North Carolina Is Engaging in “Insane” Jim Crow–Style Voter Suppression

It SEEMS there is election FRAUD this time around.

Yes. I will admit it. Trump is RIGHT.

WHAT?! Yes. Trump is RIGHT about something! The election IS being RIGGED!

U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs slammed an ongoing North Carolinian voter purge during a dramatic Wednesday hearing, telling county attorneys that she was “horrified” by the “insane” process by which voters could be removed from the rolls without their knowledge.

Biggs called a hearing after the NAACP sued several North Carolina counties for purging nearly 6,700 voters—most of them black Democrats—from the rolls.

How is this HAPPENING you ask?

The process is simple: An individual gathers mail that was returned as undeliverable, then challenges the voter registration of residents at those addresses. If those voters do not appear at a county board of elections or return a notarized form, their voting rights are nullified.

It's ANY person too. ANYONE can send mail to targeted neighborhoods and see what gets returned:

The problem is a state law that allows any person to revoke any other person’s right to vote by gathering mail that was returned as undeliverable, then challenging the voter registration of residents at those addresses. If those voters do not appear at a county board of elections or return a notarized form, they are removed from the voter rolls, often without their knowledge.

This should make EVERYONE angry.

So yes indeed the election IS being RIGGED, but by the people who have claimed it's RIGGED against them!

Republican activists in North Carolina purged thousands of voters using this method until the NAACP stepped in with a lawsuit on Monday pointing out that the purges were illegal under federal law. The Justice Department supported the NAACP’s position, and a federal judge has called the purges “insane” Jim Crow–style voter suppression.

SOURCE

WOW. We need voter REFORM in this country NOW!

a reply to: DanteGaland

How is this HAPPENING you ask?

Because there are no Voter I.D. laws.

WOW. We need voter REFORM in this country NOW!

Yes. A 10 question test before getting your registration card.On US Civics. You have to answer 8 correctly or get denied.
Oh wait. That is probably not what was meant. And it would screen most Democrats out. Even the ones in office.
Peace and outta here

a reply to: eluryh22

NO, it is BECAUSE of the INSANE laws, and the Voting Rights Act being struck down by the Supreme Court. Since certain states HAVE to seek approval before CHANGING their laws, activist groups in places like North Carolina have been taking ADVANTAGE.

Its probably because it isn't true. Even if that did happen, cmon seriously ? the democrats are masterminds and geniuses ........AT ALL FRAUD

If you could belay the partisan politics for long enough to realise that the DNC/RNC polarity contest is two sides of the same coin, America could be saved....but no....its not going to happen.....bloodlessly, or peacefully...

originally posted by: beeeyotch
Its probably because it isn't true. Even if that did happen, cmon seriously ? the democrats are masterminds and geniuses ........AT ALL FRAUD

I provided PROOF in my OP. I would LOVE to see some to support YOUR claims.

One's OPINION of "feelings" do NOT make FACT.

If you make the claim, YOU then are obligated to back it up.

The voter i.d. laws need to be the same in every state. It is ridiculous that in some states you don't need an i.d. to vote. How does that not let people vote more than once?

Sal

a reply to: DanteGaland

Double post. bleh.

originally posted by: SallieSunshine
The voter i.d. laws need to be the same in every state. It is ridiculous that in some states you don't need an i.d. to vote. How does that not let people vote more than once?

Sal

a reply to: DanteGaland

In my state, voters have to sign next to their name on a sign-in sheet in a binder before voting.

a reply to: DanteGaland

I must be misunderstanding something ok they send letters out to registered voters at there address. If they get returned as undeliverable meaning they don't live there then they can be challenged. Have we got this so far ??? ok so then they send out a certified letter to the address they are registered at telling them to return it to the state. If they don't receive them meaning they don't live there than they can be removed from the voter roles for that area. Is everything right so far because now comes the question if you have voters on the voter roll for an area but they don't live in that area how can this possibly not be legal since I requirement to be on a voter roll in an area is that you live there. Am I missing something here because it sounds like this judge doesn't care if they no longer live in the area where they are voting at. Kind of like receiving ballots from california Obviously people in california don't live in that area. But according to the judge all they have to do is pick an address even if its not theres and they can vote in there election. Am I missing something here?????