Comments (72)

NTB wrote on May 14, 2007 3:12 PM:

Another, in my mind more important, question: "Is the NJ US Attorney's office planning an investigation into possible voter suppression? If not, why?"

Mike Conwell wrote on May 14, 2007 3:12 PM:

U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie then immediately announced a criminal investigation into who paid for and committed the act of voter intimidation. This was then confirmed by the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division that allocated half of their resources into solving this crime and bringing the perp's to justice.

Oh? That didn't happen? Must have been me day dreaming about a day when real law enforcement is provided by the DOJ.

Impeach Gonzales

mike wrote on May 14, 2007 3:16 PM:

"The U.S. Attorney's Office was not contacted to authenticate the matter or comment for the story..."

Reporting is hard work.

regular lurker wrote on May 14, 2007 3:20 PM:

I'm curious: how many people actually received the robo call?

Anonymous wrote on May 14, 2007 3:21 PM:

Folks, this was a Camden, NJ City Council election. It's pretty clear that Rove's tactics are now dripping down into municipal government -- rememeber the recent story about the US Attorney announcing the "mortgage fraud" investigation into the Democratic candidate for Kansas City, MO Mayor? MAYOR!

linda wrote on May 14, 2007 3:22 PM:

As U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie noted,

this is the dood who popped the ft dix crew. sorry, but i happened to catch a cnn segment with him and he just reeks 'loyal bushie' -- pudgie, soft, smug white boy who talks tough.

'foot' is the code word -- as in 'loyal foot soldier'...

BillD wrote on May 14, 2007 3:22 PM:

Jesus, Monica Goodling must have swooned when she saw the name Christopher Christie.

Englischlehrer wrote on May 14, 2007 3:24 PM:

Wouldn't be crazy to think that Rove's big hullaballoo about voter-fraud was to cover up the Repubs own voter-fraud in order to muddy the topic when it became a heated issue...?

pf from NJ wrote on May 14, 2007 3:29 PM:

Christie is considered the best -- maybe only -- credible statewide Republican candidate for office these days. He is the crusader against corruption.

I want someone to expose why he initiated an obviously bogus investigation of alleged corruption by Democratic US Senate candidate Bob Menendez during the campaign last year. That in itself was an act of corruption (far worse than anything Menendez was even alleged to have done) that Christie has yet to be called on, and someone should do it soon.

poetry wrote on May 14, 2007 3:29 PM:

It is more than interesting that during Chris Christie's tenure as NJ federal prosecutor, he has "investigated" and prosecuted THIRTY-THREE 'local' Democratic politicians and FIVE Republicans. The significance of that figure is that investigations of local politicians "fly under the radar" of the national press and get only LOCAL news coverage, so no one notices the great disparity between "investigated" Democrats and "investigated" Republicans -- by a Republican prosecutor with great money ties to Bush. http://www.epluribusmedia.org/columns/2007/Table%203%20Only%20Local%20Investigated.pdf

Remember the name of CHRISTOPHER CHRISTIE ... it should show up in testimony if and when the Congressional Democrats get around to inquiring what it was the remaining (not purged) prosecutors did to curry enough favor with the White House to STAY OFF the PURGE LIST.

Mr Blifil wrote on May 14, 2007 3:35 PM:

Apparently the story has been taken off of the Inquirer website, philly.com

Slippery Slope wrote on May 14, 2007 3:35 PM:

"As U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie noted, the U.S. Attorney's Office would never engage in such a practice, which clearly could have been used as a voter-suppression tactic."
*******************************************

Now we have the USA C. Christie stating that this "clearly could have been used as a voter-suppression tactic."

That is a start. If they have not yet opened an investigation (which would not suprize me) then by Christie's own account there should be one.

Let's track that new (on-going) investigation.

Oh, wait. I guess if a Democratic member of congress were to make ANY inquiry then they would be accused of tampering.

Damn.

TheraP wrote on May 14, 2007 3:36 PM:

This is a cancer that is metastasizing and mutating and cloning itself. It has pushed aside the normal innards of government and wrapped itself around anything it could not push aside or negate. It is strangling the life out of everything we hold dear.

Cal Damage wrote on May 14, 2007 3:38 PM:

A better question is "Why was this a believable story?"
And I think the answers are, first, that this falls in line with the tactics we all now know were policy from the top (Rove) down, and also, that the intended tainting of our government's delivery of service with the poison of politicization has succeeded. This latter will be the greatest institutional legacy of this Administration, and, as intended, will poison public perception of the government, no matter how well-run, for generations to come.

'Wheel' - as in, we all die when the wheels come off the bus we've let these clowns drive us around in.

Thinkerton wrote on May 14, 2007 3:39 PM:

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if there was some Republican mischief at the root of this, but while we wait for that proof... Can someone explain to me how this recorded message supresses votes? I understand how saying something like "if you're an immigrant you'll be arrested" can provoke fear in law-abiding citizens, but telling people that it's illegal to be paid for a vote? Isn't that just good (and rather obvious) advice for anyone? It just doesn't seem like a very potent message to send if you're trying to supress or manipulate an election.

JEP wrote on May 14, 2007 3:47 PM:

Anyone else want to bet that these robocalls came from someone who has done it before?

Find out who did it in 2006, and maybe we can find out who did it this time around. There's a connection somewhere, and since we already have a history to look at, maybe that is where this will originate...

Eric Ferguson wrote on May 14, 2007 3:51 PM:

The link to philly.com is broken. I looked around their site for the article, but can't find it. Maybe they took it down?

RandyR wrote on May 14, 2007 3:51 PM:

The question about the investigation of a Kansas City Mayor by the US Attorney is an outrage. She was investigated and cleared and then Schlozman came in and they reopened the investigation after the US Attorney issued a letter clearing her.

Kit Bond is a very conservative Senator from Missouri. The strategy of the "Bushies" seems to be pick off anyone who can run against him. And that's what is happening in K.C.

Security Code: foot put it in a boot and kick their asses out.

Jim Goetsch wrote on May 14, 2007 3:53 PM:

The transcript of that call is completely consistent with the voter intimidation efforts that the Republican Party has been engaging in ever since the Reagan days. Signs threatening severe penalties have been put up outside of minority neighborhood polling places for many years, and the party openly acknowledges this. They say they're just "trying to keep things fair".

JEP wrote on May 14, 2007 3:53 PM:

From the NYTimes, January 31, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/31/opinion/31wed1.html?ex=1179288000&en=a495e45e936170af&ei=5070
"Dirty tricks like these turn up every election season, in large part because they are so rarely punished. But two Democratic senators, Barack Obama of Illinois and Charles Schumer of New York, are introducing a bill today that would make deceiving or intimidating voters a federal crime with substantial penalties.

The bill aims at some of the most commonly used deceptive political tactics. It makes it a crime to knowingly tell voters the wrong day for an election. There have been numerous reports of organized efforts to use telephones, leaflets or posters to tell voters, especially in minority areas, not to vote on Election Day because voting has been postponed."

So, just what happened to that legislation? Anyone know? And wouldn't it cover this type of shenanigans?

TPM took the lead in uncovering previous robocall scams, if there were any "names named" then, they might well be the same ones now...

Just who does this kind of work for the RNC, etc.?

kiki wrote on May 14, 2007 4:04 PM:

"[R]ememeber the recent story about the US Attorney announcing the "mortgage fraud" investigation into the Democratic candidate for Kansas City, MO Mayor? MAYOR!"

Careful on this one, folks. The mayoral candidate in question has had several ethical missteps and Democrats in Kansas City aren't that keen on her. That's why she only got 1% of the vote in the mayoral primary. And believe me, even without the indictment she wouldn't have gotten many more votes. She quite literally couldn't win an election for dog catcher.

Also, no Republican in Missouri is going to challenge Kit Bond ever, no matter what the White House does. He's as safe as safe can be. The fight among Missouri Republicans is who will be first in line as soon as Kit announces his retirement, which many expect will be at the end of his current term in 2010. And even if he does run in 2010, he won't draw opposition from the GOP, but we might finally see a top-drawer Democrat take him on.

bordersmuggler wrote on May 14, 2007 4:04 PM:

Bush and Cheyney must be impeached, if for no other reason than to block the wave of pardons which will be slated for January, 2009.

dz wrote on May 14, 2007 4:07 PM:

Some more context, as I work in Camden:

This was a nonpartisan municipal election for Camden City Council. Because Camden is overwhelmingly Democratic, there is no November election on the municipal level.

There were two main factions squaring off in this election. One was a set of candidates more closely aligned with the Camden County Democratic machine, directed by George Norcross (google him for more information). The other set of candidates was a loosely-organized group of anti-machine candidates (also most likely Democrats on the State and National level).

Turnout was under 10% of registered voters. This is very low, but not much lower than the last comparable election in Camden (2003).

Ian wrote on May 14, 2007 4:10 PM:

This story didn't make much sense for a bunch of reasons, if only because robocalls are expensive and the US Attorney budget very scrutinized. Given RNC history, I would suspect they were the ones responsible.

regular lurker wrote on May 14, 2007 4:12 PM:

dz,

Do you know if there were actually robo calls? Or was the robocall story just spoonfed to a hungry journalist?

JM wrote on May 14, 2007 4:18 PM:

There's a Bush in St. Louis: William H.T. Bush, aka "Uncle Buck." No doubt he factors in any political event in MO, particularly Republican. But shhh! be vewwy quiet.

sc: right, as in I am always

Jim S wrote on May 14, 2007 4:33 PM:

"Wouldn't be crazy to think that Rove's big hullaballoo about voter-fraud was to cover up the Repubs own voter-fraud in order to muddy the topic when it became a heated issue...?
Posted by: Englischlehrer
Date: May 14, 2007 03:24 PM"

This is exactly what is going on (IMHO). Not just in voter fraud, but in all fishy GOP business. They accuse Democrats of doing something that they (Republicans) are doing so that when the Dems accuse the Republicans they can say it's just tit for tat politics.

Remember Florida 2000, the repubs accused all protesters calling for a recount of being Dem operatives all while they were flying Republican congressional staffers down there to bang on the doors and start a riot at the poling station (pretending to be outraged citizens of Florida).

Jeff Adams wrote on May 14, 2007 4:44 PM:

First time visit. I can see why Bill Moyers reads you every morning.

The exposure of the NJ robocalls and the background of connecting the dots on Carol Lam's removal at the same time that she was preparing an indictment and/or subpoena of Kyle Foggo and his records are more than enough to warrant impeachment. It dereliction of duty for the our Senate and House not to proceed with impeachment.

eyeball wrote on May 14, 2007 4:47 PM:

terrible screwup by Inquirer not to have gotten a full reponse from that USA office before printing that article. bad work.

no question such robocalls are a lasting stain of rovism that will take decades to blot up. christ.

now's the time we NEED USAtt.'s the most - to kill this thuggish cancer of the new GOP jim crow.

but: this practice of paying people "walking around $$' to get them to register and vote has GOT TO STOP. it's a bad disease on democracy and the Dems need to be the ones to kill it.

Michael Ditto wrote on May 14, 2007 4:48 PM:

Ian: Sorry, but robocalls are not expensive. A robocall to 4000 voters would have cost less than $300. They average about 7 cents per call, but can be gotten for as little as 1 cent per call. That's why robocalls are a favorite voter suppression tactic of the Republicans, and have been adopted by lobbyists and issue advocacy groups as well.

noshrub wrote on May 14, 2007 4:49 PM:

This is a dirty tricks robocall. There's going to be an appearance that the dems did this...it's kind of like the Dan Rather "fake" letter.

ChasingTheDollar wrote on May 14, 2007 4:59 PM:

Didn't something else like this happen in Virginia? I don't remember the details, but I know one was posted somewhere and I have a download of the audio on my computer at home. I'll look into that, but I am pretty sure I am right. It didn't deal with buying votes, but with just trying to vote if you weren't "eligable" or something.

PSP wrote on May 14, 2007 5:00 PM:

Camden politics is as crooked as crooked gets. But, there are so few republicans in town that it is HIGHLY unlikely that they could win an election even with Bush and Rove themselves handing out cash outside the voting booths.

"Gubernatorial Election

In 2001, Democrat Jim McGreevey received over 90% of the vote in Camden against Republican Bret Schundler. About 19% of the voting age population in Camden voted in this election, or about 27% of registered voters.

In 2005, Democrat Jon Corzine again received over 90% of the vote in Camden against Republican Doug Forrester. About 17% of the voting age population in Camden voted in this election, or about 23% of registered voters. "

http://www.camconnect.org/resources/VoterParticipationReport.htm

BillE wrote on May 14, 2007 5:08 PM:

The repugs gripe about Voter Fraud when the crime they commit is Election Fraud. Very big difference in scope.

wrb wrote on May 14, 2007 5:10 PM:

RICO

This is what it was designed for. The enterprise seems to reach from the RNC into the DOJ, the Bench, the White House and now local GOP political operations.

Only prosecuting it to the fullest extent has hope of rescuing the country, and actually the GOP. These guys need to do prison time for the sake of the country.

Imagine if democrats won in '08, as they are likely to, and felt free to follow these rules, and actually succeed in establishing a permanent one-party state.

Anthony wrote on May 14, 2007 5:21 PM:

kiki: You said, "Careful on this one, folks. The mayoral candidate in question has had several ethical missteps and Democrats in Kansas City aren't that keen on her."

Are ytou talking about Katheryn Shields? If so, why do you think she is unelectable? Katheryn Shields was elected 3 times to the county executive position.

Anonymous wrote on May 14, 2007 5:22 PM:

Given that the election was among Democrats only, it doesn't make much sense that Republicans would be involved in the robocalling (here, at least). More likely it was one faction in Camden getting wind that the other side was buying votes and trying to counter it.

colinski wrote on May 14, 2007 6:31 PM:

Whether the Inquirer story is correct, Christie's actions warrant scrutiny. This appears to be the right target, even if for the wrong reason.

Christie's investigation of Sen. Menendez, and more importantly, the release of information about it, was timed to coincide with the 2006 election. Combined with the fact that the possible crime itself was trivial, this "coincidence" should be examined in light of recent revelations.

[TPM story:]

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001489.php

Albeit a possible tangent, the story of Todd Christie's stock infractions suggests that he was the beneficiary of a politicized investigation. When one looks at the amount of money given by the Christies to the Republicans, there is an even stronger appearance of "loyal Bushies" using the justice system to pursue partisan advantage.

[Todd Christie story:]

http://bayshorenews.blogspot.com/2006/07/old-unpublished-article.html

pol wrote on May 14, 2007 6:43 PM:

Speaking of Rovian tactics dripping to local levels... In a local election last fall, the Republican candidate for chair of county supervisors sent out a mailing stating a blantant lie about the Democratic candidate receiving thousands of dollars in funding from developers in the area -- just days before the election. It was mirrored in the local papers. Just after he'd won the election, the Republican issued a statement that -- oops! -- he'd made a mistake...

Michael Ditto wrote on May 14, 2007 7:18 PM:

05:22 PM: Just as likely, one faction calculates that suppressing the general turnout would favor their candidate. If they are dishonest enough to implicate the US Attorney, they are dishonest enough to cook up allegations of vote-buying.

Or there may be vote-buying. Local politics can be amongst the dirtiest, especially when it's all intra-party warfare. But I don't think it's safe to make that assumption based on one bogus news article.

Richard L. Adlof wrote on May 14, 2007 7:25 PM:

Insert the deity of your choice!!!!

I hate robo-calls. They are almost enough to make me run for congress so I could outlaw them . . .

Thomas May wrote on May 14, 2007 7:31 PM:

Gee, seems there ought to have been at least a few phone calls made to the U.S. Attorney's office that would have tipped them off that something was coming down. Someone would as well have had to record the call. Maybe the USA could check their own records.

starwheel wrote on May 14, 2007 7:32 PM:

The Courier-Post is the newspaper that serves Camden County. I didn't see anything on their website about this story or the subsequent denials.

I posted a message on a General Forum board on their website but no response or views yet.

I try and contact their offices to see if there will be any coverage on this.

As I note on my post on their message board, I'm wondering if this was a practice run.

1Watt wrote on May 14, 2007 7:44 PM:

500 Rovian emails misdirected, to be turned over to Conyers.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/14/1426254

meep! wrote on May 14, 2007 8:56 PM:

poetry @ 3.29: "Apparently the story has been taken off of the Inquirer website, philly.com"

Google has it cached at:
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/nj/20070513_Camden_voters_got_taped_warnings.html&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Chuck N wrote on May 15, 2007 6:56 AM:

Philly reporting area is no stranger to Roger Stone and dirty tricks.

http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/extra/archives/001061.html

PJ White wrote on May 15, 2007 7:17 AM:

"This is a cancer that is metastasizing and mutating and cloning itself. It has pushed aside the normal innards of government and wrapped itself around anything it could not push aside or negate. It is strangling the life out of everything we hold dear."

TheraP, yipes, what a metaphor! Accurate though.

Jane wrote on May 15, 2007 10:35 AM:

Pol 6:43

This is what slander laws are for. It is difficult to sue if you are a public person but if it could be shown that the Rethuglican knew or should have known before the election it could work .... Just brining such a suit might start to slow them down

Generally, it may be that the Repubs try some of these things on a local level before taking them national.

rudytbone wrote on May 15, 2007 12:46 PM:

Someone please explain to me how this is voter supression. Was this message not a statement of fact?
So, if your beef is with Robo calls, would it be better if they had a call center do the calls?

If you beef is with the message, why do you not want the truth?

ajwe ulrbksg wrote on September 12, 2007 1:26 PM:

knph onmlxih lpdzsemxy oqcgk lhfmvz hogdslpa bzqmj

hfepwy ofjtuydgq wrote on September 12, 2007 1:27 PM:

yuxqfc kdibn msyq gzqocxe idqomx nkgofazu ywab http://www.cxvtweka.empa.com

hfepwy ofjtuydgq wrote on September 12, 2007 1:30 PM:

yuxqfc kdibn msyq gzqocxe idqomx nkgofazu ywab http://www.cxvtweka.empa.com

gvfhxem uoseyfvnx wrote on September 12, 2007 1:32 PM:

cimnlkz tchdve mpuxc xekwfyuq jstmf ylbscfzq aqnkgcuh wjqrkenxu ryijmp

hfepwy ofjtuydgq wrote on September 12, 2007 1:32 PM:

yuxqfc kdibn msyq gzqocxe idqomx nkgofazu ywab http://www.cxvtweka.empa.com

gvfhxem uoseyfvnx wrote on September 12, 2007 1:33 PM:

cimnlkz tchdve mpuxc xekwfyuq jstmf ylbscfzq aqnkgcuh wjqrkenxu ryijmp

gvfhxem uoseyfvnx wrote on September 12, 2007 1:34 PM:

cimnlkz tchdve mpuxc xekwfyuq jstmf ylbscfzq aqnkgcuh wjqrkenxu ryijmp

2002 federal tax rate schedule wrote on September 21, 2007 6:32 AM:

Nice site. Thank you!

2002 san francisco 49ers wrote on September 21, 2007 10:40 AM:

Cool site. Thank you:-)

5 point seat harness wrote on September 23, 2007 4:51 PM:

Good site. Thank you!

7 gates of hell pa wrote on September 23, 2007 8:25 PM:

Cool site. Thank you!

awesome game website wrote on September 27, 2007 3:35 AM:

Good site. Thank you.

bed breakfast english garden wrote on September 28, 2007 4:34 AM:

Cool site. Thanks:-)

bed breakfast english garden wrote on September 28, 2007 4:34 AM:

Cool site. Thanks:-)

bianca smut shack wrote on September 28, 2007 4:33 PM:

Good site. Thank you.

black babes lesbian bra wrote on September 29, 2007 12:49 AM:

Nice site. Thanks!

blank skateboard deck wrote on September 29, 2007 3:57 AM:

Nice site. Thank you!

bottled water history timeline wrote on September 29, 2007 5:41 PM:

Very good site. Thank you:-)

bottled water history timeline wrote on September 29, 2007 5:42 PM:

Very good site. Thank you:-)

disneychannel.com wrote on October 24, 2007 5:47 PM:

Very good site. Thank you!!!

channel.com disney jumpin wrote on October 24, 2007 9:43 PM:

Good site. Thank you!

channel.com disney jumpin wrote on October 24, 2007 9:43 PM:

Good site. Thank you!

epenisa wrote on January 11, 2008 1:00 AM:

Hi
Nice work from your side... have a nice time with yoru blog :)
Bye