[EL] If elections can be rigged...

Thu Oct 20 09:15:30 PDT 2016

I suspect if we define "rig the election" as "violating the FEC's" coordination rules, then we might have a rigging. All those pesky legal standards-- material involvement, candidate campaign substantial involvement, and shared content and messaging-- seem to be met as detailed in the complaint I filed. See http://www.projectveritasaction.com/news/james-okeefe-files-fec-complaint-against-clinton-campaign-and-dnc.  And that includes evidence like video transcripts and actual e-mails from third-party groups and Democratic operatives, not mere conjecture or hyperbole.  

Forward,

Benjamin Barr
Counsel
Project Veritas Action Fund

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 20, 2016, at 11:35 AM, Joseph E. La Rue <joseph.e.larue at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> No, Zach, it didn't.  And, while it doesn't necessarily mean that the DNC has a plan to rig the election, it did show a Democrat official talking about Democrats rigging elections through vote fraud.  Rather than pretend it didn't happen, wouldn't it be better for the Liberals and Progressives on this Listserve to condemn the comments?  And, while they are at it, shouldn't they seek to ensure that their fellow Democrats aren't actually doing this, rather than ignoring it because it doesn't fit their preferred theory (i.e., there is no significant vote fraud)?  By the way, I'm not saying that Democrats actually have committed vote fraud for 50 years.  I'm simply saying that it seems a better response is to condemn the comments, rather than (1) pretend they weren't made or (2) pretend Veritas doctored the tape and the Democrat official never said what he clearly said.  
> 
> 
> Joseph
> ___________________
> Joseph E. La Rue, Esq.*
> cell: 480.737.1321 
> email: joseph.e.larue at gmail.com
> 
> * Licensed in Arizona and Ohio
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the message.
>  
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION/ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT.
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this communication was not written and is not intended to be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed by the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter addressed herein.
> 
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Zach West <zachwest1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Did this Project Veritas reporting involve a boat?  
>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Benjamin Barr <benjamin.barr at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Seems credible. As a result of Veritas reporting, Scott Foval (Americans United for Change) and Bob Creamer (Democracy Partners) have been pushed out/resigned/fired yesterday and today. Seems significant. 
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>>> On Oct 18, 2016, at 5:23 PM, Fredric Woocher <fwoocher at strumwooch.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Such a credible source.
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Fredric D. Woocher
>>>> 
>>>> Strumwasser & Woocher LLP
>>>> 
>>>> 10940 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2000
>>>> 
>>>> Los Angeles, CA 90024
>>>> 
>>>> fwoocher at strumwooch.com
>>>> 
>>>> (310) 576-1233
>>>> 
>>>> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Benjamin Barr
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:31 PM
>>>> To: Schultz, David A.
>>>> Cc: law-election at uci.edu
>>>> Subject: Re: [EL] If elections can be rigged...
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Why do you suppose democratic operatives have bragged about having bussed people for 50 years to engage in voter fraud?
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Forward,
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> Benjamin Barr
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Schultz, David A. <dschultz at hamline.edu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> If elections can be rigged, either party can do it.  The secretary of state (or commonwealth) is the chief election officer in each state and they would have the ability to manipulate the election system to the benefit of their favored candidate.  Of the 50 states, 27 are Republican.  Among the 11 swing states that are Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Ohio, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina,  Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin, only four, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin, are controlled by Democrats.  Republicans control nearly two-thirds of the secretaries of state in the critical swing states and presumably would not have an incentive to rig the election in favor of Clinton.
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>> David Schultz, Professor
>>>> Editor, Journal of Public Affairs Education (JPAE)
>>>> Hamline University
>>>> Department of Political Science
>>>> 
>>>> 1536 Hewitt Ave
>>>> 
>>>> MS B 1805
>>>> St. Paul, Minnesota 55104
>>>> 651.523.2858 (voice)
>>>> 651.523.3170 (fax)
>>>> http://davidschultz.efoliomn.com/
>>>> http://works.bepress.com/david_schultz/
>>>> http://schultzstake.blogspot.com/
>>>> Twitter:  @ProfDSchultz
>>>> My latest book:  Presidential Swing States:  Why Only Ten Matter
>>>> 
>>>> https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780739195246/Presidential-Swing-States-Why-Only-Ten-Matter
>>>> FacultyRow SuperProfessor, 2012, 2013, 2014
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Law-election mailing list
>>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Law-election mailing list
>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161020/94bf5379/attachment.html>