Justin Rood of ABC news came out with a tortured defense of ACORN today with the help of "experts" that claim there is no connection between invalid voter registrations and voter fraud. In order for Rood to make this claim he relies on the testimony of two "experts", namely Civil Rights attorney David Becker and Lorraine Minnite, a political science professor at Barnard College in New York.
A further examination of these two experts however shows that Rood is downright deceitful in presenting this argument. Lorraine Minnite actually donated $250 to the Obama campaign in March of this year while David Becker is anything but the Republican that he is portrayed as in the article. In fact Mr. Becker is a former director at People for the American Way, a liberal activist group that monitors "right wing organizations" and is currently launching a campaign aimed at Fighting Back Against Right-Wing Smears of ACORN.
Just in case you were unconvinced of the objectivity of Becker's former group note that they will be launching a full page ad in the New York Times in defense of ACORN.
We can hardly call these experts objective yet they are the people that ABC News is relying on to gloss over the multi-state voter fraud activities of a group that is intricately tied to Barack Obama.
An example of just how dishonest Rood is in his report is his characterization of Mr. Becker.
But McCain's voter fraud worries – about Acorn or anyone else – are unsupported by the facts, said experts on election fraud, who recall similar concerns being raised in several previous elections, despite a near-total absence of cases.
"There's no evidence that any of these invalid registrations lead to any invalid votes," said David Becker, project director of the "Make Voting Work" initiative for the Pew Charitable Trusts.
Becker should know: he was a lawyer for the Bush administration until 2005, in the Justice Department's voting rights section, which was part of the administration's aggressive anti-vote-fraud effort.
This is called validation by omission, as if working in the Bush justice department implies that you are a Republican supporter. Omitted are the facts that Becker is a Berkeley graduate that also worked in the justice department for the Clinton administration. After leaving the justice department he spent nearly two years as the director of People For the American Way, a Tides Foundation project that monitors the activities of right wing groups, and has partnered with left leaning advocacy groups such as NARAL, NOW, the ACLU, the NAACP and the AFL-CIO just to name a few.
Becker also wrote a 2005 article in the Washington Post called Reviving Jim Crow?. This article took for President Jimmy Carter's side of the argument claiming that a Georgia law requiring voter ID was a form of discrimination; an argument that was rejected by the Supreme Court of the United States.
I have no doubt that Becker is an expert lawyer but I'd be a little skeptical to consider him objective about ACORN by any stretch of the imagination.
As for the use of Lorainne Minnite, what can I say?
"We're chasing these ghosts of voter fraud, like chickens without a head," said Lorraine Minnite, a political science professor at Barnard College in New York who has researched voter fraud and fraud claims for most of the past decade. "I think it's completely overblown, I think it's meant to be a distraction."
"This stuff does not threaten the outcome of the election," said Minnite. "How many illegal ballots have been cast by people who are fraudulently registered to vote? By my count, it's zero. I just don't know of any, I've been looking for years for this stuff."
Glad she can count. Too bad she can't be transparent and disclose her support of Barack Obama up front. It is both indefensible and unprofessional to use an Obama campaign contributor without attribution as an expert in a news article to dispute John McCain.
Finally Rood resorts to a blurb on Fact Check.org as final proof that there is no evidence linking ACORN's massive dump of invalid registrations to an attempt to commit voter fraud.
Even the non-partisan truth-in-politics Web site FactCheck.org called foul on McCain's alleged possible conspiracy, noting that a Republican prosecutor handling a key Acorn registration fraud case has said there's no evidence indicating the group was involved in vote fraud.
This displays a sort of fifth grade logic, taking one case from the past and presenting it as some sort of all encompassing proof. But then I am probably dissing fifth graders here because even they know that a single example doesn't form a rule.
Even though the FactCheck.org site is completely anemic in terms of evidence supporting or negating proof of voter fraud with respect to ACORN we can note that the site does lists the following that is conveniently omitted in the ABC report:
It's true that the voter registration wing of the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now has run into trouble in several states. ACORN employees have been investigated and in some cases indicted for voter registration fraud. Most recently, more than 2,000 registrations in Lake County, Ind., have turned out to be falsified.
[...]
Meanwhile, on the other side of the table, Obama wasn't entirely forthcoming about his relationship with ACORN:
Obama: The only involvement I've had with ACORN is, I represented them alongside the U.S. Justice Department in making Illinois implement a motor voter law that helped people get registered at DMVs.
He did, but that wasn't his only involvement. He also worked closely with ACORN's Chicago office when he ran a Project Vote registration drive after law school, and Obama did some leadership training for Chicago ACORN. The Woods Fund, where Obama served as a board member, gave grants to ACORN's Chicago branch; both organizations are concerned with disadvantaged populations in that city. And during the primaries of this election, Obama's campaign paid upwards of $800,000 to the ACORN-affiliated Campaign Services Inc. for get-out-the-vote efforts (not voter registration). Those services were initially misrepresented on the campaign's Federal Election Commission reports, an error that some find suspicious and others say is par for the course.
Misrepresented!
For a more honest assessment of ACORN and I suggest Stanley Kurtz and Jim Hoft. ABC news clearly can't be counted on to objectively report their activities.
Terry Trippany is the publisher of Webloggin and holds the post as The Watcher at Watcher of Weasels.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Justin Rood and ABC (ALL
October 17, 2008 - 19:12 ET by TN MomJustin Rood and ABC (ALL BARACK CHANNEL) must think the American people don't have internet access.
For a more honest assessment of ACORN and I suggest Stanley Kurtz and Jim Hoft. ABC news clearly can't be counted on to objectively report their activities.
I did my own research and concluded: Obama & ACORN are joined at the hip. No amount of lies can change that!
That they are TMom...and
October 17, 2008 - 19:21 ET by bigtimerThat they are TMom...and the enemy within marches on with their propaganda...oh no the NYTs are going to have a full page ad out in their defense of ACORN...
I have seen so many people making excuses and coming to defense of this filthy corruption of our votes...our most precious right.
Obama just paid 800,000 to Acorn folks not that long ago...they seem to think we are deaf, dumb and blind with their blatant repeat and repeat and we will just accept what they say as fact...Obama at the trough of Acorn all along the way...with him leading the way.
Filthy people.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh
BigTimer
October 17, 2008 - 20:19 ET by TN MomI read that SCOTUS ruled in favor of the Ohio Democrat Sec. of States favor. UNBELIEVABLE!
In Tennessee you have to have a valid ID to vote (but I called my election officials to ask if there are ACORN groups here; I want the election officials to know I'm watching), but the SCOTUS/Ohio ruling AND ACORN criminal deeds affects my voting rights.
Wonder if I can sue?
So did Fox's O'Reilly
October 17, 2008 - 19:50 ET by kgSo did Fox's O'Reilly Factor
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
How is this possible, NY
October 17, 2008 - 19:59 ET by AcrosHow is this possible, NY Times will defend ACORN a proven vote fraud organization but when it comes to an everyday citizen, JOE THE PLUMBER, it time to tear him down thing. What is wrong with the MSM!!!!!!!!!!
Acros: "What is wrong with the MSM!!!!!!!!!!"
October 17, 2008 - 22:45 ET by Rush FanEasy answer.
Most of the mainstream media in this country are comprised of liberals. Liberals lie, obfuscate, and handle the truth recklessly.
Rush Limbaugh said it best: "There is no longer a media in this country. There is simply an established propaganda arm for the Democrat Party and any and all who relate to it in any way, elected and unelected."
--------------------------------------------------------------
The liberal media continues to sacrifice ethics for the greater cause: The Election of Barack Hussein Obama to the Presidency of the United States
Terry - I noticed that
October 17, 2008 - 22:59 ET by Rush FanTerry - I noticed that someone must have read your post, and then posted this comment at the ABC.com website:
David Becker is a former Director of People for the American Way, one of the most liberal activists groups in America, In fact on Sunday he is running a full page ad in the New York Times titled 'In Defense of Acorn'. Lorraine Minnet is an Obama supporter and has contributed to his campaign.This reporting by ABC is uhmmm Mickey Mouse.
Posted by:
robtrml 10:52 PM
----------------------------------------------------------
"There is no longer a media in this country. There is simply an established propaganda arm for the Democrat Party and any and all who relate to it in any way, elected and unelected." ~ Rush Limbaugh
Thanks for the update
October 17, 2008 - 23:19 ET by Terry TrippanyI believe that the MSM has lost all credibility. If only it would make a difference but it is apparent that they have no shame. It is amazing that very few of the professionals have bothered to speak out against the terrible and destructive bias of their fellow journalists. We can't even get them to speak out about it in general terms.
There is no excuse. - Trip
Yes, it is obvious this
October 18, 2008 - 04:40 ET by Rush FanYes, it is obvious this political season that the media have finally come all the way out of the liberal closet. The culture for this bias reporting surely emanates from the top, the owners and network heads. Regardless of the leanings of the journalist, which are mostly liberal, the leaders of these news organizations, whether networks, newspapers, or magazines, could demand fair and balanced reporting.
I’m certain that FoxNews employs people who are liberal, perhaps even far-left, but the news presentation is balanced and objective for the most part. Major credit must go to Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes. The fair and balanced approach has been a successful business decision for FoxNews. Perhaps the demand for fairer reporting, and the bottom line, will eventually change the rest of the mainstream media as well.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The liberal media continues to sacrifice ethics for the greater cause: The Election of Barack Hussein Obama to the Presidency of the United States.
Some things you should know about ACORN and voter fraud
October 18, 2008 - 11:52 ET by nicholas nicklebyTerry,
I think this is a fine examination of the background of two experts--apparently, one gave to Obama's campaign, and the other has a history of liberal politics.
However, you're falling into the "genetic fallacy"--the incorrect thought that you can dismiss the message because of the messenger. (It's the same thing a lot of people on the left fall into in regards to Bush--"well, if Bush says it, it must be wrong/untrue.")
Rather than dismiss the message based on the messenger, you should examine the message, and do some research into the topic to see what these two messengers/experts are leaving out.
So, with that in mind, here are some things you should know about voter fraud, voter registration fraud, and ACORN.
First, history of voter fraud: between 2002 and 2005, the current count for people being found guilty of voter fraud is... 20. Yes, not tens of thousands or thousands or even hundreds. 20 people in 3 years.
Now, just because no massive voter fraud has ever happened doesn't mean that it could--but generally we use history to judge. (Like, for instance, people on this board are often in arms over Obama's history of association with shady characters. Well, that's fair to me--history is how we judge the future.)
Similarly, we could use history to judge how the Republicans have used the phantom of voter fraud before, and how no real cases of massive voter fraud have been found (as reported by that Republican lawyer that Rood cites). This isn't 5th-grade logic, by the way: it's looking for a pattern. (The same way that people here look for patterns in Obama's association and voting record. So unless you're calling NB posters and commenters out on their use of 5th-grade logic, I'd seriously rethink that part of your post.)
Second, you may not know this but according to law, ACORN has to turn in all of the voter registration forms that they collect (to prevent any partisan worker from "losing" a form for someone who might be for the other candidate). In fact, ACORN's usual practice is to separate out all the forms that look suspicious into another pile. (So, do you remember that CNN report that said that the first 2,000 of so registrations were fraudulent. Well, gosh, I guess that must have been the fraudulent pile.)
Third, about the difference between voter registration fraud and voter fraud--and there is a difference!--did you know that, according to the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), "any voter who has not previously voted in a federal election" must provide identification--so, there's no worry that someone is going to show up to vote in Mickey Mouse's name.
Fourth, in ACORN's defense, you know that just two years McCain gave a speech at an ACORN meeting (co-hosted with several other groups) in which he said "what makes America special is what's in this room tonight." And yet, now that he's down in the polls, we're hearing all about this possible fraud by this criminal organization? ( http://www.youtube.c... ) Seriously, if people who work for Macy's shoplift, that raises the price for everyone, right? But we don't call Macy's a quasi-criminal organization--Macy's fires the people who do bad work, as does ACORN.
Fifth and finally, on the other hand, while there's been no evidence of voter fraud to turn in illegal votes, there have been quite a few controversies over the past few years involving voter suppression and the purging of lists. (As the GOP did in Indiana 2 years ago.)
Or, how about this: let's put a face to these abstractions: Joe the Plumber. Did you hear that Joe Wurzelbacher is registered as "Worzelbacher" thanks to some trouble reading his hand-writing? Well, his name doesn't match his name on the registration--no Worzelbacher lives at the address where he lives--so that means that his vote might not get counted: he would have to vote on a provisional ballot which might then be investigated and possibly tossed out.
So, Terry, while I think you did a fine job finding out about the backgrounds of these two experts, I think you should do more to investigate their claims, which are more or less true: ACORN is cooperating with the government to find suspicious registrations; voter registration fraud is not the same as voter fraud, and there have been no cases of massive voter fraud, though there have been cases of massive voter suppression--and Joe the Plumber's vote might very well be suppressed if the GOP had their way on this one.
Here in Ohio
October 18, 2008 - 19:39 ET by TheHistorianHere in Ohio, the Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, has gone all the way to the Supreme Court to keep from doing screening on approximately 200,000 registrations of the sort you indicate are "harmless". She instead has the Boards of Elections checking INDIVIDUALLY these registrations, and it is doubtful that they will be done by November 4. So, what on these voters?
Explain this one away, please. http://michellemalki...
You know you can't. Your whole post is so full of self-righteous untruths which you can't prove. In fact, I will argue that the low number of voter fraud prosecutions (20 you stated) is due to lack of prosecutorial emphasis than anything else. It is absurd to think that there is this low a number of prosecutions means that there is no voter fraud. We saw a similar problem in the Clinton administration where people with illegal guns were not prosecuted, and then there were a bunch of you libs that tried to maintain that there was no illegal gun possession problem.
"What experience and history teach is
this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history,
or acted on principles deduced from it."
G. W. F. Hegel
actually, my post is full of truths, none of which you disproved
October 19, 2008 - 12:01 ET by nicholas nicklebyHi Historian,
Oh brother. Now you seem to be practicing some of the same fallacious arguments as Terry up there. First, the Malkin piece does not contradict any of the facts about ACORN, to wit:
1) some ACORN employees turn in fraudulent voter registrations, but that does not mean ACORN itself is a criminal enterprise
2) ACORN is required by law to turn in all voter registrations, though it flags the one it thinks are suspicious.
So, there goes any question of ACORN being involved in a massive voter fraud scheme. (In fact, that Malkin piece is hilariously clear about this--though she has tagged it as "ACORN Watch," you'll notice that she never once mentions ACORN, probably because ACORN is not involved in what she's talking about.)
So, once again, ACORN is not involved in a massive voter fraud scheme. Nobody has proven it, and all the evidence points against it (that evidence including the historical record, which Terry derides as being only useful to 5th-grade logic.)
Now, again, if we look at the historical record from the past few years, what we find is not massive voter fraud, but rather evidence that the Justice Department has been trying to gin up a controversy over voter fraud, much like the McCain campaign is doing now. According to the Office of the Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility, New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias was fired in part because his task force found insufficient evidence to pursue prosecution for voter fraud. (So, he was instructed to find voter fraud, he didn't find it, he was fired.) It's true that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but there's been very little evidence provided to prove any sort of voter fraud.
Now, as to this Michelle Malkin's piece--it does provide some evidence of residency fraud, and I'm not in a position to explain it away, but we can explain a few differences between what Malkin is talking about here and what the McCain campaign has alleged.
First, out-of-state residents voting in Ohio is unrelated to ACORN.
Second, these students are not illegal in the sense that they are not casting votes for unreal people, nor are they voting twice. They have changed their residency--perhaps illegally (I don't know Ohio residency laws)--but they are still real Americans who are entitled to one vote (though perhaps not in Ohio).
So, this case is totally different from the scare-campaign that has been built up by the McCain campaign--this isn't a massive case of voter fraud, it's a small (12 people) case of what might be termed residency fraud.
And you still haven't disproven what I think is one of the clearest examples: if the Supreme Court had granted the GOP's case against the Ohio Secretary of State, then Joe the Plumber might be denied his legal right to vote.