From the 07.11.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
Highlights:
They whined about Republican-favored redistricting isn't stopping their voter suppression efforts. (approx. 2:35)
Adams and Loesch both declared that if Texas's law is struck down, then it will put the laws on voter suppression closer to oblivion. (approx. 4:20)
Loesch falsely claims that True The Vote, a spin-off of King Street Patriots, monitor elections honestly. They don't.(approx. 5:31)
Adams misleading states that the DOJ is "facilitating lawless behavior in our polling places." (approx. 7:09)
Partial Transcript:
LOESCH: "Eric Holder currently has in his sights Texas trying to invoke their 10th Amendment rights to uphold 'voter integrity' in their state. According to J. Christian Adams at Pajamas Media, the Texas Voter ID law is on life support."[...]J. CHRISTIAN ADAMS: "Well, the latest is that the trial is still going on. Tthe Justice Department actually put up a witness this morning to testify that Governor Perry is a 'fascist.'" LOESCH: "So if the Department of Justice scores a win here in Texas, and they prevent them from requiring photo ID in order to safeguard the votes of those casting them. This is, to me, going to set a precedent that is going to endanger the 10th Amendment powers of the other states that are currently in this same tussle with the DOJ." ADAMS: "Well, you're exactly right. In the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was amended in 2006 to essentially give enormous federal power over state election decisions." [...] "The same laws designed to help Republicans with redistricting is causing voter integrity efforts across the country to be attacked by the Justice Department. They're gonna kill Texas's Voter ID law, probably kill South Carolina's Voter ID law, Mississippi and Alabama are trembling. So what you have is heading into the election situation where Eric Holder is using a weapon given to him by Republicans in 2006 undermining election integrity."LOESCH: And this just underscores the huge point that even if we have Republicans in office passing legislation where you give government that much oversight, you can't be guaranteed that you're going to always have good people in office. You should never want someone else to have that kind of power over voting and states' rights anyway."ADAMS: "You're exactly right, Dana, this is part of a bigger problem. Republicans wanted to tend to disengage on racial issues, on election issues, on anything that the NAACP beats its drum about."
From the 05.24.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
Transcript:
LOESCH: "I read about this story-- this is a headline... that sounds ridiculous, and in fact, I talked about it last night as well. The Department of Justice-- I talked about it two hours ago-- the Department of Justice is now deciding that they're very interested in the-- what happened at the University of Arkansas-Fort Smith does with their bathrooms."[...] LOESCH: "I just want to let that sink in. I dramatically paused for a reason. They don't care about Fast and Furious, but they're very concerned about the University of Arkansas-Fort Smith does with their bathrooms. A male student, who calls himself 'Jennifer Braly,' is in the process of raising money to pay for a sex reassignment surgery. He's becoming a woman, [but] still has male anatomy. He wanted to use the women's restroom, and was told that he couldn't, filed a complaint, and the DOJ brought its muscle and said: 'the rule about he can't use the women's bathroom....' That's how the DOJ--" PRODUCER: "Wait a minute. If I'm a woman, I'd be looking at him who wants to be her and say, 'you can't come in here...'" LOESCH: "You have frankenberries." PRODUCER: "You can't come in here with that." LOESCH: "And the women were actually really uncomfortable about it. And they were against it, like: 'No, he is a dude. He still has-- you know.'" PRODUCER: "He can still stand up and--" LOESCH: "I'm not saying that he would, so I don't want people to freak out about it saying 'there's him!' I'm just saying that men are stronger than women and can overpower most of them. It comes down to being a safety issue. It has nothing to do with gender, anything like that. It's just that men anatomically are stronger, or physiologically they're stronger regarding anatomy or so forth. Obviously, hello, we went through school. So the Department of Justice got involved and made them. So now this guy can use the women's bathroom with the women." PRODUCER: "The DOJ's-- they're hard at work." LOESCH: "So there's that. They're hard-workers, not with Fast and Furious."
Loesch falsely claimed that "he denies the existence of widespread 'voter fraud.'" (approx 1:20)
O'Keefe says that the "'mainstream media' will never love us." (approx. 2:20)
Loesch falsely states that "the 'mainstream media' and the Democrats' narratives claim that no voter fraud exists, but it's been proven wrong by you, O'Keefe." (approx. 3:10)
O'Keefe blames the "establishment for covering up the problems." (approx. 4:40)
Loesch and O'Keefe bash Sharpton and the Dems for telling the truth about "voter ID" laws. (approx. 5:50)
Loesch baselessly accuses "Eric Holder and the DOJ of refusing to uphold voter integrity." (approx. 7:00)
Loesch falsely peddles the non-truth that "Voter IDs help voters, not suppress the voters." (approx. 7:30)
O'Keefe: "I think the people will stand behind us on this one." (approx. 8:28)
Loesch: "If the DOJ, Eric Holder, and the Democrats will go after O'Keefe, then wouldn't it compromise their inability to do their jobs." (approx. 9:10)
Loesch: "O'Keefe scored a victory right out of the gate with this." Nope, he LOST right out of the gate, as usual. (approx. 10:40)
The real Eric Holder is right, and people like O'Keefe and Loesch are lying liars.
From the 04.09.2012 edition of KFTK's The Dana Show:
James O’Keefe and his supporters think that he’s scored big today. See, not long ago, Attorney General Eric Holder criticized laws that require people wishing to vote to bring photo I.D. with them; he called those laws “a solution in search of a problem,” and said “there is no statistical proof that vote fraud is a big concern in this country.” So one of O’Keefe’s colleagues—a white man who looks considerably younger than the Attorney General—went to went to Holder’s polling place for the recent primary in Washington, D.C., and claimed to be Holder. The punch line, of course, is that he was given no trouble, and welcomed to vote. (He never went through with it and actually committed the voter fraud, presumably because someone’s giving them legal advice not to.)
James O’Keefe and his supporters think that he’s scored big today. See, not long ago, Attorney General Eric Holder criticized laws that require people wishing to vote to bring photo I.D. with them; he called those laws “a solution in search of a problem,” and said “there is no statistical proof that vote fraud is a big concern in this country.” So one of O’Keefe’s colleagues—a white man who looks considerably younger than the Attorney General—went to went to Holder’s polling place for the recent primary in Washington, D.C., and claimed to be Holder. The punch line, of course, is that he was given no trouble, and welcomed to vote. (He never went through with it and actually committed the voter fraud, presumably because someone’s giving them legal advice not to.)
Well, no. Shapiro and O’Keefe and the rest don’t know when voter fraud takes place, if indeed it does, because they don’t do the work necessary to find out. O’Keefe may be lionized as an investigative journalist, but he’s not one, and he never has been. He takes the easy, flashy way out: his videos don’t prove that malfeasance is happening; they prove that it could, maybe. (Taking the same trick and repeating it over and over again, which is basically what O’Keefe did with this latest video, part of a series of such work, doesn’t help.) Investigative journalism—the real thing, the kind that discovers the dirt people are actually doing, rather than that they could potentially do—is hard work, and it can be boring. You want to expose systematic voter fraud? Get a bunch of records, pore through them for a few hundred hours.
James O'Keefe's Project Veritas has unveiled the latest chapter in its ongoing "voter fraud investigation": a video that purports to show a young man nearly obtaining the ballot of Attorney General Eric Holder. Like O'Keefe's past "voter fraud" videos, however, this video fails to show actual voter fraud being committed, and it doesn't prove the existence of a widespread conspiracy to throw an election. That's because both are extremely rare.
The video shows the man entering a polling place in Washington, D.C., then cuts to the man asking a poll worker, "Do you have an Eric Holder?" After the O'Keefe associate confirms Holder's address, which is censored, the poll worker offers him the voter roll and says, "Please sign your name there." The fake Eric Holder then says he left his ID in the car and leaves.
This video doesn't prove any of these things. What it shows is a man coming close to committing a serious crime. But even if the man had fraudulently cast a vote under Eric Holder's name, D.C. and federal laws provide a number of protections against fraudulent votes.
First of all, if the imposter had fraudulently cast Holder's ballot, and the real Eric Holder then had shown up to vote and been told his name was already crossed off the list, the real Holder almost certainly could have still voted. Under the Help America Vote Act of 2002, any voter who is told by an "election official" that he or she is "not eligible to vote" must be allowed to "cast a provisional ballot."
In spite of all this evidence, however, right-wing media routinely drum up phony or baseless cases of voter fraud, which they then use to rally support for restrictive voter ID laws.
