Will Rush Limbaugh Be Indicted for Voter Fraud?
By Steven Rosenfeld
AlterNet

Friday 21 March 2008

As Ohio election officials investigate illegal crossover voting in the 2008 primary, questions arise on Limbaugh's role.

As the board of election in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, where Cleveland is located, launches an investigation into illegal crossover voting in the state's 2008 presidential primary, a big open question remains unanswered: Will county officials go after the ringleaders of apparently illegal electioneering where thousands of Republican voters swore - under penalty of law - allegiance to the Democratic Party in order to vote for Hillary Clinton?

In case you missed it, Rush Limbaugh, the nation's top-rated talk radio host, was urging Republicans in Texas and Ohio to skip their party's primary on March 4 and instead cast a vote for Hillary Clinton in order to prolong the fight between her and Barack Obama. And that Tuesday, as media in both states reported, thousands of Republicans did just what Limbaugh and others had suggested - they changed parties to vote for Clinton.

"I want Hillary to stay in this, Laura," Limbaugh told Laura Ingraham on Feb. 29, near the start of his Hillary crusade. "This is too good a soap opera. We need Barack Obama bloodied up politically, and it's obvious that the Republicans are not going to do it and don't have the stomach for it, as you probably know."

And on Wednesday, the day after the Ohio primary, Fox News asked Clinton if she owed Limbaugh a thank you. "Be careful what you wish for, Rush," she replied. Later that day, Limbaugh played the Fox tape on his show and said, "How do you interpret this, folks? She could have said thank you. She could have said thank you! In fact, I was expecting in her victory speech last night to be thanked.

"I helped give Mrs. Clinton the biggest and happiest moment and night of the campaign season so far, maybe her life, and she tells me, "Be careful what you wish for, Rush"? Why, that sounds like a threat, does it not? I've got a Democrat presidential candidate threatening your host. Why, I am stunned! After all I did ..."

While this all makes for great talk radio and sounds like fun, there is one catch: What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio was a fifth-degree felony in that state, punishable with a $2,500 fine and six to 12 months in jail. That is because in order to change party affiliation in Ohio, voters have to fill out a form swearing allegiance to that party's principles "under penalty of election falsification."

On Thursday, March 20, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that the "Cuyahoga County Board of Election has launched an investigation that could lead to criminal charges against voters who maliciously switched parties for the March 4 presidential primary." According to the report, "One voter scribbled the following addendum to his pledge as a new Democrat: "For one day only."

"Such an admission amounts to voter fraud," the report continued, attributing that conclusion to BOE member Sandy McNair, a Democrat. The report said the four-member board - two Democrats and two Republicans - had yet to vote on whether it would issue subpoenas, although Ohio's secretary of state, Democrat Jennifer Brunner, is empowered to cast tie-breaking votes when the BOE is deadlocked.

In 2008, 2.22 million Ohioans voted in the Democratic primary, compared to 1.27 million in 2000, according to unofficial results released by Brunner's office. In contrast, 1.01 million Ohioans voted in the 2008 Republican primary, compared to nearly 918,000 people in 2004.

Both Ohio's secretary of state and attorney general, both Democrats, were reluctant to embrace the prospect of voter fraud prosecutions.

"Secretary of State Brunner has not been contacted by anyone regarding the prosecution of alleged improper crossover voting," Brunner spokesman Jeff Ortega said. "Prosecution of such activities is the exclusive domain of the county prosecutor or the Ohio attorney general."

"We will not make a blanket statement that we would never pursue a case such as that, but it would be our position that a case such as that would be very hard to prosecute," said Ted Hart, spokesman for Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann, who added that a senior attorney in his office said it would be difficult to ascertain voters' motives on particular days. "The county prosecutor would have the first right of refusal."

But Michael Slater of Project Vote, a nonpartisan group that designs voter registration drives for low-income people, said GOP meddling in the Ohio Democratic Primary was a clear-cut example of fraudulent voting, which is how Republicans have defined the issue in recent years, as GOP advocates have urged state legislatures and Congress to adopt anti-fraud measures such as tougher voter ID laws.

"Here we have a real instance of spurring people on to engage in illegal election activities with a real intent to affect the outcome," Slater said. "That is voter fraud. People were encouraged to break the law. They had to declare allegiance to a political party and sign a document under penalty of perjury. Intent is what matters in voter fraud."

For years, Republicans have literally made a federal case of voter fraud. The Bush Justice Department fired U.S. attorneys who would not prosecute cases of people who GOP politicos believed were impersonating voters to help Democratic candidates.

Voting rights groups such as ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, which registers millions of low-income people in presidential election years, have been prosecuted by U.S. attorneys for voter fraud - even after ACORN followed the law and alerted the FBI about mistakes made by its volunteers.

After 2004, Republican-controlled legislatures in Florida and Ohio passed laws, now overturned, curtailing voter registration drives under the guise of fighting voter fraud. Meanwhile, numerous states have passed new and tougher voter I.D. laws, all aimed at stopping people who purportedly were impersonating voters.

"I think this is Rush and others inspiring people to commit voter fraud," Slater said. "They should be brought under investigation."

-----------

AlterNet is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by its writers are their own.

Steven Rosenfeld is a senior fellow at Alternet.org and co-author of "What Happened in Ohio: A Documentary Record of Theft and Fraud in the 2004 Election," with Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman (The New Press, 2006).

-------

“Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of men? The Shadow knows!”

Surely the same right that allows a person to choose what to do with a pregnancy extends to what a person chooses to do with their vote.


A suit in this case would go down as a truly special kind of stupid.

-Drew

For years, Republicans have literally made a federal case of voter fraud. The Bush Justice Department fired U.S. attorneys who would not prosecute cases of people who GOP politicos believed were impersonating voters to help Democratic candidates

Considering that it is already done then I guess it is not soooooo stupid, right?

you gotta dumb it down,cause im so stupid,one time i tried to drown a fish

You and M-Man need to just get married and live in each others misery...

It's the same ole thing...

One liberal post what a nother liberal rights.

Does anyone have an orginal thought?

Wow, imagine, a moronic lawsuit--because we've never had one of those before. Come on Dragoness, this is just wrong. Who cares what a person does with a vote. Do you really care if a bunch of people pretended to like Hillary to keep her in the race? I mean, who's to say it won't backfire?

And surely you are not using what you find wrong with the way Republicans have handled voter issues to justify what is happening now? I mean, that would be using bad behavior to justify still more bad behavior.

-Drew

In truth Drew, with all the joking and razing aside. I was totally amazed the first time I heard of it. I did not know that there was "voter fraud" like this. I thought of voter fraud as lying about citizenship or identity, etc.... So I am not to sure if I think it is stupid or not. I am watching to see what happens here.

I am suprised lymbaugh still has a following after his drug abuse. It cracks me up how he used to rage against drug users and declare they all should be locked up and the key thrown away......and t hen when he is caught up in it, he takes the liberal way out and claims to be an addict and seeks treatment

It is interesting to be sure. Holy S***, we agreed on something. OK, easy now dragoness, let's not let that get out of hand :)

-Drew

In Limbaugh conservatives found a drug addict that they felt sorry for and in Limbaugh liberals found one that they showed no pity.

Who would have ever believed that Oxycontin could be so revolutionary as a political force.

-Drew

i have no respect for that hypocritical drug popping fool..


but, what kind of crap is it to deal with this as fraud. our votes are our's to do with as we wish. this is some petty bs

its probably because most drug addicts never said tis trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too.

...We are becoming too tolerant as a society, folks, especially of crime, in too many parts of the country.... This country certainly appears to be tolerant, forgive and forget. I mean, you know as well as I do, you go out and commit the worst murder in the world and you just say you're sorry, people go, "Oh, OK. A little contrition."... People say, "I feel better. He said he's sorry for it." We're becoming too tolerant, folks.

or this...

I want to let you read along with me a quote from Jerry Colangelo about substance abuse, and I think you'll find that he's very much right…"I know every expert in the world will disagree with me, but I don't buy into the disease part of it. The first time you reach for a substance you are making a choice. Every time you go back, you are making a personal choice. I feel very strongly about that."...

What he's saying is that if there's a line of cocaine here, I have to make the choice to go down and sniff it….And his point is that we are rationalizing all this irresponsibility and all the choices people are making and we're blaming not them, but society for it. All these Hollywood celebrities say the reason they're weird and bizarre is because they were abused by their parents. So we're going to pay for that kind of rehab, too, and we shouldn't. It's not our responsibility. It's up to the people who are doing it. And Colangelo is right.

all this while he is takeing enugh oxycontin to tranqualize a heard of elephants

Look, there is no way that we'll disagree too much on our failed war on drugs. But that failure is spread around both parties. No one has been able to get a plan together for that one. And you know--it is just one of those things that will forever be a losing battle. As long as there is stress and a chemical release from it, there will be users. I am all for taking a fresh look at how we've dealt with that and while I don't think we should move to stock Wal Mart shelves with Oxy for the public to consume at will I do think that it is pure idiocy to jail a guy for pot while the level 3 sex offender is let out of prison early.

Drew

I am sorry for jumping off-topic on this one. I was just sort of following the curve ball as it related to Rush.

No fear here, you will hate me again in the morning

LOL....nah, I'll just argue with you about something.

-Drew