Democrats Sue Trump And GOP For Voter Intimidation

Roll Call reports:

Democrats have filed lawsuits against the Donald J. Trump campaign and other Republicans to stop potential voter intimidation at the polls in four battleground states. The complaints — filed Sunday by state Democratic parties in Nevada, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Arizona — came nine days before the presidential election and allege a “coordinated campaign of vigilante voter intimidation” that violates the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Klu Klux Klan Act of 1871, which bans private conspiracies to intimidate or threaten voters.

They ask the court to stop “exit polling” and “citizen journalist” activities at election sites by the state Republican parties, the Trump campaign, longtime Trump adviser Roger J. Stone and a group called Stop the Steal Inc. formed by Stone. “Trump’s calls for unlawful intimidation have grown louder and louder, and the conspiracy to harass and threaten voters on Election Day has already resulted in acts that threaten the voting rights of registered Pennsylvania voters,” the Pennsylvania complaint states.

More than 23 million people across the country have already cast absentee ballots or voted early in person, according to the non-partisan United States Election Project. The lawsuits cite an unnamed official’s comments to Bloomberg News on Oct. 27 that the Trump campaign has three voter suppression operations that target African-Americans and other groups. And the Democrats allege Trump supporters have pledged to go to certain polling places with minority voters and interfere.

  • JT

    If only this had been done with Hitler, history might have been different.

  • Good. We’re going to have one hell of a mess to clean up after Nov 8.

    How about we start with a NATIONAL voting rights act, covering the entire country and setting poll access standards for every state and territory?

    • Chucktech

      Absolutely. All we need to do is take the White House and both houses of Congress.. Easy Peazy.

      • RoFaWh

        A more realistic fantasy: require all elected officials to put their assets into blind trusts the day they take office.

        • J Ascher

          Public officials must also be prohibited from serving in any capacity on a political campaign other than their own.

          • Jessicaeandrews1

            Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj212d:
            On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
            ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash212ShopMagazineGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj212d:….,……..

    • bambinoitaliano

      It calls for stiff penalty not only the amount fine but mandatory minimum jailing time of one year when caught.

    • Christopher

      And let’s make voting mandatory as well.

      • Chucktech

        Terrible idea. People who don’t give a shit about voting know nothing about governance, care nothing about governance and would be just punching in random names. You can’t make people have an informed opinion.

        • Christopher

          One could hope that if everyone were required to vote, then maybe even more people might take it seriously.

          Or they may do exactly as you say. We’ll never know.

        • vorpal

          I’m not for or against it, really, as I haven’t read enough either for or against it… but in a mandatory voting scenario, people should have the option of showing up and submitting an empty ballot if they so choose.

          Australia has mandatory voting and my Australian friends all seem to be big fans.

          Regardless, I think we need to modernize voting in order to make voting more appealing to younger voters. I know that there are many security challenges in doing so, but I would like to see online voting made somehow possible.

          • Chucktech

            I used to be a HUGE fan of the idea of online voting. Hell, we do on line banking, online government functions (drivers license, tax paying, etc.) , on line lots of stuff. Now, we have all this bullshit from Russia. Now I’m not so sanguine about it.

          • vorpal

            Understood 100%.

            There is so much risk already in person, and that risk increases dramatically online, so the hesitation is a good thing. I just think we need to investigate this as a possibility and find ways to make it secure. It’ll be an advance, at least, in terms of security, even if it isn’t ever implemented.

            (And yes, I have had credit card fraud before, so I appreciate the cautiousness.)

      • How about instead we offer $20, cash, to everyone who votes? A reward rather than a penalty.

        • Christopher

          Bribing people for doing their civic duty just seems wrong.

          But you may be onto something there. We no longer live in a world where people do the right thing just to do the right thing. Everyone needs to “get something” these days.

          What that “something” SHOULD be is a functioning government with rational, smart, and compassionate individuals ACTUALLY representing the people who elected them.

          • Xuuths

            And it’s illegal.

        • BobSF_94117

          Finally! A way to generate all that previously non-existent voter fraud the GOP keeps whining about…

        • ETownCanuck

          Instead of cash, what if there were a tax deduction for it…say, if you can show proof that you voted you get a $20 deduction on your federal income taxes?

          • RoFaWh

            There’s one very good reason to favor BeccaM’s proposal over yours. Her proposal makes it easy to answer the question “how much is this program costing?”, whereas a deduction, especially if it’s from income, not taxes payable, is much harder to summarize because you don’t necessarily know what the applicable marginal tax rate was.

      • No, I do not think it is a good idea to fuck with the vote. In 1979, I met a guy in a bar fresh back from ‘in country’; his idea was you don’t get to vote unless you have killed someone. He was a pilot and only killed people from a distance.

        • marshlc

          What possible rationale could there be for that stance? It seems to me that if you’re gonna base the right to vote on matters of life and death, it would be better to say that you can’t vote unless you have given birth to someone, or saved someone’s life.

          Though if I had to justify that stance, I doubt if I could come up with a reason – the entire concept is nonsense.

          • There is a certain mind set that believes if you have not killed anyone to protect your country, you have not earned the right to vote – taken almost directly from dickwad Heinlein’s Starship Troopers.

        • HanyBaal

          “Service Guarantees Citizenship” wasn’t that the quote from
          Starship Troopers?

          • I was at a local SCI-FI con back in the late 70s; the guy talking went on and on about shit (something about twisting nipples in one of his books) – I turned on my heel and said “what a sexist asshole”, the guy next to me said (with all the awe a geek can have) “But, but – that is Bob Heinlein!”.
            I think it was his book “Beyond This Horizon” that first stated “an armed society is a polite society” – the same book had a dad beat his kid silly ‘for talking in the men’s room’.

          • McSwagg

            an armed society is a polite society

            I call bullshit on this idea. Texas is armed to the teeth with open carry laws and road rage is epidemic.

          • It was such a stupid idea but the libertarians were so in love with Lazarus Long and his aphorisms that it made sense in their narrow minds. It is the Libertarian ideal; nothing they espouse actually works in the real world.

      • Hank

        When I lived in Belgium, I learned, that voting was indeed MANDATORY!!! I have no idea as to how it was/is enforced, however it is a law that we indeed need!

        • ChrisMorley

          Belgium, the country where it took very much more than a year [541 days] after the 2010 general election to form a government because the French speaking Walloons loath the Flemish [Dutch dialect] speakers in Flanders and everyone hates the people in the capital Brussels. [slightly simplified]

          They had to reform the constitution 6 times in an attempt to make the country even vaguely governable.
          After the 2014 general election it only took 5 months to form a government.

    • NancyP

      We said that after the 2000 election, and ended up with a crappy law.

    • Richard, another Canuck

      Then bring back the Fairness Doctrine and set National Education Standards.

  • Brooklyn Joe

    wow – good for them – calling out the strong-arming

  • RainbowPhoenix

    They just need to show the recordings of Trump telling his tools to do exactly that.

  • Herald

    This is good, my question does this kind of suit have any teeth to it?

    • Sam_Handwich

      seems more like laying groundwork in the event that intimidation does occur

      • Herald

        That is what I thought. It would be nice if it did some good this election!

  • bkmn

    More please. It should be an open and shut case.

  • Lazycrockett

    Serves you right RNC. Serves you right.

  • moebym
    • LackofFaithify

      Well, I mean, maybe if they are really hot… 😛

      • moebym

        Or laughing hysterically.

      • Gerry Fisher

        Slut! (Hello, Kettle. I’m the pot.)

    • RoFaWh

      Uh oh. Look out. She’s wearing pearls and sunglasses.

      • Maggie 4NoH8

        AND, power pants. Don’t forget the power pants.

  • AW
  • saucetin

    Sue his shitty, shitty self and turn that tactic back on the man.

  • Sam_Handwich
    • Christopher

      Don’t forget about a teeny tiny foil hat for the olive. Can’t be too careful these days.

  • Rex

    Trump want’s to make America great again.
    Look at what he’s done to it so far.

  • bambinoitaliano
    • DonnaLee

      Oh to be able to vote more than once for this….

  • Viod Null

    Smart people have voted early and thus will not be shot dead at the pols by god loving Christians protecting Trump from ‘Hillary Voters’. (read ‘*’ as non-whites and non-heterosexuals.)

  • bambinoitaliano
    • Treant

      The comments are classic. Apparently, releasing bad info about Hillary = Honest. Refusing to release Trump info also equals Honest.

    • BobSF_94117

      I wasn’t aware the Russians were running for office…

    • Gerry Fisher


    • HanyBaal

      Trump or RWNJ’s must have something on him

  • Michael Smith

    So this sounds rather hypocritical:

    • SoCalGal20

      Just a bit!

    • JCF

      …because everyone already knows “Russians = Trump”, and vice-versa. Does Putin own Comey’s arse too?

  • JT

    Speaking of abuse of power

    James Comey has been abusing his power for years

    FBI director James Comey set off a torrent of criticism
    late last week when he directly inserted himself into the presidential
    campaign with a vague letter to Congress about the reopening of Clinton
    email case. His conduct has shocked many observers across the political
    spectrum, but the only thing truly surprising about this episode is that
    people are only now realizing how power-hungry and dangerous Comey
    actually is.

    During his stints in the Bush and Obama administration Comey has
    continually taken authoritarian and factually dubious public stances
    both at odds with responsible public policy and sometimes the law. The
    Clinton case is not an aberration, it’s part of a clear pattern.

    • Herald

      Just like trump it appears that Comey will not stand up to the light being shone his way. GOOD!

  • SoCalGal20

    And the hits just keep coming for Comey. Goddamn.

    Edit: I love how three of us posted this at the same time lol.

    • Herald

      So it is to close to the election to say or do anything that might maybe hurt trump. But saying and doing things that would hurt Hillary is just fine.

      Deplorable is way to mild for this.

      • Chucktech

        Deplorable, hell, this is election tampering.

        • Dreaming Vertebrate

          This little Dino knows when the eggs in the nest have HATCHed.
          It’s time to ACT. lock him up!!!

          • Chucktech

            I see what you did, there…

        • Herald

          Thanks, trump has sunk so low I just don’t have the words anymore.

        • marshlc

          Yeah, who cares about deplorable. Illegal, now, that’s something with some substance.

    • Lazycrockett

      Trying to save his partisan ass.

  • Clive Johnson

    Meanwhile, other clowns are waiting for Hillary on the other side of the election fence, should she win:

    House Republicans Already Have a Plan to Make Hillary Clinton’s Presidency a Living Hell

    • Lazycrockett

      Executive Orders baby.

      • RoFaWh

        Actually, that’s not the joke you may have thought it. When you study history or for that matter current affairs, you will note how often (and in how many different polities both present and past) a governmental organ or practice established for one reason evolves to become important in another way. If the GOP stymies all of Madam President Clinton’s legislative initiatives, they are mainly just weakening the role of Congress in government; there are things that simply must be done to keep the wheels of government turning smoothly. If Congress won’t deal with them, then the Executive (i.e. Madam Prez. Cl.) will take the initiative and ignore any apparent illegalities.

    • Chucktech

      As I’ve said many times before, Hillary knows this with eyes wide open. I’m sure she will govern accordingly.

      • Gerry Fisher

        It’s my hope that she’ll take the best of what Obama did and avoid the mistakes he made. I trust her to be able to handle this situation. Part of it, IMO, is using the Bully Pulpit to inform the public better about why government has stalled.

        • Chucktech

          Obama Problem #1: Attempting to govern in a bi-partisan way after it was crystal clear in about month two that THAT wasn’t going to work. Somehow, I’m pretty sure that Hillary has learned from history.

  • Miji

    So hopefully this will lay the groundwork to have the consent decree binding the GOP extended another 8 years was it?

  • moebym

    Slightly OT: Nate Silver just keeps pushing that narrative that Trump is closing the gap with Clinton. I know she’s still in a really good position, but stuff like this is really not helping my nerves.

    I wonder if I can hide his Tweets until after the election is over.

  • Dreaming Vertebrate

    Trump’s seditious Russian connections hidden by Comey!

  • Tom000

    “Posted on October 26, 2016 by John McAvoy
    Over 20 volunteers stopped by last night at the Toledo Tea Party’s regular meeting location to make phone calls for Trump and the National Rifle Association.”

    This was posted on the Toledo Tea Party website so I don’t think I’m breaking any laws.

    John McAvoy lives in WOOD COUNTY, but in the past has bragged on that website about visiting LUCAS COUNTY polling sites and representing himself as an official of the Lucas County Board of Elections. Although he has official looking credentials, he is NOT an official. He goes behind the counter, ask to review official documents and interviews voters before they vote. If you run across him at any polling site in Lucas County, Ohio, call the law immediately.

  • CharlestonDave

    So what’s the point of that consent decree if the worst thing that can happen is that the consent degree gets extended a few more years when it’s already being ignored?

    It’s like saying, “Now, Bobby, if you don’t eat your broccoli then I won’t let you have broccoli for another five years.”

    • Gianni

      😀 That comparison is a good one!

    • The_Wretched

      preclearance requirements