I had three minutes, as one of 40 speakers who also got three minutes, to make New Hampshire’s case regarding the disenfranchisement of legal NH citizens by what I like to call a ‘super-enfranchised’ group of voters from out-of-state.
Super-enfranchised voters have more rights than legal NH voters.
Super-enfranchised interstate voters in New Hampshire don’t have to follow state statutes they don’t like. They get multiple choices on several state ballots from which to choose candidates.
Legal, domiciled, NH voters are limited to candidates on one ballot in their town or ward in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire citizens must also serve on a petit jury or Federal jury when called. Super-enfranchised voters do not.
That is a bonus for the non-citizen super-enfranchised voters. Holding dual citizenship just for voting eliminates having to serve on juries in two states.
On ‘Civil Rights’ Groups and ‘Elections’
The first thing you notice about any civil rights group involved in elections is this: There is nothing about elections that concerns them as long as the elections are not held to any legal, logical standard.
Any attempt to document who is voting, where their preferred class of voters are voting, how many times their favored class of voter is voting, is deemed racist.
The one, single, readily observable goal of civil rights activists involved in elections is social justice. Whatever it takes to punish and out-vote those deemed ‘privileged’ is all that matters. I find it shamelessly predictable.
One social justice warrior/attorney/activist/race hustler after another can spout off about hundreds of thousands of minority voters being disenfranchised. But in the end – no names. None.
On the other hand, when I got to testify I had numbers of illegal voters – each has a name, birth date, single legal domicile, and an out-of-state driver’s license. And like in other states, New Hampshire’s Secretary of State keeps those names locked away from public review any way he can. This is a standard across the country in states that have not become one-party states where elections are pre-determined.
Courting Vote Fraud
What voter fraud is really about is a national agenda by progressives to create a socialist form of government by any means possible. Progressive courts will deliver what a fair ballot will not.
Here in NH, voter fraud can never be curtailed by legislative action, bar the complete replacement of our State Supreme Court.
Take the Claremont Decision as an example of social justice by court order.
There is no education clause in the NH Constitution but the NH Supra “found” one just as state supreme courts all over the country did simultaneously in the 1980’s. When liberal courts began ordering public education be funded through state taxes, not local, our liberal state supreme court followed suit.
With the issue of voter fraud, the NH State Supreme Court outed itself in the “Guare” case in discovering a right by non-citizens to vote in NH. That is simply unconstitutional under the US Constitution 14th Amendment.
The Tennessee Supreme Court tried to let Eastern Tennessee keep its advantage over the western part of that state by refusing to re-apportion legislative seats, as required in that state’s constitution. The Federal Court stepped in – Baker v. Carr.
President Trump is no friend of voter fraud. He appointed a commission that expired on Dec. 31, 2017, without filing a report. The commission had no legal authority to acquire voting data from states. New Hampshire, to its shame, refused to give the commission usable computer data, treating the commission as an average NH citizen.
The Dept. of Homeland Security is now in charge of investigating voter fraud in NH. It can be assumed this group has all of the evidence submitted to Trump’s commission. They have the power to demand documents from the state.
The US Attorney’s Office is the easiest way to clean up NH elections. The Federal Government has an interest in stopping NH’s blatant, two-tier voter base which is undeniably affecting the outcome of Federal elections here.
NH could also be sued in Federal Court as we have been in the past. A Federal Court can overturn NH Supra case, Guare v. NH, that invents a right of college students and campaign workers to stay domiciled in another state and vote here.
The public is catching on. There is a visceral disgust with voter fraud. It is one political issue that has broad support among American citizens.
Super-enfranchised voters have no place in New Hampshire. We all need to be treated equally.