Election Fraud & Voter Fraud Are Two Different Criminal Beasts!

The difference between voter fraud and election fraud

Since it looks like the topic may be a recurring theme for us, we may do well to understand the difference between voter fraud and election fraud.

When you hear “We have no reason to believe that voter fraud in (Maine, Nevada etc) had any affect on the outcome”, it may be true …election fraud though, now thats a whole different subject.

  1. Breaking > Judicial Watch Launches Nation Wide ~ “The 2012 Election Integrity Project”

Voter fraud involves individual voters. Illegal immigrants voting or registered voters voting more than once are both examples of voter fraud.

Election fraud involves candidates and/or parties trying to illegally influence the outcome of an election. This kind of fraud can include ballot stuffing, manipulating results, voter suppression and disenfranchisement.

This is the kind of fraud we are most concerned about.

Daily Paul

The following are quotes taken from a Maine Blog, where there are many eyewitness accounts of the vote total not being correct in their caucus results that were reported from Maine GOP, please follow the links to see many more…

  1. Banking Cabal Struggles Desperately To Create The Fascist World Government While Multiple Criminal Investigations Zero In On Them!
  2. Red Flag Romney ~ Mitt Romney Receives More Endorsements Than Any Other Candidate ~ From The Lowest Approved Congress In History: This Should Be A ‘BIG RED FLAG’ For Everyone!

“I’m not sure how acurate the announced count is in reality. My town had 4 votes: 2 Santorum, 1 Romney and 1 other (that was me). Yet the tally in the state news release shows only 3 votes: 2 Santorum, 1 Romney and claimsthere were zero other. And I know for fact the state got our total because I was the one who called it into Michelle from the caucus. I wonder how accurate these counts were for other towns, based on the evidence of the announced tally for my town.” #19

“After reviewing the totals, I know of at least one error in my town. I wrote in the name of someone other than Romney, Paul, Santorum or Gingrich – and the totals for “other” in my town show 0. I know for a fact that there was at least one “other” vote, because I cast it.”


“Matt Deckers of Franklin, a volunteer for the Republican Party, carries a Ron Paul sign out of Troy Howard Middle School in Belfast after a countywide caucus on Feb. 4. Paul won the event by a small margin, but the results were not included in statewide tallies.”


**Update with some election law FACTS straight from Maine Government’s website www.maine.gov/portal/government/edemocracy/elections_faq

[Please note, as you can see if you follow the link, this may not apply directly to election fraud, but I am pretty sure the process is the same, go to your secretary of state and ask then file a petition.]

Citizen Initiatives
What are the laws governing the citizen initiative process?

The Maine Constitution, in Article IV, Part Third, sections 17, 18, 19, 20 and 22, provide the basic requirements for the statewide citizen initiative and people’s veto process. The Maine Election law, 21-A M.R.S.A., Chapter 11, Ballot Questions (sections 901 – 907), provides additional requirements for the Secretary of State in processing applications and drafting the ballot questions for citizen initiatives and people’s vetoes. The election page of the Secretary of State’s website provides additional information on the initiative process.

  1. Banker’s GOP Establishment Running Scared Of Ron Paul’s Message Of Liberty: Ron Paul Campaign Declares War on GOP RINOs
  2. 3 DNC Chair Associates Indicted On Election Law Violations: The New Charges Are All Felonies.
  3. U.S. ‘Ashamed’ Of Gorbachev Lies: Putin Pulling Russia ‘Back Into the Past’ ~ Truth Is ~ Putin Kicked Out Rothschild From Russia And Is Now Sovereign!

How does someone start a citizen initiative petition?

Six Maine registered voters (the “proponents”) submit an application to the Secretary of State for a citizen initiative, along with a draft of the statutory language they wish to adopt or amend.
This only applies to residents of Maine, that are registered to vote, and I believe must have voted in the caucuses (in order to have substantial standing to file)
Maine Recount Procedures found athttp://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/21-A/title21-…

§737-A. Recount

Once a recount is requested, the Secretary of State shall notify the State Police, who shall take physical control of all ballots and related materials involved in the recount as soon as possible. [2007, c. 515, §8 (AMD).]

The State Police shall store and maintain exclusive control over the ballots and other materials pending and during the recount except when the counting is being conducted by the Secretary of State. [1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF).]

A candidate who is the apparent loser and who desires a recount must file with the Secretary of State a written request for a recount within 5 business days after the election. The recount is held under the supervision of the Secretary of State, who shall allow the candidate’s representatives or counsel to recount the ballots. The candidate may not act as a counter of ballots. [2007, c. 515, §9 (AMD).]

If, after the official tabulation is submitted to the Governor, the apparent winner is determined the losing candidate, that candidate may request another recount within 3 business days after the date the Governor receives the tabulation. [1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF).]

Deposit for recount. All deposits required by this section must be made with the Secretary of State when a recount is requested by a losing candidate or an undeclared write-in candidate. Once the State Police have taken custody of the ballots and other election materials from the municipalities, the deposit made by the candidate requesting the recount is forfeited to the State if the resulting count fails to change the outcome of the election. If the recount reverses the election, the deposit must be returned to the candidate requesting the recount. The amount of the deposit is calculated as follows.

If the percentage difference shown by the official tabulation between the leading candidate and the requesting candidate is 2% or less of the total votes cast for that office, a deposit is not required. [2003, c. 447, §25 (AMD).]

If the percentage difference shown by the official tabulation between the leading candidate and the requesting candidate is more than 2% and less than or equal to 4% of the total votes cast for that office, the deposit is $500. [2003, c. 447, §25 (AMD).]

If the percentage difference shown by the official tabulation between the leading candidate and the requesting candidate is more than 4% and less than or equal to 6% of the total votes cast for that office, the deposit is $1,000. [2003, c. 447, §25 (AMD).]

If the percentage difference shown by the official tabulation between the leading candidate and the requesting candidate is more than 6% and less than or equal to 8% of the total votes cast for that office, the deposit is $2,500. [2003, c. 447, §25 (NEW).]

If the percentage difference shown by the official tabulation between the leading candidate and the requesting candidate is more than 8% and less than or equal to 10% of the total votes cast for that office, the deposit is $5,000. [2003, c. 447, §25 (NEW).]

If the percentage difference shown by the official tabulation between the leading candidate and the requesting candidate is more than 10% of the total votes cast for that office, the deposit is $10,000. [2003, c. 447, §25 (NEW).]
[ 2009, c. 253, §42 (AMD) .]
2. Recount request. If a ballot contains the names of state and local candidates or questions, the Secretary of State shall determine which requests for recount must be honored first when more than one request is presented.
[ 1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF) .]

Recount for write-in candidates. For the purposes of this section, a declared write-in candidate who has complied with the requirements of section 722-A is treated the same as any candidate whose name is printed on the ballot. An undeclared write-in candidate also may request a recount and be treated as a designated recount candidate, but only upon first submitting a written request for a recount that must contain a statement signed by the candidate that the candidate will accept the nomination. The consent must contain a declaration of the candidate’s place of residence and party designation and a statement that the candidate meets the qualifications of the office the write-in candidate seeks, which the candidate must verify by oath or affirmation before a notary public or other person authorized by law to administer oaths or affirmations that the declaration is true. The undeclared write-in candidate must submit a $10,000 deposit. If the recount fails to reverse the outcome of the election, the undeclared candidate must also pay the actual cost of the recount, as determined by the Secretary of State.
[ 2009, c. 253, §43 (NEW) .]

Notice of recount. The Secretary of State shall send written notice of a recount to the candidates for the office in question, stating the time and place of the recount.
[ 1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF) .]

Time of recount and designated recount candidates. The recount must be held as soon as reasonably possible at a time and place that affords the designated recount candidates a reasonable opportunity to be present. For purposes of this section, “the designated recount candidates” means the leading candidate and each candidate who has requested a recount and paid the applicable fee in accordance with this section. The recount involves a new count of the results for the designated recount candidates only. Once a candidate has requested a recount, the other candidates for that elective office must be notified of the request as soon as possible. Candidates for that elective office whose vote totals fall between the totals of the leading candidate and the requesting candidate must be provided with an opportunity to be included in the recount as a designated recount candidate by making a written request to join the recount and paying the applicable fee, either within 5 business days after the election or, if the recount request is made on the last day of that period, by the close of business on the next business day. Candidates for that elective office other than the designated recount candidates may be present to observe the recount but are not included in the recount, and their vote totals remain as indicated in the official results reported by the municipalities.
[ 2003, c. 447, §26 (AMD) .]

Persons prohibited from working at recount. Confidential state employees, employees of the Legislature, candidates and elected state officials may not participate in ballot recounts in any capacity. This subsection does not prohibit employees within the Department of the Secretary of State, election officials and staff of the Department of the Attorney General and the Judicial Department from performing their duties with respect to a recount.
[ 1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF) .]

List of recount personnel. The Secretary of State shall maintain a list of recount personnel for 2 years after the recount.
[ 1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF) .]

Disputed ballots segregated. At the recount, the Secretary of State shall segregate disputed ballots. Disputed ballots that are not resolved must be photocopied by a representative of the Secretary of State. The photocopy of the ballot is not a public record and must be kept separate from the original ballots.
When a recount is requested by a write-in candidate who did not receive the minimum number of votes required, if the write-in candidate is the only candidate at the recount and it appears from the recount that a sufficient number of votes for that candidate has been received at the election, then all ballots from that election are considered “disputed.”
[ 1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF) .]

Mistake in ballot count. If it is found that a mistake was made in counting the ballots on election day, or if the recount results show that an undeclared write-in candidate received votes for a particular office, the Secretary of State shall submit a corrected tabulation to the Governor.
[ 2009, c. 253, §44 (AMD) .]

Package resealed and marked. After a recount, if the election remains in dispute, the Secretary of State shall copy the incoming voting list, before proceeding to reseal the packages of ballots and incoming voting lists, noting the fact and date of the recount on the packages. The Secretary of State shall immediately send or deliver the copy of the incoming voting list to the clerk for the purpose of updating voter participation history in the central voter registration system. The clerk shall immediately send a receipt to the Secretary of State noting the date and time of delivery of the copy. All challenged and disputed ballots must be packaged separately. The challenged and disputed ballots must be kept until released to the court or to the Senate or the House of Representatives, if applicable, in case of an appeal.
[ 2009, c. 253, §45 (AMD) .]

Appeals. For all elections, except for the Senate and the House of Representatives, if there are enough challenged or disputed ballots to affect the result of an election, the Secretary of State shall forward the ballots and related records for that election to the clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court. The Supreme Judicial Court shall determine the result of the election pursuant to procedures adopted by court rule. The decision of the Supreme Judicial Court is final and must be certified to the Governor by the Chief Justice.
For all elections to the Senate and the House of Representatives, each House shall establish procedures for recount appeals.
[ 1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF) .]

Withdrawal from recount. A candidate who requests and receives a recount may withdraw from the recount at any time while the recount shows that candidate to be the loser. If, during the recount, the candidate requesting the recount overtakes and passes the candidate who initially appeared to win the election, the candidate requesting the recount may not withdraw the request and the recount must be completed.
[ 1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW); 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF) .]

Authority to adopt rules. The Secretary of State is authorized to adopt rules governing the conduct and procedures for a recount. Rules adopted pursuant to this subsection are routine technical rules as defined in Title 5, chapter 375, subchapter 2-A.
[ 2009, c. 253, §46 (NEW) .]
1993, c. 473, §31 (NEW). 1993, c. 473, §46 (AFF). 1995, c. 459, §§67,68 (AMD). 1999, c. 426, §§27,28 (AMD). 2003, c. 447, §§25-27 (AMD). 2005, c. 453, §58 (AMD). 2007, c. 515, §§7-9 (AMD). 2009, c. 253, §§41-46 (AMD).

Submitted by chris_ciwi on Tue, 02/14/2012 – 07:12

Daily Paul


“Those who cast the votes decide nothing.
Those who count the votes decide everything


What you didn’t hear:  Acorn leader convicted of Vote Fraud!

While the news cycle has been dominated for the last four days with the aftermath of the Tuscon shooting, one very important story is not out there, or at least not out there with significant coverage.

An executive with ACORN has been convicted of voter fraud in Nevada.   Amy Adele Busefink was convicted of voter fraud in Las Vegas.  She was given a two year sentence, which was regrettably, suspended.

In 2008, Busefink ran Acorn’s voter registration drive in Nevada.  Nevada officials threw out an amazing 400,000  bogus registrations ACORN had submitted.  To put this into perspective, the 2009 population of Nevada, was 2.6 million!  Those kind of numbers can mean a huge impact in an election.  ACORN darling Harry Reid barely won re-election and you have to wonder how many fraudulent ACORN votes were delivered for Reid and if those votes were his margin of victory.

This type of electoral fraud and the absolute scale of it scream that all involved should be put in jail.  However, ACORN voter fraud is always to the benefit of Democrats and Busefink was lucky enough to be in front of a, you guessed it, Democrat Judge for sentencing.   Judge Donald Mosley is a member of the Clark County Democratic Party. He has also had his own ethical campaign issues.

What is even more shocking is that Busefink, after being charged with voter fraud for her activities in 2008, then in 2010, she ran the national vote drive for Project Vote, which is an alter ego of ACORN.   Guess who else used to work for Project Vote?  None other than Barack Obama.

Busefink is not the first ACORN employee to be convicted.  The Las Vegas field director was and ACORN itself, even though it has filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy, will be tried on these charges in April.   Do not expect a lot of media coverage on that one either.

There are two real scandals here.  The first is why a group like ACORN has continued to be able to receive tax dollars for anything. ACORN’s antics have been well known, yet over the last two decades, under both Republican and Democrat administrations, they have continued to feed at the tax payer trough.

The second and biggest scandal here is why groups like ACORN and Project Vote are allowed to do voter registrations at all.  Leftist groups have developed a strategy of filing massive numbers of voter registrations at the last minute, overwhelming the ability of local election boards to verify the applications.  Last year, in both Colorado and Arizona, election offices were bombarded last minute registrations.  In Arizona, at least one in four was fraudulent and probably would have found more if they had time.

As conservatives fight back and take the country back from the Socialists, one of the our top agenda items needs to be repeal of the laws that enable these liberal groups to engage in massive voter fraud.

The question will be, will our newly elected leaders have the backbone for the fight?

Barney Frank’s Days Of Rage: States FORCED To Cut Back DUE To Barney Frank SITTING On Glass Steagall Act!

London’s New World Order Federal Reserve: Backstabbing Of The Middle East Arabs ~ Their End Game Hopes!




Josef Stalin (1879-1953)

As the below selection of links clearly shows, the Stalin vote quote is one that is quickly gaining in popularity with news media–both “mainstream” and independent. And yet it is a quote that’s source and authenticity are often disputed. While a primary source showing its origin has not yet appeared, in modern times it first appeared–as far as we know–in 1996 on Network USA.org, a  website of the Citizens for a Fair Vote Count that was a forerunner of Votefraud.org. The following Network America e-wire, which is from 2000 and begins with mention of Rush Limbaugh’s use of the quote, has a exchange between CFVC’s Jim Condit Jr. and Bruce Levy of the Wall Street Journal that goes into how we came across the quote. Rush Limbaugh quotes Stalin!

Despite the lack of certainty concerning it, there are still reasons to believe it could be a real remark from the dictator, reasons that are explored in the first two links below. (If anyone can provide more information about this quote, we would greatly appreciate it.) But no matter where the quote originated, it still speaks an important truth–a truth that it is all the more crucial people understand today, when e-voting threatens to remove forever the possibility of a transparent, verifiable vote count.

Film of Stalin voting shown on AMC
Jim Condit Jr. defends the possible legitimacy of the quote.

Is the Stalin quote an ‘urban legend’?
A balanced examination of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the attribution.

Voting results’ accuracy questioned; democracy demands that we do so
A independent news source suspects that election fraud occurred and cites a variation of the Stalin quote to bolster its argument.

Restoring trust in the vote
From Guerilla News Network, columnist Thom Hartmann raises questions about election irregularities and mentions Russ Limbaugh’s use of the quote after the 2000 election.

Theft or stupidity
Yet another post-election vote fraud editorial from Portland State Vanguard student paper recalls the dictator’s dictum.

‘Uncivil war’ against U.S. democracy
A citing from Japan, with a relevant punch line at the end.

You can count on this: Dispute over vote tally
Just days before the election,  the International Herald Tribune carried this article by Roger Cohen that opens with the quote.

Vote fraud lives
Stalin makes an appearance in a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review editorial.

Computerized voting is just a gateway to fraud
In this op-ed piece from the Michigan Technical University’s site, a paraphrase is used to point up the dangers of e-voting.

Quotes from Illuminists
Here Stalin’s pronouncement shows up among the  likes of statements by Lenin, Trotsky, George Bush, Albert Pike, David Rockefeller and other conspiratorial sorts–and another provocative one on voting by Stalin himself.

Who counts the votes?
The Hartford Advocate’s Alan Bisbort  uses a variation of the Stalin quote to open and close this column from April about Diebold, the Help America Vote Act and the 2004 election.

New voting machines: Will your vote be counted?
One of many relevant  vote fraud quotes from Intervention Magazine.

Election 2000: The court rulings
Attorney Alan Dershowitz dusts off Uncle Joe’s quip in this Court TV interview.

Living in a parallel universe
While many of the sources using the Stalin quote level it at Republicans, here the tables are turned in this World Net Daily column from after the 2000 election.

Rush Limbaugh quotes Stalin
Another pro-Bush spin from 2000.

Albert Gore’s campaign manager
An illustrated swipe at Al Gore and the Democrats.

Does your vote really count?
Lengthy article from the New American that also includes Boss Tweed’s similar, but far blunter, quote: “As long as I count the votes, what are you going to do about it?”


vote fraud

  1. Newt Gingrich Committed Massive Voter Fraud! (According to GOP/Fox ‘News’ ACORN Standards) (bradblog.com)
  2. RealClearPolitics – Why Americans Support Voter ID Laws (gds44.wordpress.com)
  3. United States Conference Of Catholic Bishops Permanently Defunds & Rebukes ACORN! What Is Taking Congress So Long To Investigate Soros, Obama, & ACORN (politicalvelcraft.org)
  4. ACORN is back and may partner with Justice Department in 2012 (examiner.com)
  5. Watch Out for Democrat Voter Fraud in 2012 (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
  6. For 2012, Be Wary of Obama’s Ties to Corrupt Project Vote (ACORN affiliate= voter fraud.) (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
  7. Judicial Watch Sues Obama Administration For Solyndra Records. (politicalvelcraft.org)
  8. You: Protesters in Moscow brace up for another massive rally against vote fraud (washingtonpost.com)
  9. Related articles
  10. Maine GOP Commits Massive Election Fraud in State Caucuses; Paul Supporters Justifiably Outraged (bradblog.com)
  11. Indiana’s Republican Secretary of State Convicted for Voter Fraud (firedoglake.com)
  12. Voter Fraud News: Indiana GOP Secretary of State “Ineligible to Serve” (my.firedoglake.com)
  13. Maine Kills Voter ID Law (lezgetreal.com)
  14. ALEC-Enabled Voter Suppression Amendment in Dire Danger of Going on 2012 Ballot in Minnesota (firedoglake.com)
  15. McCain And The List Of The Other Belligerent 54 Corrupt Senators ~ Who Blocked Removal Of Language Detaining Americans In The NDAA Bill.
  16. BREAKING => Two New States Massachusetts And Obama’s Very Own Illinois Challenge Barrack’s Official Ballot Eligibility.
  17. How The Council On Foreign Relations Uses Herman Cain To Polarize America Into Forgetting What Its Really All About ~ The Constitution!
  18. Allegations Of Rampant Voter Fraud In Maine! Share This! (disclose.tv)
  19. Ron Paul super PAC prepares effort to combat election fraud | The State Column (worldwright.wordpress.com)
  20. Election Fraud Proven In Indiana (pinkbananaworld.com)
  21. O’Keefe’s Latest Fraudulent ‘Voter Fraud’ Video Even More Fraudulent Than We Originally Reported (bradblog.com)
  22. EXCLUSIVE: Virginia Officials Confirm Criminal Election Fraud Investigation of Gingrich Campaign (bradblog.com)
  23. Another GOP Official Commits Election Fraud (mykeystrokes.com)
  24. Ind. election chief’s voter fraud trial nears end (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
  25. The Voter Fraud Fraud (loyalopposition.blogs.nytimes.com)
  26. After Voters Reject One Voter Suppression Measure, Maine GOP Moves On To Another (thinkprogress.org)
  27. RON PAUL Maine @ 36% 2nd Place 194 votes from Mitt & WINS 10 DELEGATES ! (teapartywpbfl.wordpress.com)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s