PDA

View Full Version : MD: Police used felons to collect signatures.



Sev
06-08-2012, 06:21 PM
How can this be???? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif

http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/mary...gnatures-ballot (http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/maryland-news/2012/06/montgomery-county-police-union-used-felons-gather-signatures-ballot)
<span style='font-size: 23pt'>Montgomery County police union used felons to gather signatures in ballot drive</span>

http://washingtonexaminer.com/files/styles/article-main-image/public/main/articles/police_file.jpg
Montgomery County's police union used felons, including a fugitive and a man convicted of forgery, to collect signatures for a ballot measure that would kill legislation reducing police collective bargaining rights, court documents show.

The county cites the Fraternal Order of Police's use of felons among reasons why at least 6,700 of the 34,828 signatures validated by the County Board of Elections are insufficient to put the measure, protecting police officers' ability to negotiate any management decision, on the November ballot.

The felons were responsible for collecting signatures and certifying they were gathered legally.

"The notion that a felon who under Maryland law would be prohibited from voting in an election, and who at any time was at the risk of arrest by the very individuals on whose behalf he was circulating the petition, would be responsible for preventing fraud flies in the face of common sense and is truly laughable," attorneys for the county wrotein documents filed in Montgomery County Circuit Court.

One felon, Keith Gregory Moore, of Grand Rapids, Mich., was convicted of forgery, fraud, aggravated assault and home invasion, the court filing shows.

Another petition circulator, Jessie James Rowe, of Kalamazoo, Mich., was a fugitive felon at the time he wasgathering signatures -- and still is -- the document says.

In June 2010, Rowewas convicted of possession of methamphetamines or Ecstasy. A warrant was issued for his arrest on July 2, 2010, after he tested positive for marijuana, amphetamines and opiates, violating his bond. As of May 17, when the county filed the court documents, the warrant was still outstanding. In 2004, Rowe pleaded guilty to operating a meth lab.

The county wants the 2,744 signatures Rowe collected and the 543 gathered by Moore tossed out.

Both were hired by California's PCI Consultants, which the FOP contracted togather signatures. Union Secretary Jane Milne referred questions to PCI. A PCI representative did not return calls.

The union asked that the criminal records be omitted from the court record because the county submitted them after a legal deadline.

The union and Board of Elections argue that criminal history is not relevant.

The only legal requirement is that circulators be at least 18 years old, the Board of Elections said in a court document. They do not need to be eligible to vote or live in the jurisdiction where they collect signatures.

"Unless there is evidence that a voter's signature is false, it does not matter if the circulator lacks credibility as a witness," the union wrote in a court motion.

Montgomery County says other problems among the 6,700 signatures it is challenging include signatures lacking proper dates, names that don't match voting records and circulators who gave inaccurate address information. The Elections Board approved 4,594 signatures more than required for the referendum.

The court is scheduled to rule June 18 on motions for summary judgment.

LWW
06-08-2012, 07:02 PM
Maryland is a state known for gangster government, very much like Illinois.

Soflasnapper
06-08-2012, 07:43 PM
The police union used felons the same way Mitt R-Money hired an illegal alien to cut his lawn.

Which is to say, neither of them did that alleged deed. They HIRED OTHER PEOPLE who, as it turned out, did that.

It is a laughable irony, and that is all it is.

I compliment you for reproducing most of the article, because it contains the more complete answer as well.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The union and Board of Elections argue that criminal history is not relevant.

The only legal requirement is that circulators be at least 18 years old, the Board of Elections said in a court document. They do not need to be eligible to vote or live in the jurisdiction where they collect signatures.</div></div>

IF that is the case, and it likely is, what is the alleged problem here? The union position is backed up by the Board of Elections. It is neither illegal to hire a felon (evidently), nor are signatures they gather more or less likely to be real or deficient or fraudulent (unless perhaps the felony in a given case was directly concerning election fraud, which is not alleged).

Laughable. Ironic. And a technical issue for the law to decide.

Sev
06-09-2012, 06:21 AM
I think it may have went over your head. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Gayle in MD
06-09-2012, 07:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think it may have went over your head. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The only legal requirement is that circulators be at least 18 years old, the Board of Elections said in a court document. They do not need to be eligible to vote or live in the jurisdiction where they collect signatures.

</div></div>
LOL, really Sev, this has to be one of your most desperate attempts to trash my state.


Where do you live, BTW, lol.

G.

Sev
06-09-2012, 07:34 AM
Gooooooooooood Morning Gayle.
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Gayle in MD
06-09-2012, 07:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gooooooooooood Morning Gayle.
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

GOOOOOOD Morning Sev.

Have a great day!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Sev
06-09-2012, 09:11 AM
I've been out playing in the garden.
I've built berms around all my tomato, pepper, melon, pumkin, cucumber broccoli, cabbage and squash plants for watering purposes. Been filling the mini moats. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif
The carrots, cucumbers, nasturtiums, marigolds, chives, onions peas and bean I have companion planted are coming in as well.

I really need to get a couple of 250 gallon holding tanks and pumps for rain water. Chlorine really isnt conducive to plant growth.

I would like to dig a well and get off the municible water.
Install my own filtration system.

Soflasnapper
06-09-2012, 10:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think it may have went over your head. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif </div></div>

No, I understand the citation, because the headline shortcut makes it seem like the union itself hired felons, although that is not the case by the details in the article.

Do you disagree with the article details, and suggest the union did this themselves?

It's just another way for the anti-union forces to smear unions and union members and their tactics. I get it, completely. It provides an apparent news story hook for people to say what LWW said. That is the purpose of the once again wholly misleading headline you or whoever put on this piece. Crystal clear.

Unless the headline writer cannot read. Upon re-reading it, I find the WRITER put this into the lead paragraph, so I take back my comment on only a misleading headline. The headline accurately reflects the lede paragraph, but unfortunately, the entire piece is itself misleading. Although you have to read down some 10 paragraphs to see the admission of facts that make the headline and the lede paragraph false.

Luckily for them and their purpose of actively lying to their readers, many readers DO NOT read deep into a piece, to find out they were lied to off the top.

After the credibility of the Washington Times has been shot over the years, they trot out a new propaganda rag-- the Washington Examiner. Same kind of piece of shiite lying rag, newly branded.

Seems to be working on you guys, at least.

Sev
06-09-2012, 01:33 PM
WOW.
You really missed the point of the thread.
HAHHAHAHA!!!

Soflasnapper
06-09-2012, 05:00 PM
The point is to (falsely, in my view) slam unions for something they did not do, and to also slam the state in which G lives. I think I understood it fine. About right? What did I miss in the list of those two things? Anything?

Sev
06-09-2012, 07:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The point is to (falsely, in my view) slam unions for something they did not do, and to also slam the state in which G lives. I think I understood it fine. About right? What did I miss in the list of those two things? Anything? </div></div>

Your reading way to deeply.
I was merely poking at Gayle. Nothing more. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Your analysis of the article itself is fine.

DickLeonard
06-09-2012, 07:45 PM
lww not much different than the Wall Street Gang don't you think.####

Soflasnapper
06-10-2012, 12:15 PM
I get 'da poke'!!