http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2008/10/ohio_vote_fraud.php
Early voting is taking place in Ohio. Through the end of the week, people can register and vote on the same day. The Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner argues that they are merely "casting their ballot" rather than "voting" so the fact that Ohio statute requires 30 days between registering and voting would not interfere. So here is what is happening today. People are showing up to register and vote. There is no affirmative evidence that these people have not registered or voted somewhere else. There is no control. Normally in an election, partisan election monitors are allowed into polling places so that they can police each other. But not in two counties, Franklin and Montgomery, in Ohio. Brunner also issued an advisory opinion to counties saying that they are not required to allow election monitors. Here you can see an election observer be turned away. (Video at Link provided) Which I believe is empirical evidence, of the First Order. On Oct 2, 3:19 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gaar, > > Why wait? Turn your evidence in to the appropiate authorities right > now. They can at least issue an emergency restraining order and put a > stop to the practice right now. Go, run, hurry. Do your duty as a > citizen. > > On Oct 2, 4:39 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Yeah, I heard that this last night... > > > The bad thing is, there will not likely be a Court challenge to this > > until AFTER they have stolen the Election. > > > On Oct 2, 2:35 pm, Zebnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Democrats in Ohio are rounding up homeless people and paying them to > > > register and vote for Obama. Pitiful and completely illegal. Not that > > > it bothers Democrats to commit election fraud. > > > > On Oct 2, 2:03 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I am starting to believe that the Liberals around here don't give a > > > > shit... > > > > > All they want is to get the Presidency and both Houses of Congress, no > > > > matter what. > > > > > And then we wonder how we get into the shit we do... > > > > > On Oct 2, 6:30 am, "Keith In Tampa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I don't know if this helps or not, but to try and clarify or to at > > > > > least add > > > > > to the history of how this debacle started; > > > > > > First, the "Fannie Mae" that was created in 1938 by President > > > > > Roosevelt is > > > > > not at all the same Fannie Mae that was created in 1968 by Lyndon > > > > > Johnson, > > > > > nor does the 1968 "Fannie Mae" resemble the Fannie Mae that was > > > > > created in > > > > > 1996-1999 by the Clinton Administration. Just a quick "Reader's > > > > > Digest" > > > > > abridged version; In 1968, President Johnson privatized Fannie Mae in > > > > > order > > > > > to remove it from the national budget. At this point, Fannie Mae began > > > > > operating as a "quasi-governmental" corporation, (called a "government > > > > > sponsored enterprise") which generated profits for stock holders while > > > > > enjoying the benefits of exemption from taxation and oversight as > > > > > well as > > > > > implied government backing. Freddie Mac was created in 1970 in order > > > > > to > > > > > prevent any monopolization of the GSE market. > > > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae > > > > > > The Fannie Mae that we are talking about in 2008, was in fact a > > > > > creation of > > > > > the Clinton Administration, and the 105th and 106th Congress. One > > > > > of the > > > > > biggest changes to Fannie Mae, as well as the overall banking > > > > > industry came > > > > > in 1996 when Alan Greenspan issued a ruling allowing bank investment > > > > > affiliates to have up to a quarter of their business in investments. > > > > > >http://www.nerepublican.com/index.php/2008/09/22/mules-rinos-and-very... > > > > > > In particular, President Clinton, in essence, repealed the > > > > > "Glass-Steagall" Act, and as I am sure most group members recall, > > > > > (as I do) > > > > > the theory was, that America's financial competitiveness was being > > > > > hampered > > > > > in comparison to Europe's and the emerging economies of Russia and > > > > > China. > > > > > That we needed the "Gramm-Leach-Bliley" Act, in order to make > > > > > America's > > > > > lending institutions viable and competitive. > > > > > > If you go and look at other posts in this thread, by me, and other > > > > > members, > > > > > I think the rest of the history falls into place.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
