OPEN LETTER TO LORETTA LYNCH, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

May 14, 2016

The Honorable Loretta Lynch
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, D.C.  20530-0001

Re:    Request for U.S. Department of Justice Investigation Into
         Legal Violations of Citizens Right To Vote And Voter Suppression
         By The Democratic and Republican Major Parties

Dear Attorney General Lynch:

The United States 2016 Presidential Election cycle has been marred with mass voter suppression, irregularities and questionable results. Please sincerely and publicly address the following issues by opening an official investigation into these matters and by using any legal means necessary to restore the rights of the citizens in the United States.

BACKGROUND
In the Iowa primary, it has been reported that over 90 precincts failed to provide the people an opportunity to vote and that the Iowa Democratic Party refused to audit the results.  

Three days ago, the New York Times reported that all precinct totals have now been accounted for, over three months after the Iowa caucus concluded and despite the Iowa Democratic Party admitting it had failed to provide official staff members to oversee these 90 precincts to legitimize these alleged voters and/or votes.

This New York Times report cites the Associated Press as their only source for Iowa’s now reported totals; except the results of the Iowa caucus still fail to be posted officially by the state of Iowa as of today. 

There is no legal precedent or authority for the Associated Press to provide official election results. There is also no explanation of how 90 precincts that were admittedly never staffed still reported.

In the Arizona primary, Maricopa County provided only 60 polling places for an estimated 800,000 registered voters.

A letter from Arizona’s Phoenix Mayor, Greg Staton, described voters having to wait for up to five hours – many of which who could no longer afford to wait to vote, and provided a breakdown of polling locations that obviously discriminated against higher minority populations (such as Latinos) who were also significantly over-represented among the rejected ballots.  These statistics clearly indicate voters were discriminated against based on their race or color.

Arizona also prohibits voter participation in presidential primaries unless voters are registered through a limited number of political parties with no provisions for voters outside these parameters - as do many other states.

Additionally, there are multiple reports that legally registered voters were denied the right to vote by mysterious changes in party affiliations and other tactics commonly referred to as “voter purging”. 

Finally, an affidavit from long-time poll worker, Dianne Post, has sworn the voting machines failed to perform correctly or provide options to allow certain registered voters of political parties the opportunity to vote.

In the New York primary, parallel events to Arizona mirrored broad scale voter suppression, including the same mass purging of registered voters and mysterious changes in party affiliations that resulted in the denial of formerly registered voters the opportunity to vote or to have their votes counted.

Despite not one but two local officials being suspended with regards to these matters and New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderrman opening an investigation, the New York Board of Elections certified the New York primary results – even though 91,000 provisional ballots were rejected and failed to be included in the final results.

Currently, it being reported that the upcoming California primary on June 7th has already been found to be exhibiting the same patterns of voter purges and voter suppression.

At least 400,000 Californian’s won’t be able to vote due to a voter registration form that was described as “written by a chimpanzee” while an additional 450,000 Californian’s have been officially purged from voter rolls that again, disproportionately affect minority areas (such as Latinos) mirroring Arizona’s minority voter dilution tactics on people of race or color.

While the aforementioned primaries are the most egregious thus far, the entire 2016 national election cycle has been marred with irregularities, suspicious processes, lack of transparency and evidence to support recorded votes, and wide scale voter suppression that includes, but is not limited to:

1)  Being unable to vote in a timely and reasonable manner, 

2)  Failure to provided sufficient equipment (such as ballots and polling places) to record        votes, 

3)  Insufficient staffing provided for the public to vote and record those votes, 

4)  Disenfranchised voters not being provided reasonable opportunities for protest at the
     lack of ability to vote and/or have their vote counted, 

5)  Voter discrimination through failing to offer all citizens the right to vote-regardless of 
     their party affiliation, and, 

6)  Officially recorded votes through provisional ballots, caucuses and similar means failing
     to be included in vote counts and totals. 


LEGAL PROTECTIONS GUARANTEEING THE PEOPLE THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND HAVE THEIR VOTES COUNTED


The Constitution
Under the U.S. Constitution, the rights of the people to vote shall not be denied or abridged for any reason as clearly described below:

U.S. Const. amend XIV § 1.  No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of the citizens of the United States…

U.S. Const. amend XV § 1.  The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

U.S. Const. amend XIX § 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

U.S. Const. amend XXIV § 1.  The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representatives in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.*

U.S. Const. amend XVI § 1.  The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.   

U.S. Const. art. IV § 4.  The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.


The Voting Rights Act
The Voting Rights Act of 1965, an Act to enforce the fifteenth amendment of the Constitution, also requires opportunities for people of color or race not be discriminated against, to be allowed to vote and to have those votes counted, including, but not limited to:  

VRA § 2 provides protections from diluting minority votes such as what occurred in Arizona (based on the lack of targeted voting opportunities describe by Mayor Staton’s request for an investigation).

VRA § 10(a)(i) precludes persons of limited means from voting or imposes unreasonable financial hardship upon such persons as a precondition to their exercise of the franchise (like Arizona voters who could not afford to wait any longer).

VRA § 10(a)(iii) in some areas has the purpose or effect of denying persons the right to vote because of race or color. (As what occurred in both Arizona and New York due to the imposition of unreasonable burdens and hardships for voters seeking remedy for the right to vote, disenfranchisement of their ability to vote and inability to have their votes counted.)

VRA § 11(a)  No person acting under color of law shall fail or refuse to permit any person to vote who is entitled to vote under any provision of this Act or is otherwise qualified to vote, or willfully fail or refuse to tabulate, count, and report such person’s vote.  (Such as occurred in, but not limited to, Iowa, Arizona and New York) 

VRA § 17  Nothing in this Act shall be construed to deny, impair, or otherwise adversely affect the right to vote of any person registered to vote under the law of and State or political subdivision.     

As is clearly stated above, the right to vote is a right and privilege granted to all citizens of the United States that shall not be denied or abridged. Constitutional amendments have been added to strengthen, not dilute the initial privileges of voting by commanding the inclusion of all genders, people of color or race and people eighteen years or older to have the opportunity to vote and have their votes counted.

There is ample evidence to support the fact that a broad range of United States citizens have been denied the right to vote, were not provided the opportunity to vote and/or have failed to have their votes counted.

While remedies to investigate and reconcile these events with individual states regarding the denial and abridgment of the citizens right to vote and have their votes counted may require lengthy and specific legal procedures, relief to the citizenry may be granted through an alternative avenue.


ENGAGEMENT AND SUPPORT FOR ILLEGAL VOTING ACTIVITIES

The Democratic and Republican parties are responsible for presenting delegates that are alleged to represent both the vote of the citizenry and for having those votes counted during the primary election cycle within their party. This is a provably false narrative.

Instead, both parties are engaged in, and conspiring to deny, the right of United States citizens to vote and to have their votes counted.

Despite the fact that both Democrat and Republican parties are clearly aware of the reported wide spread national voter suppression that has disenfranchised tens of thousands of citizens votes (if not hundreds of thousands), the parties continue to promote and support false tabulations and allege accuracy of their delegates masquerading as representatives of the public votes - as if they were committing no crime against the people’s sovereign rights.

This is not legally permissible, either under the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act, as clearly outlined below.

VRA § 12(d) When any person has engaged or there are reasonable grounds to believe that any person is about to engage in any act or practice prohibited by section 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, or subsection (b) of this section, the Attorney General may institute for the United States, or in the name of the United States, an action for preventive relief, including an application for a temporary or permanent injunction, restraining order, or other order, and including an order directed to the State and State or local election officials to require them (1) to permit persons listed under this Act to vote and (2) to count such votes.

VRA § 13(c)(1)  The terms “vote” or “voting” shall include all action necessary to make a vote effective in any primary, special, or general election, including but not limited to, registration, listing pursuant to this Act, or other action required by law prerequisite to voting, casting a ballot, and having such ballot counted properly and included in the appropriate totals of votes cast with respect to candidates for public or party office and propositions for which votes are received in an election.

The United States Constitution demands the people be protected from domestic Violence, such as those who would attempt to strip our Constitutionally guaranteed rights from us; the right to vote and have our voted counted is one of them.

We are guaranteed a Republic Form of Government across all fifty states that elevates the rights of the people above all others, including political parties such as the Democratic and Republican parties who have engaged, or are about to engage, in practices that violate this fundamental right.

As such, the Department of Justice is both empowered and required to protect the people above all else. 

In response to the gross injustices that have been, are being, or will be perpetuated against the citizens of the United States to deny and strip them of their fundamental rights, the department must do everything in its power to prevent further criminal activity by the Democratic and Republican parties.

This includes submitting applications for a temporary or permanent injunction, restraining order, or any other order deemed necessary to the prevent the parties engaging in, or are about to engage in, activities that conspire to encourage, support, and uphold national voter suppression as well as to prevent the illegitimate upholding of fraudulent vote counts and/or delegate apportionments so as to insure the integrity of the General Election to the general populace.

Specifically, one of the most forthright and immediate remedies to restoring order to the national electoral process is to restrain or file an injunction prohibiting the convening of the Democratic and Republican parties national conventions, as they intend to present delegates as representatives of the people's vote, despite obvious facts and clear evidence indicating this narrative is false.


DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES VIOLATE ANTI-TRUST LAWS

Today, U.S. registered voters are conservatively estimated at 146,311,000 but might be as high as 445,852,000Credible sources for the number of U.S. citizens currently registered to either the Democratic or Republican party could not be found.  One unverified source alleged in 2009 that there were roughly 55 million registered Republicans and 72 million Democrats. This may mean at least 127 million Americans are affected by these two parties alone, not to mention the 324 million people that comprise the rest of the U.S. population. 

In 2010, the Department of Justice filed a civil anti-trust lawsuit against Election Systems & Software (formerly Diebold) because at that time, the DOJ considered ESS to hold a monopoly on U.S. elections, which affected 1,400 jurisdictions in 33 states and nearly 28 million people.

Yet the Democratic and Republican parties currently represents registered voters that, at minimum, are over four times higher than what ESS once controlled, affecting all fifty states and jurisdictions. 

In plain language, their monopoly is presenting a far graver danger to elections in the United States, and to the citizens right to vote and to be counted, than ESS ever was.

As such, the Department of Justice has both a duty to, and is empowered with, the means to provide relief to the citizenry from these political monopolies, which have engaged, or will engage, in egregious criminal behaviors against the people of the United States.

To serve this end, it is also requested the Department of Justice begin filing civil anti-trust proceedings against the Democratic and Republican parties to demand they be broken up in efforts to promote fair competition in the electoral process.    


DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES VIOLATE RICO

It is further requested the Department of Justice open an investigation of the Democratic and Republican parties on the grounds of potential violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).

Both the Democratic and Republican parties operate under a political monopoly system of the American electoral process and easily fit within the definition of a cartel; both in the sense of a political group as well as a commercial and industrial enterprise designed to limit competition and/or fix prices. 

In this case, these political/commercial cartels have transformed from a political party to a racket that has placed “fund raising”, or the acquisition of money, above their duties and obligations as a political body.

In just one example as outlined in the recent CBS 60 Minutes segment, Dialing For Dollarselected representatives are prohibited by these monopolistic parties from performing the duties they were elected by the people to perform. Instead, our representatives are no longer free to represent us as they have been “captured” to feed the financial demands of the Democratic and Republican cartels whom demand payment to guarantee party protection. 

Both the Democratic and Republican cartels are responsible for acquiring and managing vast sums of money under their monopolistic umbrellas across all fifty states. There have been wide spread allegations that the parties use these funds to purchase and/or demand favors and require massive contributions to ensure political protection.

Opening an investigation into how far these cartels reach into obstructing Congressional duties through their demand-for-payment-for-protection programs has become essential in efforts to restore integrity to both the election process as well as ensuring the people’s representatives are allowed to perform their duties unhindered and unfettered by continuing demands for payment to the cartels.

Furthermore, allowing outside organizations of this magnitude to unduly influence and/or outright control the people’s votes and the processes and duties of government as set forth in the Constitution should be considered a national security risk of the highest order. 

Some of these risks might include, but are not limited to:

  • Demanding Democratic or Republican elected officials approve of increases in the national debt for unnecessary programs or financially burdensome laws in exchange for continued protection from the party, or financial rewards to party connected associates. 

  • Demanding Democratic or Republican elected representatives use their Congressional powers and authority to award favors, pass legislation or approve otherwise dangerous policies in efforts to appease the cartels demands for funding or to ensure party protections. 

  • Demanding political and financial support for candidates, legislation or policies from elected representative that do not support the best interest of the United States or her people as payment to ensure continued political party protection. 

  • Using undue party influence, protection and funding to subvert, coerce, intimidate, and/or obstruct the people’s elected representatives from representing the people and acting on the people’s behalf, not on the political parties behalf. 

Based on the reasons so described, the Department of Justice is urgently requested to officially and publicly respond, investigate, and report on their findings into these most pressing and serious matters, as well as to initiate any and all legal action deemed necessary to protect the people of the United States from further domestic violence and attacks on our votes, our rights and our system of government as set forth in the Constitution of the United States. 

Respectfully submitted by, 
Cindy MacDonald

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.