Tag Archives: DOJ

“Advocates Worry Trump Administration Wants To Revamp Motor Voter Law”

If by “revamp Motor Voter” they mean keep voter registration rolls free of ineligible people, then yes.


Left-wing “advocates” like Demos that oppose removing ineligible people from voter rolls “worry” that two separate federal requests for information related to states’ voter registration lists signal what they see as an unwelcome return to enforcement of federal laws that require states to proactively maintain accurate voter lists. Such enforcement was nonexistent under the Obama administration.


One request, from the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, asks for states’ publicly available voter registration records. The other, from the DOJ Voting Section, requires states to document procedures they follow to maintain accurate voter lists in compliance with the National Voter Registration Act (aka Motor Voter) and the Help America Vote Act.


Both letters come in response to concerns about voter rolls that are bloated with outdated, inaccurate, and duplicate registrations. Experts estimate there may be millions of people on voter rolls who have died, moved, aren’t citizens, or are otherwise ineligible to vote.


Motor Voter adds to the problem by making it difficult to take ineligible people off the rolls, and easy for some to get on.


“When you’ve got a system that allows people to mark, ‘No, I am not a citizen,’ and still get registered to vote, that system is broken.”



DOJ sues Detroit suburb, says city’s at-large elections violate Voting Rights Act

Another lawsuit filed under Section 2 of the not-“gutted” Voting Rights Act:


The Eastpointe City Council met behind closed doors Tuesday to discuss how to respond to a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit filed against the Detroit suburb last week that claims the city’s at-large council election system, in place since 1929, “dilutes the voting strength of black citizens, in violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.”


DOJ wants to split the city into four single-member districts, with one drawn to create a black-majority district. The change would require voters to approve an amendment to the city charter.

Eastpointe City Manager Steve Duchane, who is named in the federal lawsuit along with the council, has said the city’s black residents have not formally expressed concerns, and shifting to district voting could require spending as much as $50,000 to change polling precincts, register new voters and issue new voting cards.

But fighting the DOJ lawsuit in court could cost Eastpointe taxpayers a million dollars.


Reaction from residents was mixed, and council members and the city’s attorney say they want DOJ to provide more specific information about the allegations. The city has 60 days to file a response.

“The Real Reason for the Left’s All-Out Assault on Jeff Sessions”

The institutional Left is afraid:”

Under persistent questioning, Sessions has had to defend his decision to prosecute a case of brazen voter fraud—something that was his job to do. The repeated references to this case by some senators represent just how far the civil rights industry has swerved from its honorable roots to derail a confirmation. Character assassination, false testimony, performance protests aimed at securing retweets instead of reconciliation, and more have all been trained on the Alabama senator.


The oft-referenced voter fraud case Sessions brought involved the harvesting of absentee ballots by a trio then lionized as “the Perry County Three” in the mid-1980s. These Perry County defendants faced charges for mail fraud and casting multiple ballots in a single election. They simply stole votes. They weren’t acting to further civil rights—they were committing crimes. As Sessions mentioned in his testimony, the offense was reported by local black complainants whose absentee ballots were being intercepted and voted without their consent. . . .


Contrary to what the NAACP and its friends may say otherwise, the right to vote exists with the individual, not the political machine that forces “assistance” on voters without their input. Arguing that the decision to prosecute voter fraud is itself a disqualifying offense when seeking the job of attorney general demonstrates just how perverse the modern left has become with respect to the rule of law.


The left’s highlighting of this one case demonstrates that the institutional left is afraid. They are afraid they may soon lose enormous power because the Sessions Department of Justice will no longer participate in their radical racialist agenda.

Why the Left hates soon-to-be Attorney General Jeff Sessions

The Left hates Sessions because Sessions hates voter fraud, loves the Constitution


Former DOJ Voting Section attorney J. Christian Adams joins Vicki McKenna to talk about why the Left is desperately smearing and lying to fight Senator Jeff Sessions’ Attorney General confirmation, why they fight the election integrity measures he supports, and the sorry state of the modern civil rights industry.

They hate Jeff Sessions because Jeff Sessions hates voter fraud. He prosecuted voter fraud when he was a U.S. attorney, and in the perverse world of the modern Left, that disqualifies you from being the Attorney General.


And that’s why they’re going after Jeff Sessions, because he prosecuted voter fraud in Alabama in the ’80s, and it just so happens some of the people he prosecuted were well-connected ‘civil rights leaders’ . . . they were stealing the votes of black voters,  they were going to their house, they were taking their absentee ballots, they were changing the votes.

To the modern Left, though, it doesn’t matter if black “civil rights activists” steal the votes of black voters. Prosecuting black cheaters (at the request of black candidates losing votes to the cheating) is the problem.

This goes back to the overarching narrative we see over and over and over again. . . any election integrity measure, they act as if it’s a conspiracy by Jim Crow. It’s the modern lie. it’s what the civil rights industry has become is a group of well-funded dishonest brokers. . . .


The modern Democrat Party is changing the rules of the game when it comes to elections. . . they want to change the environment so it helps them win power. . . They know Jeff Sessions opposes that. . . That’s why they hate Sessions, because Sessions loves the Constitution.

Adams says California is a great example of how you “transform a political class by transforming the electorate.”

They basically had an open system where it was a free for all. People flooded across the border, they got registered multiple times, and you saw a state completely transformed politically. . . . That’s how they plan on transforming the country. They tell you this. They tell you that they believe demographic changes will eradicate conservatism and constitutionalism. They make no secret about it. What they don’t tell you is those demographic changes are accelerated by lawlessness.

The institutional Left is spending “millions and millions and millions of dollars” funding “a giant edifice that is working to undermine the American system of elections and the rule of law,” including soon-to-be-failed efforts to block Jeff Sessions from becoming our next Attorney General.

“How black Democrats stole votes in Alabama … and Jeff Sessions tried to stop it”

Anyone who claims this was a racist prosecution by Jeff Sessions is “a liar and a political opportunist of the worst kind.” 


Another thorough debunking of the Left’s false claims that Jeff Sessions tried to suppress African-American voters in 1985 by pursuing a voter fraud prosecution in Perry County, Alabama, via Hans von Spakovsky:

A 34-page federal grand jury indictment filed on Jan. 25, 1985 lays out in great detail the actions of the Turners and Hogue in the voter fraud case. The object of the conspiracy was to elect the candidates they had “supported and endorsed.” According to the indictment, they used Evelyn Turner’s position as a notary public to witness absentee ballots falsely in furtherance of the conspiracy.


The indictment also gives the lie to the spurious claim recently made by former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, a member of the Turner/Hogue defense team. In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Patrick claims that Sessions based the case on the legal theory that it was a federal crime “for someone to help someone else to vote or to advise them how they should vote — even if and when they ask for such help.” As the indictment makes clear, that was not the theory of the case.


Neither the Turners nor Hogue were prosecuted for assisting voters. The indictment charges them with picking up absentee ballots to “open and fraudulently change those ballots that had not been marked for candidates supported and endorsed” by the defendants. They were prosecuted for allegedly casting “false, fictitious, spurious and fraudulently altered absentee ballots.”


Yet somehow, the Left would have us believe that this was a racist prosecution.

Retired former head of the Justice Department’s Election Crimes Unit Craig Donsanto, who literally wrote the DOJ’s book on “Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses,” says that “evidence in the case was overwhelming. I was there with the other assistant U.S. attorneys and not one dissented — everyone thought it was a solid case. I told Jeff Sessions to go forward with the case.”

Donsanto is highly offended by any claims that the prosecution was racist. The federal prosecutors were “trying to protect black voters who were having their votes stolen,” he notes. Moreover, the investigation was initiated only after local black voters and candidates complained to the Justice Department. . . .


As Craig Donsanto says, this was a prosecution intended to preserve and protect the right to vote, something to which he dedicated his entire professional career. Anyone who claims this was a racist prosecution by Jeff Sessions is, according to Donsanto, “a liar and a political opportunist of the worst kind.”

Sessions was right to prosecute Alabama voter fraud case

Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions was right to prosecute voter fraud while he was the U.S. attorney for southern Alabama, specifically a 1985 Perry County case of absentee ballot harvesting that saw blacks’ votes stolen by black candidates running against other black candidates in a Democratic primary (the election that matters in the heavily-Democratic area).

“Mr. Sessions should be applauded for his efforts to combat voter fraud in Alabama,” said Christian Adams, the former Justice Department lawyer and now president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation.


Mr. Sessions’ actions in a case from three decades ago is looming large as he prepares to face a confirmation hearing next week. In that case the Justice Department brought charges against several people whom the government said engaged in absentee ballot fraud, harvesting ballots from absentee voters and then filling them in themselves. All of those involved — the voters and the accused — were black.

letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee from Deval Patrick, who defended one of the Perry County Three as a lawyer for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and later served as assistant attorney general for the DOJ Civil Rights Division, is ginning up a smear campaign against Sessions. In it, Patrick claims that the “theory of Mr. Sessions’ case was that it is a federal crime for someone to help someone else to vote” and that the prosecution was an “attempt to criminalize voter assistance.”


Squarely wrong, says Adams, who worked similar cases as a DOJ Voting Section attorney.


In his own letter to the Committee, Adams exposes Patrick’s legal and factual errors and omissions, along with Patrick’s “most incendiary and unfair allegation” that “it constitutes voter intimidation to prosecute voter fraud.”

Far from being some noble endeavor couched in civil rights, these absentee ballot activities steal votes by stripping the will of the voter away and giving it to a corrupt political enterprise. Far from being an exercise in voter intimidation, prosecution of these crimes by federal officials is essential to preserving the right to vote and the integrity of our elections. Mr. Patrick is squarely wrong when he says otherwise.


The right to vote means the right to vote of the voter, not the right of a political machine to force assistance on voters or mark the ballot for them without the voter’s input. And it certainly does not mean the right to alter the ballot of a voter against the will of the voter, which was the central charge brought by Mr. Sessions in the Perry County case. Mr. Sessions should be praised for pressing these prosecutions–not criticized. Indeed, you will see below that after Mr. Sessions’ prosecutorial efforts in the 1980’s, criminality surrounding elections in this part of Alabama only grew worse – and with it the wholesale disenfranchisement of African-American voters by a corrupt political machine.

Liars on the Left are Attacking Jeff Sessions

Pray for Jeff Sessions:

Everyone who believes in prayer should say some for attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions. Senator Sessions is experiencing the full wrath of the worst hateful lies that the modern Left and Democrat Party can conjure. Lies, half-truths, and smears have become the strategy to attack his nomination.

The age of Obama has seen the rise of bricks-and-mortar operations with deep cash reserves designed to permanently transform the nation, and the Justice Department has been ground zero. That’s why Jeff Sessions is the perfect pick for attorney general, and that’s why the liars on the Left are willing to smear this good man.

One source of smears and half-truths is Deval Patrick who, as a former assistant attorney general for Civil Rights at the Justice Department, should know better.

Mr. Patrick sent this disgraceful letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee seeking to derail the Sessions nomination. It claimed that when Mr. Sessions prosecuted a case of brazen voter fraud, he actually engaged in voter intimidation. . . .

The letter omits key facts and distorts others.

Mr. Patrick makes the implausible claim that the “theory of Mr. Sessions’ case was that it was a federal crime for someone to help someone else vote or to advise them how to vote.” Mr. Patrick must not have read the actual indictment very carefully in the Alabama case from the 1980s. It clearly alleged that fraudulent absentee ballots were being mailed and that alleged political operatives were casting multiple ballots in the names of absentee voters.

But Patrick’s letter is standard procedure — reframe efforts to stop voter fraud as violations of civil rights. They oppose Jeff Sessions for attorney general because he fights voter fraud, period.

In response, former Justice Department Voting Section attorney J. Christian Adams sent the Judiciary Committee this letter replying to Mr. Patrick’s claims:

The right to vote means the right to vote of the voter, not the right of a political machine to force assistance on voters or mark the ballot for them without the voter’s input. And it certainly does not mean the right to alter the ballot of a voter against the will of the voter, which was the central charge brought by Mr. Sessions in the Perry County case.

Mr. Sessions should be praised for pressing these prosecutions — not criticized.

“Former DOJ Attorney: Sessions Faces ‘Nest of Vipers’ If Confirmed as Attorney General”

The next AG will be trying to roll back fundamental transformation “in a nest of vipers:”

On a recent episode of Radio Stranahan, election law expert and author J. Christian Adams—who served in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice under President George W. Bush—went over the immense challenges that the incoming Attorney General will face from what he calls “intransigent bureaucrats” and people talking like they’re “the smartest people in the room.”

What Trump’s Attorney General Will Face

“It’s a game of whack-a-nut.”


J. Christian Adams on Radio Stranahan earlier this month talks about the challenges the next Attorney General will face, starting with an army of intransient Justice Department bureaucrats and lawyers working against him who don’t want to enforce or change the law:

To manage a group of eight or nine hundred radicals [in the Civil Rights Division], Jeff Sessions will have eight people. That’s it… it’s a game of whack-a-nut. These eight people essentially are going to be spending all their time trying to roll back the fundamental transformation in a nest of vipers. It’s going to be extremely difficult to do.

The radical leftovers from Obama’s DOJ will be aided by their allies in the institutional Left:

That’s what makes it a fearsome task, because the Obama administration recognized that the Justice Department was ground zero for the fundamental transformation. That’s why they put a radical like Holder in who did not care about criticism from any direction. He did not care. It emboldened him. And that’s why Obama was able to do so much. The Civil Rights Division – it’s not just immigration, it’s police, voting, schools, transgender, hiring practices, education. . . It’s not just voting, it’s everything. The Civil Rights Division touches more parts of American life than any federal agency.

Listen to the full interview here, starting at the 30:10 mark.