New York Times Bill Clinton Interview: Bill Clinton Says He Had It Worse Than Barack Obama, Yet “HE” Got Things Done.


 

itisme

President Clinton in 1998. He and his aides have compared his effectiveness during his time in office versus President Obama’s. Credit J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press

President Clinton in 1998. He and his aides have compared his effectiveness during his time in office versus President Obama’s. Credit J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press

I will refrain from commenting on this garbage until the end of this New York Times piece…….

From The New York Times POLITICS:

 

Toxic Partisanship? Bill Clinton Says He Had It Worse, Yet Got Things Done

 

President Obama heads into midterm elections in which he may face crushing losses. He has been spurned by his own party, whose candidates do not even want to be seen with him. The president’s supporters say the toxic atmosphere in Washington has made it impossible for Mr. Obama to succeed.

But there is a counter view being offered by a former Democratic president that as far as personal attacks go, he, Bill Clinton, had it worse. “Nobody’s accused him of murder yet, as far as I know. I mean, it was pretty rough back then,” Mr. Clinton said last month in an interview aired by PBS, when asked about the partisan climate facing Mr. Obama.

Whatever Mr. Clinton’s motivations, his comments, which his former aides frequently refer to when the topic comes up, do not permit Mr. Obama to excuse his legislative setbacks by simply citing hyper-partisanship. As one former White House aide to Mr. Clinton put it: “They impeached our guy.”

The tumult of the Clinton years — including conspiracy theories about the death of Vincent W. Foster Jr., a deputy White House counsel and friend of the Clintons’ from Arkansas who committed suicide in 1993, the investigation into Whitewater, the Monica Lewinsky scandal and impeachment — has come back as Hillary Rodham Clinton inches toward a run for president in 2016.

 

When asked last month what the single biggest misconception about his presidency was, Mr. Clinton told Charlie Rose on PBS, “I think that most people underappreciate the level of extreme partisanship that took hold in ’94.”

Twenty years later, Mr. Clinton has devoted much of his energy to campaigning for Democrats who do not want to be associated with Mr. Obama. At frequent campaign stops across the country, the former president does not talk about who had it worse, but instead emphasizes that polarization and an inability to work together are the cause of the country’s problems.

“Every place in the world people take the time to work together, good things are happening,” Mr. Clinton said this week at a campaign stop in Hazard, Ky., for the Democratic Senate candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes. “Every place in the world where people spend all their time fighting each other and telling everybody how sorry they are, bad things happen.”

If Mr. Clinton does not explain on the campaign trail how bad things were for him, his Democratic supporters do.

“Everyone looks at Clinton in this hazy glow of, ‘He’s so wonderful,’ ” said Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic strategist. “But when he was president, boy, were there a lot of people who went after him in a very personal, some would say dirty, way.”

Even Mr. Clinton’s old rival, Newt Gingrich, a former Republican speaker of the House, said people had a gauzy view of the Clinton years. “Everyone is doing the, ‘Gee, Newt and Bill got things done, why can’t Obama get anything done?’ routine,” Mr. Gingrich said. “Maybe it’s driving Bill nuts.”

The underlying implication is that Mr. Obama does not have it so rough. Republicans who voted to impeach Mr. Clinton criticize the current president for being less able or willing than his Democratic predecessor to woo congressional Republicans.

 

Bill Clinton Talks About Partisanship

Mr. Clinton talked to Charlie Rose of PBS about the level of partisanship during his presidency compared with what President Obama is facing now.

Publish DateOctober 24, 2014. Photo by Michael Loccisano/Getty Images

 

Trent Lott, the Mississippi Republican who served as Senate majority leader from 1996 to 2001, said Mr. Clinton was “affable” and “approachable,” even toward his political opponents.

“You could talk to him,” Mr. Lott said. “He was also willing to make a deal for the good of the country.” In contrast, he argued, Mr. Obama “has just walked away” — so if Mr. Clinton even tried to give the current president a pass, it “just won’t sell.”

Congressional Republicans, of course, have also refused to reach across the aisle and work with Mr. Obama the way they did in Mr. Lott’s era. The current Congress is on track to become one of the least legislatively productive in recent history. That is partly because Mr. Obama faces a far more polarized electorate than Mr. Clinton did.

Over the past 20 years, the number of Americans who hold extreme conservative or liberal views has doubled from 10 percent in 1994 to 21 percent in 2014, according to the Pew Research Center. And the middle ground has shrunk, with 39 percent of Americans taking a roughly equal number of liberal and conservative positions, compared with 49 percent in 1994.

Mr. Clinton often talks about this polarization and says that while the partisan gridlock is worse today, and the American electorate is less willing to hear arguments it disagrees with, the attacks he faced were more personal than those Mr. Obama has experienced.

In a 2012 interview with The New York Times, Mr. Clinton mentioned the “murder” conspiracy theory in the 1990s, and said of Mr. Obama’s tenure: “Nobody has tried to bankrupt him with bogus investigations, so it’s not quite as bad. But the political impasse has gone on longer.”

“I will certainly not contradict the president I worked for when he argues that it was even more personal then,” said William A. Galston, a former policy adviser to Mr. Clinton. “But the polarization of our official political institutions and our political parties has become even more acute than in the Clinton days,” he added.

Mr. Clinton in 1996 with the House speaker, Newt Gingrich, left, and the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott. CreditJoe Marquette/Associated Press

 

That argument absolves Mr. Clinton of his own part in the scandals of the 1990s, several historians said. “They’re different situations because there were criminal allegations” against Mr. Clinton, said Ken Gormley, the author of “The Death of American Virtue: Clinton vs. Starr,”about the investigation led by Kenneth W. Starr.

President Obama has attracted a lot of attacks when it’s hard to point to something exactly he has done that warranted them,” Mr. Gormley added.

Some of the venom directed at Mr. Obama has a racial component that Mr. Clinton, a relatable white Southerner, never had to deal with, said Douglas G. Brinkley, a presidential historian and professor at Rice University. “The Clintons created huge problems of their own making,” Mr. Brinkley added, while “Obama’s problem is that he bullheadedly pushed Obamacare, and he happens to be African-American.”

“You can’t get more personal than questioning a person’s veracity for where he was born,” said Mr. Galston, the former Clinton aide, referring to the “birther” conspiracy theories about Mr. Obama’s birth certificate.

Mr. Clinton’s reminders about how bitter things were in Washington when he was in the White House might not be the best message as Mrs. Clinton eyes an attempt at getting back there, as president herself this time.

Senator Rand Paul, a potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate, has already seized on the Lewinsky scandal as a way to remind voters that the Clinton years were not just “peace and prosperity,” as Mrs. Clinton often characterized her husband’s presidency during her 2008 presidential campaign.

Mr. Clinton is not the only president who weathered harsh attacks. Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, called former President George W. Bush a “liar” and a “loser,” and protesters depicted him as Hitler.

“Every president probably thinks he had it worse than all his predecessors,” said Kenneth L. Khachigian, a Republican strategist who served as a speechwriter for Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon. “But,” he added, “those of us in the Nixon years would have gladly traded places with Bill Clinton’s White House.”

Sometimes: “Just An Image Says It All™”


itisme

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!image1000words

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

twoimages

29a3194

 

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!cobra

The Twitter Storm™


itisme

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!twitterstorm

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!twitter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

At The Movies With Mr. MilitantNegro™: The Equalizer Starring Denzel Washington.


heyitisme

denzel-washington-shovel-ready

 

Sony/Columbia Pictures have spent years attempting to get a cinematic version of The Equalizer off the ground. The original television series ran from 1985-89, and starred the late Edward Woodward – in a Golden Globe-winning role – as Robert McCall, a g-man turned private detective, who spent his days helping out the weak and under-priviledged in an effort to make up for past dark deeds.

 

The film version – a loose adaptation of that premise – lay dormant until last year, following the departure of star Russell Crowe and director Paul Haggis (who had previously collaborated on The Next Three Days). Progress re-started once Denzel Washington came aboard to headline, based on a script draft written by Richard Wenk (The Mechanic). Sony intended to fast-track the project, but things failed to roll along as smoothly as the studio wanted – with both Nicholas Winding Refn (Drive) andRupert Wyatt (Rise of the Planet of the Apes) passing on the director job, before Antoine Fuqua (Olympus Has Fallen) accepted the position.

 

That means Sony has been forced to abandon the April 11th, 2014 release date it originally had in mind, so as to allot the necessary amount of time for filming. The Equalizer features a supporting cast that includes Chloë Grace Moretz (Kick-Ass 2), Marton Csokas (Noah) and Melissa Leo (Wayward Pines), and is now slated to reach theaters on September 26th, 2014.

 

images

 

‘The Equalizer’ TV Trailer: Denzel Washington Doesn’t Look at Explosions

 

It’s always worth being nice to people who work in retail, because one of those people might just have a secret past as a black ops commando and a hunger for vigilante justice. That’s the case with Robert McCall (Denzel Washington), a calm-voiced Homemart employee with OCD who made a promise to his wife that he’d never go back to his old life of violence. For sadistic mob boss Teddy (Martin Csokas), however, Robert is willing to make an exception.

 

 

 

The Equalizer, directed by Antoine Fuqua (Olympus Has Fallen) is loosely based on the 1980s TV show of the same name, and Sony is so confident in its potential that a sequel is already in development. If this goes ahead, with Washington’s involvement, it will mark the first time that the star has ever appeared in a direct sequel to one of his movies.

 

First comes the task of getting people into the theaters for The Equalizer, however, and so a new minute-long trailer for the movie has been released, which also offers a preview of upcoming single “Guts Over Fear” by Eminem and Sia, which is featured in the film. The trailer includes a few new clips, including a scene where Robert is asked by his curious colleagues about his life before Homemart. To top things off, there is an obligatory shot of Washington walking away from an explosion in slow motion.

 

Denzel-Washington-The-Equalizer

 

The Equalizer also stars Chloë Grace Moretz as Teri, an underage sex worker whom Robert meets during one of his usual late-night visits to his favorite diner, and who inadvertently draws him into a vigilante mission against the Russian mafia. The screenplay was penned by The Expendables 2 writer Richard Wenk.

 

For more details about the story and production of The Equalizer, don’t forget to check out Screen Rant’s set visit report, as well as our interviews with producer Todd Black, director Antoine Fuqua and star Denzel Washington. Let us know in the comments if the combination of fast-paced action and the sweet sound of Eminem’s voice in this latest trailer have convinced you to check out The Equalizer in theaters next month.

 

denzel-washington-the-equalizer (1)

 

The Equalizer hits theaters September 26, 2014.

 

The Equalizer Official Trailer #1 (2014) – Denzel Washington Movie HD

 

 

Denzel_Washington__public_domain_

 

Washington’s next starring vehicle – expected to be an R-Rated dramatic thriller along the lines of the actor’s previous collaboration with Fuqua on Training Day (which snagged Washington an Oscar) – shall now serve as counter-programming, to Laika’s quirky family-friendly stop-motion feature The Boxtrolls and the surreal sci-fi film Selfless from director Tarsem Singh (Immortals, Mirror Mirror), during its opening weekend.

 

The Equalizer is budgeted at $50 million (which includes Washington’s $20 million salary), with studio executives hoping that the film performs well enough at the box office to serve as the foundation for Washington’s first-ever franchise. All things considered, such an achievement shouldn’t be too difficult to manage, given that Washington’s last four movies have grossed somewhere between $80 million and $130 million in the U.S. (before factoring in the international market).

 

The Equalizer Official Trailer #2 (2014) – Denzel Washington Movie HD

 

 

The Equalizer is a 2014 American action thriller film directed by Antoine Fuqua and written by Richard Wenk, based on the television series of same name, which starred Edward Woodward. The film stars Denzel Washington,Marton Csokas, Chloë Grace Moretz, David Harbour, Haley Bennett, Bill Pullman, and Melissa Leo. This was the first film to have Village Roadshow Pictures co-finance the deal with Sony Pictures Entertainment since Saving Silverman in 2001.

 

Plot

Denzel Washington plays McCall, a man who believes he has put his Special Forces past behind him and dedicated himself to beginning a new, quiet life. But when McCall meets Teri (Chloë Grace Moretz), a young girl under the control of violent Russian gangsters, he can’t stand idly by—he has to help her. Armed with hidden skills that allow him to serve vengeance against anyone who would brutalize the helpless, McCall comes out of his self-imposed retirement and finds his desire for justice reawakened. If someone has a problem, if the odds are stacked against them, if they have nowhere else to turn, they call the Equalizer.

 

 

The Equalizer
The Equalizer poster.jpg

Theatrical release poster
Directed by Antoine Fuqua
Produced by Todd Black
Jason Blumenthal
Denzel Washington
Alex Siskin
Steve Tisch
Mace Neufeld
Tony Eldridge
Michael Sloan
Screenplay by Richard Wenk
Based on The Equalizer
by Michael Sloan andRichard Lindheim
Starring Denzel Washington
Marton Csokas
Chloë Grace Moretz
David Harbour
Bill Pullman
Melissa Leo
Music by Harry Gregson-Williams
Cinematography Mauro Fiore
Edited by John Refoua
Production
company
Distributed by Columbia Pictures
Release dates
  • September 7, 2014 (TIFF)
  • September 26, 2014(United States)
Running time 131 minutes
Country United States
Language English
Budget $50 million

 

Cast

 

 

Production

 

Development

In June 2010 it was announced that Russell Crowe was looking to bring The Equalizer to the big screen directed by Paul Haggis, with Crowe attached to play Robert McCall.

 

In December 2011, it was reported that Denzel Washington is set to star in the title role of the film version, to be financed by Sony Pictures Entertainment and Escape Artists. Director Antoine Fuqua came on board to direct on March 21, 2013, reuniting the two from their successful collaboration on their 2001 Oscar-winning film Training DayChloë Grace Moretz was announced as co-lead to Washington on May 10, 2013. On May 31, 2013, Melissa Leo was then cast in the film. Leo previously worked with Washington in the 2012 film Flight, and Fuqua in Olympus Has Fallen (2013).

 

 

Filming

Filming began in June 2013 with locations in Salisbury, Hamilton, Chelsea, Haverhill, and Boston, Massachusetts.

 

Denzel Washington The Equalizer Movie 2014

 

Marketing

The first official image from the film was released on December 6, 2013. Sony originally planned on an April 11, 2014 release date but pushed it back to reach theaters on September 26, 2014. The first official poster for the film was released on April 16, 2014. On April 22, USA Today revealed some photos from the film.

 

On May 24, the trailer for the film was released. On June 12, another official trailer of the film was released. On July 16, the IMAX poster for the film was released.

 

On August 25, 2014, American rapper Eminem‘s “Guts Over Fear” featuring Sia, with production by Emile Haynie previews of the song premiered in trailers for the film.

 

the_Equalizer

 

 

Release

On June 25, 2014, IMAX Corporation announced that they had made a deal with Sony and it would release the film in its IMAX screen theaters worldwide from September 26.

 

The film will be released at the 2014 Toronto International Film Festival on September 7, 2014.

 

PHn48DC9j5FUqq_1_m

 

Reception

The Equalizer has received mixed to positive reviews from critics. On Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds a rating of 66%, based on 29 reviews, with an average rating of 6.1/10. The site’s consensus states: “The Equalizer is more stylishly violent than meaningful, but with Antoine Fuqua behind the cameras and Denzel Washington dispensing justice, it delivers.” On Metacritic, the film has a score of 54 out of 100, based on 7 critics, indicating “mixed or average reviews”.

 

 

Sequel

On February 24, 2014, it was announced that Sony Pictures and Escape Artists are planning for a sequel to the film, with Richard Wenk penning the script.

 

The_Equalizer_Denzel_Washington

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

BP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!000000000000000000obama-forward3

Militia Group Plans To Target African-American Democrats At Polling Places In Wisconsin…Illegally.


itisme

From PoliticusUSA:

 

Militia Group Plans To Target African-American Democrats At Polling Places In Wisconsin

 

A militia group in Wisconsin is planning to target African-American Democrats at polling places in order to suppress the vote and keep Republican governor Scott Walker in office.

 

Here is a Twitter exchange where the group details their plan:

 

 

A visit to the group’s Facebook page features makes it clear exactly who they are targeting. All of the pictures on the page feature African-Americans. The group is trying to get African-Americans who may have outstanding warrants arrested in order to keep them from voting. The group wants people to report those they suspect of having warrants out on them to the police on election day, “Do the community a favor and keep an eye out for people wanted on warrants and report them to the police on election day.”

The “poll watchers” also plan on harassing and following people who they suspect of being wanted on warrants to their homes. The plan seems to be to use the police to intimidate African-Americans into not voting in November’s election.

The group admits that they are targeting Democrats. They aren’t exactly subtle in making it clear that they are targeting African-American voters. The scheme is an attempt to intimidate African-American voters while getting around the Voting Rights Act. The point of this campaign isn’t to get felons off the streets. The “poll watchers” are trying to keep African-Americans away from the polls.

The fact that they are targeting a specific group of individuals based on race and perceived political affiliation means that their operation is a violation of the Voting Rights Act. According to theJustice Department, “The administration of elections is chiefly a function of state government. However, federal authorities may become involved where there are possible violations of federal law. In cases where intimidation, coercion, or threats are made or attempts to intimidate, threaten or coerce are made to any person for voting or attempting to vote, the Department of Justice can consider whether there is federal jurisdiction to bring civil claims or criminal charges under federal law. Depending on the nature of the allegations, they may fall into the jurisdiction of different parts of the Department. If you have information about allegations of intimidation, please contact us.”

Wisconsin Republicans are desperate to keep Scott Walker in office, Currently, Gov. Walker is tied with Democrat Mary Burke in the polls. A voter intimidation effort that could prevent African-Americans from voting might be enough to get Walker reelected. The right-wing Wisconsin poll watching group is planning on engaging in illegal activity. The group is just getting started, which is why it is a perfect time to send the message that these tactics will not be tolerated.

You can contact the Justice Department here, and request that the election be monitored.

The right to vote must be protected, and those who attempt to intimidate voters need to be held accountable.

Thank you PoliticusUSA.

Injustice_Logo_610

From The New York Times:

Voter Harassment, Circa 2012

 

This is how voter intimidation worked in 1966: White teenagers in Americus, Ga., harassed black citizens in line to vote, and the police refused to intervene. Black plantation workers in Mississippi had to vote in plantation stores, overseen by their bosses. Black voters in Choctaw County, Ala., had to hand their ballots directly to white election officials for inspection.

 

This is how it works today: In an ostensible hunt for voter fraud, a Tea Party group, True the Vote, descends on a largely minority precinct and combs the registration records for the slightest misspelling or address error. It uses this information to challenge voters at the polls, and though almost every challenge is baseless, the arguments and delays frustrate those in line and reduce turnout.

 

The thing that’s different from the days of overt discrimination is the phony pretext of combating voter fraud. Voter identity fraud is all but nonexistent, but the assertion that it might exist is used as an excuse to reduce the political rights of minorities, the poor, students, older Americans and other groups that tend to vote Democratic.

 

In The Times on Monday, Stephanie Saul described how the plan works. True the Vote grew out of a Tea Party group in Texas, the King Street Patriots, with the assistance of Americans for Prosperity, a group founded by the Koch brothers that works to elect conservative Republicans. It has developed its own software to check voter registration lists against driver’s license and property records. Those kinds of database matches are notoriously unreliable because names and addresses are often slightly different in various databases, but the group uses this technique to challenge more voters.

 

In 2009 and 2010, for example, the group focused on the Houston Congressional district represented by Sheila Jackson Lee, a black Democrat. After poring over the records for five months, True the Vote came up with a list of 500 names it considered suspicious and challenged them with election authorities. Officials put these voters on “suspense,” requiring additional proof of address, but in most cases voters had simply changed addresses. That didn’t stop the group from sending dozens of white “poll watchers” to precincts in the district during the 2010 elections, deliberately creating friction with black voters.

 

On the day of the recall election of Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, the group used inaccurate lists to slow down student voting at Lawrence University in Appleton with intrusive identity checks. Three election “observers,” including one from True the Vote, were so disruptive that a clerk gave them two warnings, but the ploy was effective: many students gave up waiting in line and didn’t vote.

 

True the Vote, now active in 30 states, hopes to train hundreds of thousands of poll watchers to make the experience of voting like “driving and seeing the police following you,” as one of the group’s leaders put it. (Not surprisingly, the group is also active in the voter ID movement, with similar goals.) These activities “present a real danger to the fair administration of elections and to the fundamental freedom to vote,” as a recent report by Common Cause and Demos put it.

 

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits intimidation or interference in the act of voting, but the penalties are fairly light. Many states have tougher laws, but they won’t work unless law enforcement officials use them to crack down on the illegal activities — handed down from Jim Crow days — of True the Vote and similar groups.

 

Thank you The New York Times.

 

Injustice_Logo_610

 

BULLIES AT THE BALLOT BOX: PROTECTING THE FREEDOM TO VOTE AGAINST WRONGFUL CHALLENGES AND INTIMIDATION

 

By….

Protecting the freedom to vote for all eligible Americans is of fundamental importance in a democracy founded upon the consent of the governed. One of the most serious threats to the protection of that essential right is the increase in organized efforts, led by groups such as the Tea Party affiliated True the Vote and others, to challenge voters’ eligibility at the polls and through pre-election challenges. Eligible Americans have a civic duty to vote, and government at the federal, state, and local level has a responsibility to protect voters from illegal interference and intimidation.

 

As we approach the 2012 elections, every indication is that we will see an unprecedented use of voter challenges. Organizers of True the Vote claim their goal is to train one million poll watchers to challenge and confront other Americans as they go to the polls in November. They say they want to make the experience of voting “like driving and seeing the police following you.” There is a real danger that voters will face overzealous volunteers who take the law into their own hands to target voters they deem suspect. But there is no place for bullies at the ballot box.

 

Even in states with clear legal boundaries for challengers and poll watchers, too often these boundaries are crossed. Laws intended to ensure voting integrity are instead used to make it harder for eligible citizens to vote – particularly those in communities of color. Moreover, the laws of many states states fall short when it comes to preventing improper voter caging and challenges. This should concern anyone who wants a fair election with a legitimate result that reflects the choices of all eligible Americans.

 

Clear rules that protect voters from improper removal from the rolls by voter caging and challenging, as well as from intimidating behavior at the polls, can help prevent interference with voter rights. This report describes the threat posed by potential voter challenges in the 2012 elections, and assesses the extent to which ten key states — Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Virginia — are prepared to protect the rights of eligible voters to cast a ballot in the face of such challenges. The ten states examined here include states where races are expected to be competitive, which makes voters in those states particularly vulnerable to challenges. We also survey states where a history of aggressive voter challenge programs in recent elections threatened to intimidate voters or interfere with their access to the ballot.

 

 

Overview

This report first provides background on the current threat of overly aggressive voter challenge tactics and the history of such efforts in previous elections. The report then details what is permissible and legal when it comes to challenging a voter’s eligibility, both before and on Election Day and inside and outside the polling place. We analyze laws in ten states governing:

 

  • The process for challenging a registered voter’s right to vote before Election Day and the use of voter caging lists;
  • The process for challenging a registered voter’s right to vote on Election Day;
  • The behavior of poll watchers or observers at the polls on Election Day; and
  • Protections for voters against intimidation, outside and inside the polls.

 

The report measures the extent to which each state’s laws protects voters’ rights in these areas, and assesses them in a set of comparative charts as satisfactory, mixed, or unsatisfactory. Each section includes recommendations for best practices in each of the areas we examine.

 

 

Findings

In examining the ten states’ laws governing challenges to voters’ right to vote before Election Day, including the use of voter lists created through caging or other unreliable practices, we find Colorado, Nevada, and Ohio are satisfactory, North Carolina and Texas are mixed, and Florida, Missouri, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Virginia – five out of the ten states – unsatisfactory.

 

In assessing these states’ laws governing challenges to voter’s right to vote on Election Day, and procedures for determining those challenges, we find that while some of the ten states have practices that protect voters’ rights, other states need improvement.

 

  • Texas does not allow for any voter challenges on Election Day, and Ohio only allows challenges by election officials; Colorado, New Hampshire, and North Carolina also have satisfactory protections for voters from improper Election Day challenges.
  • Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia have laws that are mixed, with some provisions that protect voters’ rights but also room for improvement.
  • Florida and Pennsylvania have laws with unsatisfactory protections to guard against inappropriate Election Day challenges to voter eligibility.

 

Our analysis of these states’ laws governing poll watchers or observers and their conduct at the polls shows they are also mixed in the extent to which they protect voters’ rights. The laws of Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia are satisfactory; Florida, Missouri, and New Hampshire are mixed. However, Pennsylvania and Texas allow behavior by poll observers or poll watchers that could endanger voting rights.

 

We also summarize these states’ laws protecting voters from intimidation, both outside and inside the polls. State and federal laws barring intimidation of voters can be used to protect voters from harassment.6 However, the efficacy of these protections depends on robust enforcement by election administrators and law enforcement officials.

 

We call upon election administrators and officials with the Department of Justice to take steps in advance of and during the elections to protect voters from bullying at the ballot box. Our intent is to help minimize the level of activity that moves from positive civic engagement to voter intimidation and suppression. There must be zero tolerance for bullying behavior that stands between an eligible voter and her ballot.

Read the entire report here.

african-american-voting-485x356

18 U.S. Code § 594 – Intimidation of voters

 

Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, at any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing such candidate, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

 

 

Wisconsin Poll Watcher Militia Facebook Page

 

CLEAR UP YOUR WARRANTS and you have nothing to fear.

DO NOT CLEAR UP YOUR WARRANTS and we will do our best to make sure you are hauled off in cuffs as soon as possible.

 

Please match up names on outstanding warrant lists to those people listed here:

http://www.putwisconsinfirst.com/

If you have a hit, please forward the name to us and we’ll get one of our members to check it out.

 

Douglas County, Wisconsin outstanding warrant list.

 

Wood County outstanding warrant list.

 

La Crosse County outstanding warrant list.

 

Dodge County outstanding warrant list.

 

Manitowoc County outstanding warrant list.

 

Jefferson County outstanding warrant list.

 

Attention all members: Militia training will be at HQ on September 20, 2014 at 0930. We will hand out updated watch lists, duty assignments, and discuss rules and regulations. Expect it to take around 2-3 hours. After our discussion we will be headed to the range for anyone who wants to participate.

 

!!!!Nitorious

 

Now if you stop and think about this for a few minutes, these backwoods ass, cousin fuckin, red neck, sister marrying, caucasians, Wisconsin Poll Watcher Militia members must be the epitome of stupid. What idiot thinks criminal with “Warrants” would show up to vote, AND SHOW Identification? Besides violating 18 U.S. Code § 594 – Intimidation of voters…..

 

§594. Intimidation of voters

Whoever intimidates, threatens, coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, any other person for the purpose of interfering with the right of such other person to vote or to vote as he may choose, or of causing such other person to vote for, or not to vote for, any candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, at any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing such candidate, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 720; Pub. L. 91–405, title II, §204(d)(5), Sept. 22, 1970, 84 Stat. 853; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, §330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

These assholes in the Wisconsin Poll Watcher Militia think they can stop and detain voters in the state of Wisconsin…and the law prohibits such actions on election day in the vicinity of polling places.

I wish I lived in the neighborhoods these ignorant Kocksuckers were visiting in Wisconsin. I have been carrying a CCP (Concealed Carry Permit) since 1985, upon discharge from the United States Military, and I would welcome anyone from the Wisconsin Poll Watcher Militia approaching me on election day. Or ANY day for that matter.

 

I have a suggestion for the Wisconsin Poll Watcher Militia. Come to the Southside of Chicago, Harlem, Compton, South Philly, or any crime infested city in the ghetto, and try that bullshit. We’ll see how long you continue to breath after arrival. 

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

Bxi5Rm3IAAAvmN8

Bka7jhpCcAAw07N

BxOMi2TIIAASs5d

BxvvFtKIIAA6phr

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 274,480 other followers

%d bloggers like this: