Tag Archives: Democrat Party

Republicans allege election rigging in Pueblo, CO

Here’s the bombshell press release from Pueblo county GOP chairwoman Becky Mizel as forwarded to us:

The Pueblo County Republican Party with support of members of the Constitution Party and Democrat Party requested a recount on December 5th, 2012, due to the following areas of concern:

  • Critical election anomalies were observed in at least 25 precincts. Based on data posted on the Secretary of State’s web site identifying voter turn-out by Precinct and a report provided by Pueblo County Clerk’s office on active Mail in Ballots that were compared and found to have potential voter turnout to exceed 100% of the registered voters. It was verified by phone with both the Secretary of State and the Pueblo County Clerk’s office that this could not have occurred due to provisional ballots replacing mail in ballots. A sample of these precincts is attached. In attempt to further cross check these results, audit calls were made to these precincts, at least 6 voters in one precinct stated they had not voted which substantiated that the election results should be recounted.
  • Election data provided later differed from the canvassing board summary created by the Pueblo County Clerk’s office.
  • It was observed and reported to the County Clerk Gilbert Ortiz groups and individuals were observed picking up more than 10 mail-in ballots and delivering them to the County Clerk’s office. PCRP registered a complaint due to potential voter fraud. Mr. Ortiz stated he was aware this had occurred, to remedy this situation if a person delivered over 10 ballots he was having the individuals sign in on a sheet located at the election department. At the time of canvassing the Republican canvassing member asked to receive these lists of persons delivering more than 10 ballots. The Democrat canvass member stated, “This list is under investigation, so you may not have access to the lists”. No such investigation has been reported to the Secretary of State’s office to date nor is any record of the investigation available by the Pueblo County District Attorney.
  • The integrity of the chain of custody of main in ballots was not preserved. Mail- in ballots were seen being carried into Democrat headquarters. Ballots were being collected by door knocking. Two judges were not present at all times at drop off locations for mail in ballots. No system was in lace to detect if one individual dropped off more than 10 mails- in ballots over the course of the election.
  • It is the expectation the election department has limited access of individuals and security measures to protect voting machines, ballots and ballot processing. Mr. Ortiz gave the candidates a tour of the election department stating only limited personnel had access to keys to the election department. When various people were observed entering the election department after hours and through varying entrances that are not under video surveillance Mr. Ortiz later stated “All personnel have keys and access to the department”. During early voting, lights were observed on in the election department after hours of operation as late as 9:00PM to 11:00 PM at night with people inside the department to include cleaning crews file storage boxes were also seen leaving the department after hours. Upon inquiry of this breach of security, the county attorney’s office sent written notification housekeeping personnel were not allowed in the election department, Mr. Ortiz stated his staff cleaned the election office. Upon observation of the video surveillance cameras unsupervised cleaning crews were inside of the election department after working hours on at least two occasions. Furthermore, areas of the election department are not under camera surveillance to include a storage area where voting cartridges are stored. These oversights compromise the integrity and confidence of the voting public no matter what party affiliation.
  • Once a candidate is elected is our belief that they represent equally all the people. In the spirit of cooperation, Mr. Ortiz was put on notice on 11/21/12 that we planned to ask for a recount of the election so that he was not caught off guard. It is our belief that it was as beneficial to the County Clerk as it was to our candidates to conduct a recount given the questions. A great deal of research was done to attempt to determine what the cost would be as no guidance or help was provided from the County Clerk. The result was a $6,000-$8,000 price. We were prepared for it to be double that cost. The price to us was $29, 385. We checked the validity of this price through various sources and were told this price was not appropriate. PCRP filed the final recount request on 12/5.12Mr. Ortiz then informed us at 7:00 PM that we needed to have the money to his office at 5:00 PM on the 6th. Mr. Ortiz had known for two weeks that we planned to ask for a recount but found no need to give us any guidance on how we make this happen and represent all the people of Pueblo County.
  • These areas and other factors such as difficulties with poll watcher access prompted a recount request. These actions serve to disenfranchise election transparency and accountability by making fees for a recount unrealistic. A report of other county recount costs is attached as is a sample of the data that we sought to clarify.

According to a sampling of precincts, there is a major discrepancy in voter turnout (when non-voters are counted it goes well over 100%), which should be enough to raise eyebrows with the Colorado Secretary of State.

From my own personal investigation into the matter and speaking with several witnesses (who will gladly testify under oath, but fear reprisal if this investigation doesn’t take hold) they saw people loading mail-in ballots into cars and trucks at all hours of the night in the days prior to the election.

Worse, the people doing the “dirty deeds” were not even election officials, but complete unknowns that gladly flaunted the presence of security cameras.

Democrat Pueblo County Clerk Gilbert Ortiz has clearly showed a lax standard for ballot chain of custody and we’d love him to answer for it (again, we’ve gone after Republicans for the same scandals in the past).

We here at Hammer of Truth would love to see a formal inquiry launched into the matter. And to again be clear: if it were Republicans doing such dirty deeds, we’d be just as interested in a full investigation.

Becky Mizel, the Pueblo County GOP Chairwoman has being adamant that they aren’t trying to overturn the outcome (and indeed has conceded that Obama remains the president no matter the outcome here), but is seeking to ensure that there are elections free of impropriety now and in the future. She’s also claiming that a recount request was improperly handled, causing the GOP to miss the deadline.

[A full list of attached documents have been uploaded to Scribd as one file: The Pueblo County Attorney's Office response for requested video tapes, a sampling of precincts showing OVER 100% TURNOUT (ye gads), and the cost of a full recount as requested by the Pueblo County GOP.]

( -)-(- )4 comments

Add another star, Puerto Ricans want statehood (or not)

In October, we informed you that Puerto Rico would be voting on whether to become the 51st member of the United States of America. It appears the majority of voters there may get their wish, but only if Republicans don’t drag their heels and block the process for purely political reasons:

VOTERS may have voted for more of the same in America on election day, but in Puerto Rico they opted for decisive change. In a two-stage plebiscite—the island’s fourth referendum regarding its relationship with the United States—54% of the electorate voted to change Puerto Rico’s current status as a self-governing “commonwealth”, and 61% wanted the new form of government to be full American statehood.

[...] The vote will not have immediate consequences. Congress would have to pass a law admitting Puerto Rico for it to become a state. With a fiscal squeeze looming at the start of 2013 lawmakers will have their hands full in the coming months. And the island’s government is unlikely to push the issue aggressively following the election as governor of Alejandro García Padilla, who supports a continued commonwealth.

Moreover, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has little incentive to address the topic. According to exit polls, 83% of boricuas on the mainland voted for Barack Obama. Statehood would add two Senate seats and a House delegation of five, the same size as Oregon’s and probably as reliably Democratic.

Unless the island holds another vote that yields a different result, however, Puerto Rico has now officially requested statehood. If Democrats retake the House in 2014, they would be well-advised to try to add a 51st star to the flag.

As a libertarian-republican with Puerto Rican friends dotted across the country, I say give the people what they voted for.

After all, once Puerto Ricans become full-blown hard-working Americans subjugated by the IRS like the rest of us, they will certainly not be so enthused about the Democrat Party’s nonsense core tenet of redistribution of wealth.

Update: A commenter here at HoT aptly points out that all is not as it appears.

José writes, “Puerto Ricans did not vote for statehood. When you add the votes in favor of independence as well as the blank votes which were casted [sic] in protest, along with those also casted [sic] in protest in favor of a sovereign comonwealth [sic], statehood just got the typical 45%.”

He continues, “Now, you’re probably asking yourselves why would anyone vote a certain way in protest? The answer is very simple: the Commonwealth option was NOT incuded [sic] in the referendum.”

The status referendum results do indeed show that while a majority chose to change the status of their country, a minority actually chose statehood with 480,749 casting blank protest ballots. “55% of the residents of Puerto Rico REPUDIATED statehood.”

“They just want to fix what they have so they can sustain their own economy without having to endure the indignity of Washington’s handouts.” I couldn’t agree more.

And yes José, I like spending words (especially for making corrections and clarification), I hope you’ll oblige a few more.

( -)-(- )6 comments

2012 election results

I’ll be away from the blog this evening, but I encourage everyone to use the Google elections map, just because it’s probably the best tool out there created by some incredibly smart coders.

And just for giggles, here’s my predictions, cross-posted from IPR:

Romney wins.

Johnson breaks 1M, barely. Gets credit for handing wins to Romney in Colorado and possibly Ohio. Time for democrats to hate libertarians.

Amendment 64 passes in Colorado with surprisingly strong republican support. Battle lines drawn for 10th amendment showdown with federal government.

I’m basing my judgement on the Romney/Obama matchup on an apparent gaffe by the president during the Town Hall debate when he (mis)stated “when I was president.”

I am rather certain he was being prophetic in that utterance.

Update: You can track Colorado’s Amendment 64 / marijuana legalization issue here, on the very last page (use the dropdown). Colorado polls close at 7PM MST / 9PM EST.

Here’s to “the entire country getting on airplanes to go to Denver for the weekend to chill out.” Good call GJ.

Update 11/7: Obama gets another four years, GJ got over 1M (yep, barely) and Amendment 64 passed (1,027,893 Yes to 898,317 No with 23 of 64 Colorado counties reporting)… two out of three predictions ain’t so bad, all things considered. I really should have stuck with my original assessment I told a few people (not on any record) that Obama would get re-elected if he convinced people the economy was rebounding by June, but I guess my time hanging out with Republicans had tinted my view. C’est la vie.

( -)-(- )Comments Off

Democrats: Advocating socialism by any other name

There’s a difference between Jeffersonian classical liberals of the Democratic Party and what we have now, a party full of progressives/socialists/Marxists.  They are all about taxing the rich and addicting the poor to welfare and government handouts.

They want the middle class dependent on them.

They are about stealing our private property by claiming it is for the good of the collective. They are about controlling our health care; even withholding care if it is not cost-effective according to their rules. They want to regulate small business until they are broke.

President Barack Obama, Senators Mark Udall and Michael Bennett, Colorado Legislatures Sal Pace and Angela Giron and Pueblo City Council members Ami Nawrocki, Leroy Garcia and Sandy Daff are not classical liberals; they are socialists openly embracing Marxist tenets. Many Democratic candidates running for federal, state and local offices across the country are now openly socialists/Marxists.

Those who embrace Jeffersonian classical liberalism in the Democratic Party must regain control and banish socialists/Marxists in their party to the dustbin of political history.

It is time for the Jeffersonian Democrats to have a “tea party” and take their party back from the hard left.

After this election cycle maybe they will heed the “voices in the wilderness” as we conservative libertarian “tea party” activists did.

Continue voting for socialists/Marxists and soon all the wealth will be stripped from us and transferred to the government. Then what? There will be no people left with resources to run and operate the free market engine driving our prosperity for generations.



Be careful how you vote.  Just because you are a government employee, union member or receive your income from a non-government organization depending on taxpayers’ subsidies and grants does not exempt you from the consequences of socialism.

You and I are not high enough up the food chain to be exempt from the pain and suffering that socialism/Marxism always inflicts. Only a few at the top benefit from collectivism. 

Ask any person who has endured Marxism/communism or any totalitarian government anywhere in the world and they will tell you the truth.

The choice is yours.

( -)-(- )Comments Off

XKCD infographic of 224 years of Congress

Follow the yellow line on the right to see who had the majority. SOURCE:

Interesting to note that Republicans have only had control of the President, House and Senate for a relatively short period (106th, 108th, 109th) and chose to enact tax cuts rather than repeal government largess. And of course that trend quickly reversed when Obama took office and enjoyed a Democrat majority during which his major “reform” measure was to expand government into the healthcare industry.

Is it any wonder that libertarians find themselves better aligned within the GOP than the DNC (when they aren’t piddling with the always marginalized LP)? One is actually willing to give your money back to you and let the government peons flip out over how to pay for things (ahem, fire some bureaucrats please), while the other eventually succumbs to the reality that Obamacare is a massive tax hike.

( -)-(- )Comments Off

LibertyManiacs presents the Veep debate drinking game

I’ll be live-blogging the Vice Presidential debate (sober, unlike the press in Kentucky), but friend of the site Dan McCall of LibertyManiacs has put out a timely rules chart for how you might want to “enjoy” the show the duopoly tag team has in store.

“If you’re going to drink the Kool-Aid, you might as well spike it.” Well said:

Also, one side-show to keep an eye out for is Libertarian Party Vice Presidential candidate Judge Jim Gray — who promises to make his own stand online by answering the same questions as the other candidates. Go ahead and drink if he mentions “Obamney”, “The Federal Reserve” or that neither party is “following the constitution”.

Yes, that drinking game is much more depressing.

Whether you’ll be drinking or not tonight, brace yourself, the internet is going to be slammed with drunk libertarians and independents…

( -)-(- )Comments Off