Friday, April 20, 2007

Proof of Fraud?

What's wrong with this picture?

Blogger Mario Burgos,, continues to hammer away at former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias for not having prosecuted cases of voter fraud.

I posted “Wing Nuts,” a couple of weeks ago questioning Burgos, his fellow blogger Whitney Cheshire, The Wednesday Morning Quarterback,, and Albuquerque attorney Pat Rogers, asking for evidence sufficient to prove all the elements of the crimes.

A former fellow journalism student, Benson Hendrix,, picked up and challenged them: “They claim to have a “mountain” of evidence regarding voter fraud, the point that the Wednesday Morning QB keeps trying to hammer David Iglesias and failing like a Miami Hurricane football player taking a trig test. I’d like to see this evidence. They do have it, don’t they? The vast mountains and bag fulls.”

Rogers, left, called me, April 6, asking for a copy of his picture from this blog. He contended that he didn’t agree with everything I wrote and offered me an interview with one of his clients, an Albuquerque police officer, whose 13-year old son received a voter registration card, though he had not signed anything. When I asked if they had identified who had signed the boy up, the answer was that the registrant had been a paid ACORN worker. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now has run several voter-registration and petition drives where critics, including Rogers, have contended that because workers get paid per signature, there is an incentive to manufacture names. Rogers correctly pointed out that the one case of signature fraud, in this county, where there is an outstanding warrant, was a petition drive in support of a minimum wage campaign, not a voter registration drive.

Rogers was unable to identify the name of any other person who committed the crimes for which there is some evidence. I accepted his offer to meet the innocent victims of these frauds, but I have not heard back from him.

On April 10, Hendrix blogged, “Just an update, it’s been a six whole days since I threw down the gauntlet for Mr. Burgos and Ms. Cheshire (Cat?) to pick up or shut up.”

Cheshire has been unusually quiet of late, much like the feline in Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland which was not noticeable until that wry smile appears. Satire, sarcasm and cynicism abound throughout her blog postings; her television performances are tame by comparison. Then she evaporates.

On April 17, Burgos posted, “How Much More Proof Do You Want?” He recounts a story told by the state’s newly appointed elections director, Daniel Ivey-Soto, left, that voters admitted to him that they had voted more than once at elections.

“Ok, am I the only one who finds it unnerving that the state's election director believes a certain amount of fraud is ok,” Burgos asks?

So what's wrong with this picture?

Burgos, Cheshire and Rogers, all continue to make a critical error; it is not enough to simply be able to prove that a crime occurred, it is also necessary to identify the perpetrator.

It doesn’t seem like anyone is endorsing voter fraud. Without the second evidentiary prong, cases are deficient.

The answer to Burgos’ question is that it is not OK, nor is a certain amount of fraud condoned. Instead, it is recognized as inevitable.

Until victims, law enforcement and political pundits put names to the offenders, the ability of a prosecutor to do their job is non-existent. The first prosecutor who has an obligation to pursue voter fraud is not the U.S Attorney, but the State’s District Attorney. Voting is controlled at the state level and managed by the county clerks, even in federal races. The U.S. Attorney has parallel jurisdiction. Therefore, it is the primary responsibility of the Sheriff to conduct the investigation and present the necessary evidence to the prosecutor.

Another point Burgos attempts to make is that because there is proof that Sen. Jeff Bingaman’s office contacted the office of legislative affairs at the Department of Justice about New Mexico’s Election Fraud Task Force in 2004, it was the same thing as what Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson did in calling Iglesias directly.

Had Domenici and Wilson called the office of legislative affairs, in the way Bingaman had, shown here on the left, instead of Iglesias in person, this topic would not even be open for discussion.

1 comment:

David said...

Good analysis again. Brad Friedman has an excellent write up about the "voter fraud" both Whitney and Mario were whining about. The post includes a letter from local Democratic lawyer John Boyd.

I too would love to see the mountains of evidence they said was available. Isn't Darren White a Republican? If the fraud was so obvious and voluminous, then could he not investigate under state law and bring the evidence to the DA?