Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

VOTING: What is Pierce County hiding?

Letter by Robert William Brown, Lakewood on Aug. 6, 2012 at 11:36 am with 54 Comments »
August 6, 2012 3:49 pm

What is the Superior Court of Pierce County hiding?

I have requested the names of those registered voters who have refused jury duty because they are not citizens and have been told that this is somehow privileged information. I learned recently that Douglas County has released its list.

Guess what? We found seven noncitizens who are registered to vote here in Washington. Extrapolating, that would mean that all of the other counties combined would have a minimum of 266 illegal voters. Didn’t Chris Gregoire swing the election by 135 votes? What we are seeing is big-time election fraud.

Judge Ronald Culpepper has refused my specific verbal request for the list. Just what is Pierce County Superior Court hiding?

Leave a comment Comments → 54
  1. Fibonacci says:

    Robert
    Do you check under your bed for communists too–you sseem to be a fan of conspiracy theories.

  2. Your extraplotion would most likely be incorrect.

    If there are 7 non-citizens registered voters in Pierce County, then any accurate extrapolation would have to say that there would be half as many non-citizen registered voter in a county with half the population.

    Of course the demographics for all counties are not identical, so frankly, there is no way to determine how far off your extrapolation is without further data.

    Darn statistics and probablilities.

  3. krummm, I think the author said that Douglas Cty had 7 voters on the registered voter list that were not qualified, not Pierce, since Pierce has refused to offer the list of non-jurors.

    Mr. Brown, I would love to see the link to your results and see the research methodology. Could hyou describe who the “we” is that conducted the research, please.

    In other states that did the same, the first glance looked like there were unqualified voters. When a real investigation was done, then it turned out that there were two people with the same name living at an addresses, like father and son, there were inaccuracies on the lists, people had obtained citizenship and there were other circumstances that showed there was no voter registration fraud.

    Not that I don’t trust you, but others have made the same claim only to have to say, “oops, sorry”.

  4. truthbusterguy says:

    Craig Keller in Seattle has been leading the battle on this issue. Here is the proof you guys asked for.

    http://www.respectwashington.us/legal-action.html

    Counties ARE hiding the facts that illegals ARE voting and when their is proof they shut the door on the issue and demean American heros like Mr. Keller.

  5. intheblack says:

    Bobby B, shouldn’t you spend less time on your silly conspiracy theories and more time out at the shooting range with your friend Dick Muri working on his aim?

  6. I wonder:

    Are the counties taking steps to remove the 6 from the voter rolls;

    Who the ‘we’ are;

    How ‘we’ determine who was / was no a citizens;
    What per cent of registered votes all called to jury duty;

    How was the extrapolation 6-266 done; and

    Why Bob thinks he can command the Courts to do anything,

    Krummm – Bob’s other fallacy is that all non-citizens voters would vote only for Democrats.

  7. alindasue says:

    I went to truthbusterguy’s respectwashington.us site.

    What the heck does it mean when it refers to “non-juror information” and what does that have to do with whether a person can legally vote or not?

  8. MrCarleone says:

    Whenever I hear voices, the aluminum foil helps !

  9. The study is what I thought. Two people who were barred from jury duty voted out of the seven people who had been barred from jury duty who had registered to vote. The study lumps together non-citizens and people who had felony convictions and could not serve on jury duty. That is the list they looked at and want from Pierce County – people who cannot serve on jury duty but were called up because they had registered to vote.

    The main reason people can register to vote but cannot serve on juries is a felony conviction. Washington State since 2009 has allowed many ex-felons to have their voting rights restored, but they still are barred from jury duty.

    Let’s see the study after they determine why the two people who voted (or seven who registered) were not allowed to serve on a jury. I doubt it was because they were a non-citizen. My money is on a previous felony conviction and restoration of voting rights.

  10. Clamat0 says:

    The obvious point seems to be sailing over the heads of the usual lib suspects here:

    If Douglas County sent jury duty summons to 7 illegals, that would mean significantly more are registered to vote. The selection criteria for jury duty in WA:
    Persons summoned for jury service have been selected at random from voter registration and driver’s license and “identicard” records.
    But not every registered voter is summoned for jury duty – not even close. Think about it, when was the last time you were, and how often have you been, summoned for jury duty?

    So for those given to extrapolation, I think it’s clear that the number of illegals who are registered to vote in Douglas county alone, is significantly higher than just the seven who refused JD because of non-citizenship status. And try as you may, you simply cannot gloss-over the fact that there are any illegal aliens on the voter rolls. It’s empirical evidence that this state’s loose requirements for voter’s registration and obtaining a driver’s license is leading to illegal’s being able to register to vote (also illegal).

    Again, extrapolating; if illegals are registering to vote, does it not follow that they are voting?

  11. Clamat0 says:

    I went to truthbusterguy’s respectwashington.us site.

    What the heck does it mean when it refers to “non-juror information” and what does that have to do with whether a person can legally vote or not?

    allindasue,

    If you went to the site, you must not have read far enough down. From the link:

    • Respect Washington is being assisted by the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), of Washington, D.C. To date, courts in two of Washington’s 39 counties have released public documents containing information about non–jurors. (A non–juror is an individual summoned, but unqualified for jury duty due to a felony conviction or lack of U.S. citizenship.)

    As to whether or not they can vote, obviously illegals and convicted felons whose voting rights have have not been restored (conditions include re-registering after completion of sentence, parole, probation, and maintaing a minimum of 3 annual payments toward court imposed fines) are forbidden by law to vote in any election.

  12. Clamat0, you make the same assumption when you say: “If Douglas County sent jury duty summons to 7 illegals, that would mean significantly more are registered to vote.”

    We have no way of knowing at this time whether these were “illegals” or people entitled to vote but not serve on a jury.

    Come back later with real data that supports the allegation. Right now it is just an ubnfounded allegation, just like all the other states that have found the same thing. “Illegals are voting”, “dead people are voting”, “voter fraud is rampant”. When they went back to look, there was no fraud. However, the right gets hold of the allegations and treats them as fact, so we hear it over and over.

    The right is so easily duped by people who like to pull their strings.

  13. Clamat0 says:

    Tuddo, you must have missed the part where Mr. Brown clearly states they have “found seven noncitizens who are registered to vote here in (Douglas County) Washington.” And the link states the seven were “non–juror non–citizens”, indicating the the reason for their non-juror disqualification was non-citizen status.

    Non-citizens are non-citizens, and felons are felons. Mr. Brown clearly states the criteria not met was citizenship. I highly doubt Mr. Brown would write an LTE concerning documents made public in Douglas County (and thus available to anyone including you and media members) and proclaim results that weren’t true.

    But again, I’m struck by the cavalier attitude. Even if what you say is true, 2 illegals who were shown to have voted, out of a mere seven registered non-citizens summoned for jury duty. This extends to a HUGE number of illegals registering and indeed voting, statewide, given the tiny percentage of registered voters who are actually summoned for jury duty in a given election cycle.

    Again, jury service summons records would reveal only a very small percentage of the big picture.

  14. Clamat0 says:

    Come back later with real data that supports the allegation.

    Really? Like your interpretation (theory) is more significant and accurate than Respect Washington’s? LOL, tuddo, you’re not exactly hanging your research out their for everyone to view now, are you.

    And we’re only talking about illegal aliens here. Would love to see the data on illegal felon voting too.

  15. Bad math. What you found was 7 non-citizens, who are registered to vote, who refused jury duty using that reason. What you failed to take into account was:

    – non-citizens who used a different reason to avoid jury duty
    – non-citizens who accepted their jury duty

    You cannot extrapolate a State-wide number the way you did it. You could extrapolate a State-wide number for only the conditions described by those 7.

  16. Clamat0, Mr. Brown used the category “non-juror non-citizens” which is a list that contains both non-jurors for a number of reasons and non-citizens who can not serve on a jury.

    Here is the exact quote:

    “From Douglas County Superior Court between 2008 and 2010, a cross–reference examination of the records from 238 non–juror non–citizens revealed 7 registered voters, 2 of whom had records of having voted in local elections! Registrations of all 7 fraudulent voters have been confirmed by the Washington Secretary of State.”

    The press release left a lot to be desired, so I looked at the Secretary of State’s website and found that one must look beyond the list and do research to find out why people are registered to vote but are not able to serve on jury duty.

    There are many reasons, but felonies are the main reasons.

    I am not denying that there may be illegal aliens, but evidence from other states shows that the initial claims were not justified. In Minnesota, for example, reviewing such a list found 50 possible illegals voting. It turned out, after investigation, that 11 people actually were registered improperly, 7 had voted, and all were felons who were on still on probation. None were illegal aliens.

    Voter ID laws do not catch those errors in registration. Matches are made using current judicial records, and felons often have their probationary periods extended, and those extensions are often not put into the system on a timely basis. That happens in several states.

    It turned out the only votes found fraudlent in the Gregoire-Rossi trial were a few from felons who had voted for Rossi, remember that?

  17. averageJose says:

    Robert, one of the other reasons Gregoire won is by disenfranchising our overseas military men and women. They sent the ballots out late and then refused to count any that returned late.

  18. Clamat0 says:

    tuds, first of all, mr Brown didn’t cite a category. What was cited in the Respect Washington was “non–juror non–citizens” – a clear reference to the fact that the reason they were adjudged “non-juror” was due to one of two disqualifying criteria; lack of citizenship!

    You can spin it any way you want. Respect Washington was not even referencing felons, but if they had they would likely have parsed it “non-juror felon”, as the state itself does.

    So far you haven’t linked anything relevant, never mind disproved or discredited Respect Washington’s research.

  19. averageJose, what myths and lies the right continues to put forth, even after they have been proved false:

    Here’s from an article in the Stars and Stripes:

    “Washington state election officers and military officials say they have found no evidence of problems with overseas military absentee ballots, despite allegations that many may not have been delivered or counted”.

    “Joe Hitt, spokesman for Fort Lewis in Washington, said none of the Army Reserve units currently deployed overseas have reported problems over missing or damaged ballots.

    “It just seems to be something that’s being blown up in the press,” he said. “We haven’t heard any complaints about ballots.”

    http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,SS_011305_Ballot,00.html

  20. C,lamat0, I am sorry, but your saying so doesn’t make it a fact. So far, you linked to a site that talked about a non-juror non-citizen lists, which is the name of the official lists kept by the counties by law and presented to the Secretary of State that lists everyone who was determined to be a non juror or non citizen.

    I guess I can play the game and say that your site said that the registrations were “confirmed” by the Secretary of State, so, I that must mean that they were legitimate, since that is what confirming a registration means.

    Show me where it said these 7 were non-citizens. It doesn’t. It says they were on a non-juror non-citizen list.

    Further research may prove you right, but, as I said, it never hs in the past. This is just an effort to create a myth, like Republicans have been doing, that there is rampant voter fraud. When the cases are researched, nothing is found, but people like you continue spreading the lies and allegations as if they were substantiated.

  21. Clamat0 says:

    … your saying so doesn’t make it a fact.

    Words to live by, tuddo.

  22. “If Douglas County sent jury duty summons to 7 illegals, that would mean significantly more are registered to vote.”

    Based on what?
    How many independant samples were pulled? How often? Were the samples even independant or is it possible to grab the same person in multiple samples?

    You are drawing conclusions you couldn’t possibly accurately be making. Without knowing the total population and parameters for the sampling you are not even spitballing. You can’t even give a semi-accurate guess-timate.

  23. Clamat0 says:

    Hey krummy, are you over 18 and registered to vote? Do you possess a WA driver’s license? Congratulations, you are eligible to be randomly selected to receive a summons for jury service!

    Now, kindly tell us how often you are summoned. Then consider how many folks meet the above-described criteria. Then remember that of 238 individuals who received such summons in Douglas County were found to be non-citizens, out of which 7 were registered to vote, and 2 had actually voted. Now remember, Douglas County is not the largest county in WA (population 36,650 – about the size of University Place), so it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to extrapolate here, nor a genius to realize what this means – especially when you consider King County’s population is 50 TIMES LARGER!!!!

    HTH

  24. Clamat0 says:

    Correcting the following sentence from abopve post:

    “Then remember that (“of” deleted) 238 individuals who received such summons in Douglas County were found to be non-citizens, out of which 7 were registered to vote, and 2 had actually voted.”

    Hate that we can’t edit!!!!!

  25. Clamat0 says:

    “abopve post”, LMAO, please TNT, restore the edit function!!!!

  26. Clamat0, they were found ineligible for jury duty, not that they were necessarily non-citizens. Non-citizens are a tiny, tiny percentage of the non-juror list. Don’t facts mean anything anymore?

    If yuou or Mr Brown has information that shows these weere non-citizens, please present it. No one has yet, and the Secretary of State website disputes your saying that people on the non-juror noncitizen lists are all non-citizens.

    Even though he is a Republican, Sam Reed tells it like it is, and I trust him a ot more than I trust the mud-slinging Mr. Brown.

  27. tudds, I taking the word of Respect Washington. They say the released documents show 238 non-jurors that were disqualified as non-citizens, who were probably selected because they posses a WA state a driver’s license or Identicard. They refer to them as “non-juror non-citizens” – the second negative clearly alluding to the reason for their having been disqualified. But they also state that of the 238, 7 were registered to vote, and 2 had actually voted. Those are the facts – feel free to invent your own storyline.

    You doubt Respect Washington, get a copy of the released non-juror records from Douglas County yourself – they should be public record now. The burden of proof is on you, I have no desire to track down the records for you.

    You keep harping on “the Secretary of State’s website” – why don’t you link your proof to the contrary? If it’s such damning proof, why no linky?

    But before you go scrambling, you should remember that In 2005, Sam Reed himself asked the US Census and Immigration Service to check the immi­gration status of registered voters in Washing­ton state.

    The agency refused to cooperate.

  28. scooter6139 says:

    Wow, what inane logic. This sounds like Pennsylvania and it’s ID law, claiming voter and election fraud to pass draconian ID laws. Now that it is in the courts, the Pennsylvania reasoning: they stipulate that they do not actually know of any voter fraud or of anyone impersonating someone else so they could vote. Classy!

  29. Clamat0, I’m sorry you don’t know how to use the internet, but the Secretary of State’s website is very easy to find. Look for the fact sheet on jury duty and voting.

    You have not responded to my request that you show where the people found on the non-juror non-citizen list are non-citizens and not just non-jurors.

    Here’s an update on the request from Reed to get the Homeland Security info. Homeland Security had denied the data to states for several reasons. The primary one is that the data is kept in such a way that it is pretty useless to states that do not collect alien ID numbers like Washington (and most states). The data base must be checked one name at a time when there is a question, and so far Reed’s office has not checked any names.

    So, again, tell me how Mr. Brown was able to determine the immigration status of people when such information was not even available to state officials. Did he call them up and ask them? Does he have a secret friend in INS? Did he illegally forge their signatures on a release of confidential information to be able to do an employer search to see if they could legally work?

    Here is what Reed’s office said about the data:

    “From the materials we’ve received, it does appear that we need an alien ID number when submitting a verification request to the SAVE program. Presently, I am not sure how we will get access to … alien ID numbers.

    This underscores the point that we are still determining how or if we can access the SAVE program. We also do not know how up to date (accurate) the SAVE data will be. If the data isn’t accurate, it won’t be useful to us. Given all of this, no names have been removed.”

    Furthermore, according to the Olympian,

    “Most other candidates in the race, including Reed’s Republican friend Kim Wyman, also think voter fraud by immigrants is not a problem in Washington.”

    (Kim Wyman is currently leading the race to replace Reed.)

    Read more here: http://www.theolympian.com/2012/07/26/2187102/citizenship-check-but-no-purge.html#storylink=cpy
    Read more here: http://www.theolympian.com/2012/07/26/2187102/citizenship-check-but-no-purge.html#storylink=cpy

  30. Clamat0 says:

    Clamat0, I’m sorry you don’t know how to use the internet, but the Secretary of State’s website is very easy to find. Look for the fact sheet on jury duty and voting

    You have not responded to my request that you show where the people found on the non-juror non-citizen list are non-citizens and not just non-jurors.

    You’re kidding, right? The fact is I’m referencing a posted link here. You, on the other hand, are making constant references to information which you supposedly gleaned from the SoS’s web site. But you apparently lack either the rudimentary internet skills or the common courtesy to provide a link to this phantom information for substantiation. Then you use the tired old Allinskiite method of attempting to place the burden of proof on me because I question the validity of your claims. Harry Reid must be very proud of you.

    Sorry, but that is a lame and transparent tactic. It’s a logical assumption that since you refuse to link your sources, either they do not exist or, more likely, your interpretation is contextually inaccurate or wrong… or both.

    Further confirming my suspicions is the fact that virtually everything in your 11:21 post – including everything beyond the quote this post begins with – is completely wrong. To wit:

    Homeland Security had denied the data to states for several reasons.

    From your own link to The Olympian:

    “Hamlin added that the state’s requests for the database go back to 2005 and 2006 and Homeland Security rejected them.

    Updated: Access was promised to state election officials granted only after Florida won a court case… ”

    Obviously, the request has been granted (finally).

    So, again, tell me how Mr. Brown was able to determine the immigration status of people when such information was not even available to state officials.

    Uhmmm, did you conveniently forget the subject of the letter and our discussion here? Or are you trying to change the subject. Since you are so fond of making others confirm your theories, you won’t mind doing it yourself this time. But it will be much easier for you – you won’t need to go on an internet wild goose chase. Simply follow the link below and pay attention to the first two FAQ’s:

    http://www.courts.wa.gov/newsinfo/resources/?fa=newsinfo_jury.faq#Q2

    So, for the eighteenth time, as per Respect Washington’s research into released public documents containing non-juror information from Douglas County, 238 people who received summons were found to be non-juror non-citizens – meaning they were disqualified because they are not citizens. And of those 238, 7 were found to be registered voters, 2 of which had actually voted. And before you ask (again) how they could know these 7 individuals were registered, kindly return to the above link a read where it states that registered voters are part of the summons criteria. And before you ask how they know the 2 individuals voted, I would suggest you access the county assessors records where you live, and check your own name to see if your vote (from yesterday… if you voted) has been counted.

    It’s simply not rocket science.

    As to the rest of your references to Sam Reed’s request to use the SAVE program, that would be part of a before-the-fact effort to purge our voter rolls of illegals. Aside from the obvious fact that no such effort has been implemented (yet), what we are talking about here is after the fact identification of illegal voters.

    Your arguing total apples to oranges.

    Common sense would dictate that it’s much more effective to take care of a problem before it exists. That’s what Respect Washington is helping to do by exposing the fact that there are illegally registered voters on the rolls here in WA state. They’re doing so through the clever use of non-juror documents that they’ve so far been able to obtain from just two counties in this state. As for Reed, he’s 100% on their side in terms of goals, if not methods.

  31. Clamat0, I’m not changing te subject. You stated that the 7 were found to be illegal aliens who voted. I asked you how it was proved they were illegals and not felons. You keep insisting that they are “non-citizens”.

    I listed the most common ways of finding out if people are “non-citizens”, and asked you if they used any of them. How is that changing the subject?

    Its time to reveal Mr. Brown’s sources of information on how he determine their status since even the Secretary of State had not been able to in all of these years.

    That office stated they have not taken action on one single name, so that includes the seven who had been reported as non-citizens because they had not been able to access necessary information.

  32. Clamat0 says:

    You stated that the 7 were found to be illegal aliens who voted.

    No, wrong again – that is absolutely not what I or anyone else has said. Respect Washington found 7 registered voters amongst the 238 non-jurors who were disqualified on the basis of non-citizenship. If they had been DQ’d on the basis of not having restored voting rights, they would probably have been cited as “non-juror felon”. Why is that so difficult for you to grasp?????

    I listed the most common ways of finding out if people are “non-citizens”, and asked you if they used any of them. How is that changing the subject?

    Uhmmm, because it’s irrelevant to this topic! We’re talking about how Respect Washington discovered illegal aliens on the voter roles through the back door means of use of non-jurrors lists. Again, why is this so difficult for you to comprehend?????

    Its time to reveal Mr. Brown’s sources of information on how he determine their status since even the Secretary of State had not been able to in all of these years.

    What in the name of unholy Hades do you think his letter and Respect Washington’s research was all about????

    That office stated they have not taken action on one single name, so that includes the seven who had been reported as non-citizens because they had not been able to access necessary information.

    Prove it! Provide a link! And this time make sure that Reed is specifically addressing Respect Washington’s findings in Douglas County.

    Has Sam Reed specifically denied Respect Washington’s findings? No! Has anyone (besides you and your ilk)? Hell no!

  33. Clamat0 says:

    BTW, my first reply should have included the fact that of the seven illegal aliens registered registered to vote that were found in Douglas, 2 had actually voted. And in my previous post I described how easy that is to verify.

  34. Clamato

    I have been summoned 3 times in 20 years. I know people who have been summoned 3 times as often as I have. I also know people who have never been summoned. Hence the basis of my point. The numbers are not static.

  35. The numbers are not static.

    Of course the numbers aren’t static, but that only means there’s a 50/ 50 chance the numbers of non-juror non-citizens who voted could be higher in any given year – particularly in a presidential election year. Alternately, they could also be lower. But 8,000 lb. elephant in the room is the question as to why there are any at all! Especially when the solution is so at hand.

    You are drawing conclusions you couldn’t possibly accurately be making.

    No, Im extrapolating from what is clearly defined as a random sampling.

    Without knowing the total population and parameters for the sampling you are not even spitballing.

    I’ve clearly stated the population of Douglas County, above, as 36,500 (though, admittedly, after you accusation). And the parameters for the sampling were pretty well understood here, but if you’d care to view them yourself, they’re clearly spelled out in the above link in my 7:52 AM post.

    You can’t even give a semi-accurate guess-timate.

    Uhmm I bet I could – if I was inclined to do a few more hours of research and math. In the mean time, extrapolation is good enough for me and, I’d bet, most reasonable observers.

  36. I finally see your problem. You have made the assumption that the non-juror non-citizen list details the reason people are on the list. It does not. There is no way to discern from the list whether or not a person is a felon, a non-citizen, or on there by mistake.

    That is why each county that has released the names says that they must do further investigation to see why the persons were on the list and denied jury service.

    And, again, I will certainly take the word of the Olympian’s interview with Sam Reed’s office over your tawdry claims that have absolutely no validity.

  37. Clamat0 says:

    You have made the assumption that the non-juror non-citizen list details the reason people are on the list. It does not. There is no way to discern from the list whether or not a person is a felon, a non-citizen, or on there by mistake.

    Uh-humm… :

    tuddo
    AUG. 7, 2012 AT 2:50 PM

    I am sorry, but your saying so doesn’t make it a fact.

    Clamat0
    AUG. 7, 2012 AT 3:23 PM

    Words to live by, tuddo.

    Or not.

    There is no way to discern from the list whether or not a person is a felon, a non-citizen, or on there by mistake.

    Prove it. Send an email to Respect Washington. They’re the ones who (again, for the nineteenth time) used the phrase “non-juror non-citizen” to identify non-citizens whom had been sent summons to jury service. This is not official State of WA bureaucratese fer’goshsake.

    … I will certainly take the word of the Olympian’s interview with Sam Reed’s office over your tawdry claims…

    The “interview”, which is the one you linked, I assume, had absolutely nothing to do with the use of non-juror information as a means to identify illegals on voting rolls. Neither Respect Washington nor non-juror lists were even mentioned in your article, never mind the “interview” – at least not the one you linked. Got another? ‘Cuz I ain’t seein’ it.

    Fer’ crissake, tuddo, stop! Your conflating two different stories whose only common ground is illegals aliens on the voting rolls! The article you linked has to do with Reed’s now-sucessful effort to get Homeland Security to allow access to their Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program’s database, for the purpose of purging voter rolls of illegal aliens. What Mr. Brown is referencing is Respect Washington’s work in identifying illegals through the use of public documents containing non-juror information.

    Again with the apples to oranges!

    Are you related to the Hills? Because this circular argument tactic is identical to theirs, and extremely boring.

  38. I am sorry that you cannot understand plain truth and logic. We’ve had the same arguments before and you’ve gotten so lost in thinking that assumptions are facts and accepting the word of far-right wing nut jobs instead of reputable reporters and Republican office holers, no less.

    Have you ever seen a non-juror non citizen list? Well, have you? Does it identify those people who are non-citizens? Yes or No.

    (I know it doesn’t as a fact)

    Citizenship status is by law personal and confidential information that can only be disclosed in certain instances and is never provided as part of Freedom of Information claims.

    That is why I keep asking by what method did Mr Brown verify citizenship status, since it is not included in the public release of names of non jurors.

    Unless you or Mr Brown can tell us how he knows these people are non-citizens, then this whole claim goes up in smoke.

  39. Clamat0 says:

    I know it doesn’t as a fact

    “I” being the operative pronoun – first person singular. You may believe what you’re saying to be fact, and you’re certainly entitled to your beliefs. But to quote the wise man; “your saying so doesn’t make it a fact.”

    Kindly provide proof.

    Citizenship status is by law personal and confidential information that can only be disclosed in certain instances…

    You mean like when one receives a summons to jury service?

    That is why I keep asking by what method did Mr Brown verify citizenship status, since it is not included in the public release of names of non jurors.

    More “hole in the bucket” logic – a continuation of the circular argument tactic.

    For the last time; the determination of non-juror non citizen that was ascribed to 238 individuals in Douglas County results from the fact that they did not meet citizenship requirements for jury service qualification. Do you really dispute this fact? Clearly, in order to be qualified, excused, or disqualified, the person receiving a summons to jury service must prove citizenship status, and records are kept to this effect – public records, which were subsequently released to Respect Washington following their Petition for Release of Disqualified Juror Information. Do you deny this?

    If you answer “yes” to either of the preceding questions, there is no need to reply, I have nothing further to discuss with you on this topic other that the purely theoretical question of whether in fact there is a nose on your face.

  40. Clamat0, as you righties argue about Reid’s claim on Romney, webhre is the proof. I am not the one making the (false) assertion that there are non citizenms voting, so I don’t have to prove anything.

    I can tell that you’ve neverbeen in business, or, if hyou havem you have never tried to ascertain the citizenship status of a worker. You need the individual’s written permission to seek out that information.

    That is the key to knowing whether or not the claim in this letter is accurate or jsut a bit of nonsense trhying to drum up controversy. How did Mr Brown ascertain that these individuals were not citizens.

    These individuals were not on a non-citizen list, they were on a non-juror non-citizen list which is a list of names tnhat include felons, non-citizens and others who were summoned but could not serve. Says so in the artickle, says so in the Olympian says so in the Secretary of State website.

    I don’t have to prove anything. Prove me wrong.

  41. Clamat0 says:

    I am not the one making the (false) assertion that there are non citizenms voting…

    Neither am I. To the contrary it is quite clear and verifiable that non-citizens are voting.

    The difference is you have no proof that the non-juror records from Douglas County, documenting the dismissal of 238 potential jurors who had received summons to jury service because they met the initial criteria (I linked) for receiving such summons, do not include the actual grounds on which said potential jurors were dismissed/ disqualified – non-citizen status. Obviously, they would have to.

    This is just not that difficult to grasp, tuddo. If a person is summoned for jury service because they possess a WA drivers license, or are registered to vote in WA, under the penalty of perjury or fraud, it is incumbent upon that person to show why he or she does not meet the basic requirements for service in order to be excused. If it is otherwise determined that a potential juror misunderstood or misrepresented the qualification requirements, he or she will be subsequently disqualified, and could (in the case of misrepresentation) be charged with perjury or fraud. In either case, there will be public records of the actions describing the reason why such individual was excused or disqualified – e.g. non-citizen, underage, non-resident, unable to communicate in English, or felon who’s voting rights have not been restored.

    I’ve already described how easy is is from there, to see if an individual is registered to vote and/ or has voted (at least in the most recent election) – here’s a link to prove it:

    http://info.kingcounty.gov/elections/BallotTracker.aspx

    Again, tudds, not rocket science.

    I can tell that you’ve neverbeen in business…

    I’ve owned and operated my business for over 30 years now.

    … if hyou havem you have never tried to ascertain the citizenship status of a worker.

    Again with the apples and oranges thing. I’m required to use E-verify to confirm a potential employee meets requirements to work in the US. But citizenship is not one of those requirements, so verifying citizenship is not necessary.

    Maybe I should be concluding that you have never owned a business. And I could throw in a lack of HR experience?

    How did Mr Brown ascertain that these individuals were not citizens.

    Re-read the LTE. Then re-read ALL of my comments. Enough with the circular argument!

    they were on a non-juror non-citizen list which is a list of names tnhat include felons, non-citizens and others who were summoned but could not serve.

    Prove it. Prove Respect Washington’s findings wrong. “Your saying so doesn’t make it a fact.”

    Says so in the artickle…

    What artickle [sic]? (BTW, have you been drinking? PWI (posting while intoxicated) – never a good idea.

    …says so in the Olympian…

    No it doesn’t. The article you linked says absolutely nothing about the Respect Washington findings – doesn’t even mention Respect Washington, nor does it even so much as mention the word “non-juror” “Your saying so doesn’t make it a fact.”

    … says so in the Secretary of State website.

    Where?????? For the love of God, man, provide the link. PROVE IT!!!!! “Your saying so doesn’t make it a fact.”

  42. Clamat0 “To the contrary it is quite clear and verifiable that non-citizens are voting”.

    It may seem clear to someone who doesn’t have a clue as to what a non-juror non-citizens list is, but that is why the myth-makers who like to [provide incomplete, unsubstantiated and false information like to do with ghullible people like you.

    The provision of information regarding citizenship, nationality, country of origin, or visa status to any person or organization, other than the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) [formerly the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)], the Department of Labor or “to a governmental entity when required by State or Federal law” is a violation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (P. L. 99-603)

    So, all I am asking is to show me how Mr Brown, since he is not allowed to receive citizenship information as a private citizen, verified that these were non-citizens on a list that includes felons, non-citizens and anyone else who did not serve ona jury after being disqualified.

    It is a simple request that you cannot provide, so you continue ad hominem attacks.

    It is the key question to determining if this claim is real or false.

  43. Clamat0 says:

    So, all I am asking is to show me how Mr Brown, since he is not allowed to receive citizenship information as a private citizen, verified that these were non-citizens…

    He didn’t. Protect Washington did.

  44. Clamat0 says:

    From the Appellant’s opening Brief; Ringhofer v Ridge
    RE: Respect Washington’s request for release of non-juror records from King County

    Footnote, pg.

    2 Appellant requested the individual names and addresses of disqualified jurors, the reason(s) for their disqualification pursuant to RCW 2.36.070, and the dates of their disqualification for the period ranging from January 1,2008 to December 31, 2009. Clerk’s Papers (CP) CP 85-86.

    Douglas and Okanogan Counties have fully complied.

    Did you catch the part of the request where it sates “reason(s) for their disqualification pursuant to RCW 2.36.070″.

    http://www.courts.wa.gov/content/Briefs/a01/679708%20Amended%20Appellant's.pdf

    Any more questions? After all, I’m sure this is not convincing enough for you, LOL. i can hear it now; ‘but you don’t have any proof they asked for the reasons in Douglas and Okanogan Counties!”

    Geez.

  45. Thank you. Wasn’t that easy? My first post was a polite request for this information, and you called me every name in the book, when all I asked was:

    “Mr. Brown, I would love to see the link to your results and see the research methodology. Could hyou describe who the “we” is that conducted the research, please.”

    I even said, “please”.

  46. After reading the link and the other documents in the appeal, it will be interesting to see if the seven people who self-identified as being a “non-citizen” claimed such to get out of jury duty or, if in fact, they were really non-citizens.

    The documents make clear that there was no determination as to which time they lied under penalty of prosecution, at voter registration time or at jury duty.

    So, could be voter fraud, or could be jury fraud. We’ll have to wait to see if anyone is prosecuted and what for.

  47. Tuddo, I don’t recall calling you “names”. You’re misreading my level of exasperation with you for railing against what was written, insinuating it is incorrect based on the chosen phraseology used by Respect Washington on their information page, but without having actually seen any official documents.

    In fact it is you who have no proof their findings aren’t correct.

    It’s usually incumbent upon the accuser to provide proof against the accused before the accused is required to defend himself. Otherwise charges are simply baseless – mere conjecture, speculative aspersions, etc. You could have ended this little pissing match many posts ago by simply providing one single relevant link of your own – which, to date, you have not.

    I absolutely hate this tactic. And it seems to be a popular one – frequently employed by left-leaning contributors, here; say something because it’s what you feel, but which you cannot substantiate. Then spend endless hours arguing in circles, trying to bury a glaring lack of hard evidence to back up a tenuous position, when just a simple admission of error would not only end it, but would add so much more credibility to one’s comments on future subjects.

    After reading the link and the other documents in the appeal, it will be interesting to see if the seven people who self-identified as being a “non-citizen” claimed such to get out of jury duty or, if in fact, they were really non-citizens.

    Excellent observation/ point. One of the benefits of this approach by Respect Washington, is that it will also likely reveal fraudulent excuses used by otherwise qualified potential jurors, subjecting those persons to possible misdemeanor perjury charges. I think that’s a good thing too.

  48. BTW, kindly allow one final correction:

    There were in fact 238 individuals who “self-identified” as non-citizens, seven of whom were on the voter rolls, two of which had voted.

    HTH

  49. Clamat0, a simple presentation of fact, stated in a factual way, would not cause the anguish you claim to have over people commenting on statements that have not been proved.

    Saying that these voters are non-citizens is not yet a fact. It still has to be proved. If the letter had stated that there were 7 alleged illegal registered voters, that would have gone a long way. Or, stating that people had self-identified as non-citizens for jury duty, but had identified as citizens for voter registration would have been clearer.

    Instead it called them illegal voters, and we don’t know that as a fact. That was my entire point. We need further information before we claim voter fraud. Claiming jury fraud would have been just as invalid but just as probable.

    As I said, other states that have actually followed through with investigating these types of allegations have found little to no voter fraud.

    (And I make a distinction between actual voter fraud and fraudulent voter application efforts which are caught by existing registration methods before people are registered.)

  50. Quoting from Mr. Brown’s LTE, above:

    “We found seven noncitizens who are registered to vote here in Washington.”

    As I said, other states that have actually followed through with investigating these types of allegations have found little to no voter fraud.

    First of all, I’m not aware of many other states that have used this tactic to access proof of illegal registration and voting. But the fact is that Florida has found 96 illegal voters on their rolls as of 6/ 12/12. You may consider that “little” fraud, but I think even one case of voter fraud is too many. I think you’d agree if that one vote disenfranchised your vote – remember, voter fraud can work to the benefit of any party, any issue. This is why I don’t get the “status quo”, cavalier liberal attitude to this crime.

    Also, that total of 96, so far, resulted from some 2,600 certified letters sent out (again, so far) – the overwhelming majority of which recipients have not yet responded. Gee… I wonder why?

    But your distinction is noted and appreciated.

  51. As a cost benefit issue, the whole thing is very overdone. I think we ought to have some common sense rules and oversight, and if there is a practical, legal way to compare voter rolls with the Homeland Security or other methods that do not disenfranchise real voters, then lets go for it.

    In my mind one murder by gun is too many, but hyou don’t confiscate guns or make it impossible for people to legally own guns just because of a few people who break the law.

    You do go after militias that threaten to take down the government with firearms, and use expensive methodologies to infiltrate and make sure they are not dangerous.

    The whole outrage over a few votes that don’t make any difference to an outcome as some sort of liberal plot, so the right says we have to make sure even more people who should be able to legally vote cannot vote because of voter ID laws, is outrageous and a political gimmick.

  52. As a cost benefit issue, the whole thing is very overdone.

    Respect Washington’s work is not costing the state one red cent, so I assume you’re in favor of it.

    The whole outrage over a few votes that don’t make any difference to an outcome…

    Again with the cavalier attitude. Every fraudulent vote cast nullifies – disenfranchises, if you will – one legitimate vote, period. That’s outrageous. Murder, by whatever means, for a myriad of reasons is impossible to prevent. Not so voter fraud.

    … as some sort of liberal plot…

    Sorry, never said that. To the contrary, I pointed out that is can go either way. It’s just that the evidence of voter fraud – attempted and committed – currently seems weighted in favor of the left.

    … so the right says we have to make sure even more people who should be able to legally vote cannot vote because of voter ID laws…

    Pure hyperbole. There is no sound reason controls cannot be put in place to insure voter rolls are kept free of illegal voters (for whatever reason) without genuinely disenfranchising anyone. And if liberals are feeling a bit inputed to as regards the subject of voter fraud, perhaps it could be because of their unwavering objection(s) to common-sense efforts to eliminate it (speaking of outrageous).

  53. Clamat0, the voter ID laws that are being touted in other states are not “common sense” inexpensive laws, not for states and not for individuals.

    I take, “I don’t get the “status quo”, cavalier liberal attitude to this crime” as prettyu much saying there is some kind of liberal plot. No, there isn reason and appropriate level of concern, not the screaming memies that amny conservatives have about this.

    As I pointed out, conservatives think nothing of gun deaths in this country. Oh, just another day at the office, no need to look at appropriate restrictiions on bgun purchase laws and ramping up efforts to control weapons.

    A tiny, tiny number of possible votes that have not influenced one single election and have no way of influencing elections compared with massive fraud in Ohio voter machines being programmed to only give Republican results and other issues and massive collusion to place Bush ahead in Florida through devious political shenanigans – no comparison.

    I’m glad that you agree that we should not dienfanchise anyone. Talk to Republicans in many states, and they would totally disagree.

    If your “not one” standard were to be applied to those people who have already been disenfanchised, then why are there so many people who should be able to vote, but can’t due to Republican efforts to keep the poor, minorities and students from voting, like these examples:

    http://www.lawyerscommittee.org/page?id=0046

  54. A letter I have sent to the TNT:

    Our right to vote enables us to be a self governing country. As long as we want to stay self governing we have to start taking this right seriously. Not just by getting out to vote or becoming knowledgeable on the issues but by jealously guarding our voting systems and who is allowed to vote. To make my point lets look at another of our rights. The right to keep and bear arms. I know I would not f
    eel safe if the same care that was taken for voter registration in the last governors race was used for background checks on gun sales. If that were the case then felons, illegal aliens and deceased voters might all be eligible to make gun purchases. The point here is that voting is very important. Asking for ID and demanding that our chosen representatives ensure the security of the voting process should not even be up for debate.

    I would be very interested Tuddo where you get your information. How could you possibly know: “A tiny, tiny number of possible votes that have not influenced one single election” and if you don’t KNOW this why are you spouting it as fact? I think the answer lies with another statement you made: “As I pointed out, conservatives think nothing of gun deaths in this country.” I always hesitate to call anyone a liar but you have lied here. You in fact have told a lie about me personally. I am a conservative and I am very concerned with the gun deaths in this country. I am sorry to say that you have proven that you do not tell the truth. You spew your opinions cloaked falsely as fact and to use your turn of phrase you think nothing of the people you falsely malign.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0