistling:
The most consistent voting bloc is usually up at the crack of noon. That still leaves 5-6 hours until the polls close.

fortyofforty
08-18-2012, 20:43
:rofl: True.

This BookTV interview is turning out to be painfully embarrassing for Linda Killian who is from the Wilson Center. She keeps trying to bring up the basic liberal talking points and she keeps getting slapped down. Both guys are almost laughing to her face when they counter her claims/questions.

Natsos claim to be very concerned about voter disenfranchisement. Yet, since each illegal vote cast disenfranchises a legitimate voter, they should logically be equally concerned. Their obvious lack of concern over illegal voting is telling.