So her hiring bias is very apparently well known, yet she skyrocketed upward. Really, there is only one reasonable interpretation: Gonzales wanted her doing what she did, and rewarded her for it. She also makes a very convenient scapegoat if things turn sour later, as they have.
That’s even better for the scapegoat deal. Now she can proudly claim responsibility for all this shit, and walk away without a scratch. Like Ollie North did.
And all the White House and Justice people just point at her and say, “She did it, and YOU let her walk.”
I’m not sure that everything looks all that clean and above board for Democrat partisans, particularly if some of the fired lawyers were deliberately dragging their feet when investigating voter fraud that benefited the Democrats.
Why should any honest person object if some dedicated government employee, like the abovementioned civil servant, Mr. Rove, wants to make sure that people who commit voter fraud get charged and jailed?
Elections that are won through voter fraud are no more legitimate than military coups.
I think we can all agree that the aim of every honest citizen should be to make sure that fraud is totally eliminated from the political scene. The dedicated Mr Rove appears to be trying to do just that.
Not so?
Perhaps a round of applause for this Mr Rove would be in order.
It’s probably because there is scant evidence of voter fraud.
Does this seem like something that is going to swing an election result:
Or this:
Or this:
Voter fraud is a red herring. Republicans exaggerate it in order to justify changes in election laws that would make it harder for poor people and minorities to vote. Four fake registration forms that can’t be used is a big deal. Rerouting Ohio’s 2004 election counting through the RNC servers is not. Go figure.
Addressing only the last of your four unsubstantated assertions, even the link you provided showed there was a serious problem that the US legal system could not or would not try to fix in policing elections throughout at least some of the more corrupt parts of the US.
Re the Ohio 2004 election, were the votes counted by a one party without any input or reference to any other parties? (I’m assuming there are more than two parties) or are you claiming that the computer was programmed by persons unknown to come up with a particular result?
If so, can you justify this with a link to a trustworthy source. (Note: ‘The Nation’ or ‘Kos’ or ‘DUH’ doesn’t count).
A “serious” problem? A few dozen convictions in several years is “serious”?
I’m looking for a reputable site regarding the Ohio RNC vote switching. The progressive blogs are agog with it, searching for it finds the smoke but the fire is harder to find. Anyway, as the blogs go, Kerry was winning Ohio handily until such time as the results were diverted to the RNC server. Three counties that voted against the gay marriage ban came in strongly for Bush, counter to the other counties. This is a bigger deal than a handful of isolated offenses.
Because the whole “voter fraud” issue is itself fraudulent.
Because it’s just an excuse for the Pubs to unlawfully and dishonestly challenge/suppress potential Dem votes, just like they did when they used caginglists in 2004.
And because the whole attorney-firings scandal is evidence of a Republican plot to do the same thing – but this time on an even wider scale and with the official backing of the Justice Department – in 2008.
Today an NBC reporter asked Bush point-blank (twice) if he sent Gonzales to Ashcroft while he was in the hospital to get him to approve the wire-tapping plan.
Bush dodged the question both times.
(The link is to a lefty site, but the video is the CNN feed from the press conference with Tony Blair.)
