CONYERS Voting Rights Report Removed From Library Of Congress: Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio - Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff - 2004

Well, it seems that this federal document has been removed from the Library of Congress.

https://www.loc.gov/item/2009284117/

About this Item

Title

What went wrong in Ohio : the Conyers report on the 2004 presidential election /

Summary

Report of an investigation into irregularities reported in the 2004 Presidential election in Ohio, compiled by the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee.

Contributor Names

United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary.

Created / Published

Chicago : Academy Chicago Publishers, c2005.

Subject Headings

-  Contested elections--Ohio

-  Minorities--Suffrage--Ohio

-  Presidents--United States--Election--2004

-  Elections--Ohio--Management

Notes

-  Includes bibliographical references (p. 117-142).

Medium

xii, 142 p. ; 22 cm.

Call Number/Physical Location

JK526 2004 .U55 2005

Digital Id

http://www.house.gov/judiciary%5Fdemocrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf

Library of Congress Control Number

2009284117

Description

Report of an investigation into irregularities reported in the 2004 Presidential election in Ohio, compiled by the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee.

LCCN Permalink

https://lccn.loc.gov/2009284117

Additional Metadata Formats

MARCXML Record

MODS Record

Dublin Core Record

But, have no fear, I found it, below, and it was not found in any U.S. governmental archive.

Now, why would someone allow such a prescient, historic report on voting irregularities be removed from the National Archives?

Perhaps, it was to seize the assets of the civil rights legacy.

But, hey, what do I know?

I know the U.S. Department of Justice should look into this.

Congress can not obviate is there is no precedent.

For your generalizable pleasure, we can now statistically reconstruct these investigations using databases, for external validity in the courts, of course.

Executive Summary

Representative John Conyers, Jr., the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, asked

This is the first time this photo has
been published.

the Democratic staff to conduct an investigation into irregularities reported in the Ohio presidential election and to prepare a Status Report concerning the same prior to the Joint Meeting of Congress scheduled for January 6, 2005, to receive and consider the votes of the electoral college for president. The following Report includes a brief chronology of the events; summarizes the relevant background law; provides detailed findings (including factual findings and legal analysis); and describes various recommendations for acting on this Report going forward.

We have found numerous, serious election irregularities in the Ohio presidential election, which resulted in a significant disenfranchisement of voters. Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousand of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards.

This report, therefore, makes three recommendations: (1) consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution concerning the counting of electoral votes by Congress and Federal law implementing these requirements, there are ample grounds for challenging the electors from the State of Ohio; (2) Congress should engage in further hearings into the widespread irregularities reported in Ohio; we believe the problems are serious enough to warrant the appointment of a joint select Committee of the House and Senate to investigate and report back to the Members; and (3) Congress needs to enact election reform to restore our people’s trust in our democracy. These changes should include putting in place more specific federal protections for federal elections, particularly in the areas of audit capability for electronic voting machines and casting and counting of provisional ballots, as well as other needed changes to federal and state election laws.

Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Sta... by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 49.7. Theresa Grafenstine -Did the Awans Do the DHS Hack On MicroPACT

oigVoting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 47.4. John Wilkes Phone Booth - Simple Daily Bag Drop Interrupted By DHS Hack Flight?

DOJ failed to interview FBI informant before it filed charges in Russian nuclear bribery case

While he was Maryland’s chief federal prosecutor, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s office failed to interview the undercover informant in the FBI’s Russian nuclear bribery case before it filed criminal charges in the case in 2014, officials told The Hill.

And the prosecutors did not let a grand jury hear from the paid informant before it handed up an indictment portraying him as a “victim” of the Russian corruption scheme or fully review his extensive trove of documents until months later, the officials confirmed.

The decisions backfired after prosecutors conducted more extensive debriefings of William Campbell in 2015, learning much more about the extent of his undercover activities and the transactions he engaged in while under the FBI’s direction, the officials said.

The debriefings forced prosecutors to recast their entire criminal case against former Russian uranium industry executive Vadim Mikerinn — removing the informant as a star witness and main victim for the prosecution, the officials added.

Justice Department officials began briefing Congress last week, divulging missteps in a case that nonetheless proved the Russian state-owned Rosatom was engaged in criminal activity through its top American executive beginning in 2009, well before the Obama administration made a series of favorable decisions benefitting Moscow’s nuclear giant.

Multiple House and Senate committees already are investigating whether the FBI alerted President Obama or his top aides to the Russian criminal activity and plan to interview the undercover informant soon.

The new revelations, however, could tip some scrutiny toward federal prosecutors’ own conduct in the case, a sensitive topic since Rosenstein is now Justice’s No. 2 official and the supervisor of the special counsel investigation into Russian election tampering.

Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said it was troubling that prosecutors would ever bring a case without talking first to a person they portrayed in court as a victim, especially when that person was an FBI informant available to them.

“I’ve never heard of such a case unless the victim is dead. I’ve never heard of prosecutors making a major case and not talking to the victim before you made it, especially when he was available to them through the FBI,” Dershowitz said.

“It is negligence, and I’m sure there will be internal issues with the Justice Department and U.S. attorney for making such an obvious mistake,” he said.

Officials told The Hill that prosecutors working for Rosenstein first interviewed Campbell, the informant, after they had already filed a sealed criminal complaint against Mikerin in July 2014.

Campbell got one debriefing after the criminal charges were filed, but was never brought before the grand jury that indicted the Russian figure in November 2014 even though the informer was portrayed as “Victim One” in that indictment, the officials confirmed

When prosecutors finally interviewed Campbell more extensively in early 2015 and reviewed all of the records he had gathered for the FBI, they learned new information about the sequence of transactions he conducted while under the FBI’s supervision, as well as the extensive nature of his counterintelligence work for the U.S. government that went far beyond the Mikerin case and dated to at least 2006, the officials said.

“Based on what was learned, we decided to change the theory of the case. … A plea deal became our goal so we wouldn’t have to litigate or make an issue of some of the stuff he had done for [counterintelligence] purposes,” a source directly familiar with the case said.

Campbell’s lawyer, Victoria Toensing, confirmed the Justice officials’ account. “The first time Mr. Campbell was interviewed by the U.S. Attorney’s office was after the criminal complaint was filed, and he was never brought before the grand jury before the indictment,” she told The Hill.

Justice officials said they knew when they first brought the case that Campbell had been part of a controlled, FBI-authorized bribery scheme, meaning he had permission to make payments to the Russians as kickbacks to further the investigation.

They declined to say why, with that knowledge, they initially portrayed Campbell in the indictment as a “victim” of an extortion scheme that began in November 2009 when the FBI had authorized him to make regular kickback payments of $50,000 in order to keep his consulting work for the Russians.

They said, however, they decided to pivot the case from extortion to money laundering after the more extensive 2015 debriefings revealed other transactions that pre-dated the extortion charges.

One source familiar with the case said extortion felt like a weaker charge when Campbell was acting with the FBI’s blessing and that the evidence of money laundering that Campbell documented through secret accounts in Latvia and Cyprus was irrefutable.

Campbell, who now has leukemia, also suffered an earlier bout with cancer in the middle of the case when a lesion was detected on his brain. He survived, all the while working undercover, but he developed some memory issues after treatment, sources said.

To compensate, he developed a system of extensive note taking and documentation with his FBI handlers through email to ensure facts were captured before his memory became hazy. A lot of those notes did not get reviewed by prosecutors until 2015, well after charges were filed, the sources said.

The documentation shows Campbell’s work had exposed wide-ranging details about Russia’s nuclear activities across the globe, including efforts to corner the global uranium market, assist Iranian nuclear ambitions and to criminally compromise a U.S. trucking firm that transported Russia’s nuclear fuel, they said.

Officials said the investigation and Campbell’s work from 2006 to 2013 fell under the FBI’s counterintelligence arm and Justice’s national security division, and officials originally did not intend for it to become a criminal case.

Justice officials originally hoped they simply could use the threat of criminal prosecution to “flip” Mikerin as a cooperating asset, but their confrontation with him at an office building in 2014 failed to persuade him to cooperate, sources said.

Prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland then assembled charges and an indictment, using mostly information from the FBI’s counterintelligence files and interviews of Campbell done by an Energy Department investigative agent, officials said

Mikerin was an icon in the Russian nuclear industry, a top executive of the state-controlled Rosatom firm and its Tenex subsidiary and the man Moscow sent to Washington in 2010 to oversee Russian President Vladimir Putin’s plan to grow uranium sales inside the United States under the Obama administration.

The November 2014 indictment, bearing Rosenstein’s name, charged Mikerin with felony conspiracy to interfere with interstate commerce through extortion.

Court documents alleged Mikerin was part of a larger racketeering scheme that also involved bribery, kickbacks and money laundering and that he demanded $50,000 in regular kickbacks from Campbell starting in November 2009 in order for Campbell to keep his consulting work for the Russians.

The court documents portrayed Campbell alternatively as “Victim One” or “Confidential Witness 1” who came forward to report Mikerin’s wrongdoing and cooperate with the FBI.

In fact, Campbell had been under the FBI’s control informing on the Russian nuclear industry since 2006, had signed a formal nondisclosure agreement with the FBI in 2008 and eventually was rewarded in 2016 with a $51,000 check for his extensive counterintelligence work.

Mikerin eventually pleaded guilty to a money laundering conspiracy charge and was sentenced in December 2015 to 48 months in prison.

A month later, the FBI paid Campbell compensation of more than $51,000, a transaction prosecutors did not learn about until The Hill published a copy of the check last month, officials said.

Congress is now investigating the entire Russian nuclear bribery case after The Hill disclosed Campbell’s work, with multiple committees demanding to know whether the FBI told the Obama administration about Mikerin’s criminality before the administration made favorable decisions that rewarded Rosatom with billions of dollars in new American nuclear fuel contracts.

Justice officials began briefing congressional officials this week, starting with the Senate Judiciary Committee. After the briefings end, congressional investigators plan to interview Campbell.

After Campbell’s name and work surfaced, anonymous allegations surfaced in stories by Yahoo and Reuters suggesting the Justice Department had grave reservations about Campbell’s credibility, in part because he had three misdemeanor alcohol arrests.

But officials told The Hill those leaks were not authorized by the Justice Department and did not reflect accurately the official thinking of the department.

For instance, they said prosecutors had no concerns about Campbell’s three misdemeanor alcohol arrests and that the FBI held the informant in enough esteem to pay him the check after the case ended. And after prosecutors completed three debriefings with Campbell, they approved the payment in 2015 of the last of his expenses as an undercover.

Prosecutors’ concerns primarily dealt with the sequence of events and transactions surrounding Campbell’s undercover work during the counterintelligence part of the probe before criminal prosecutors got involved, officials said.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS: CBC, Judiciary to Secretaries of State, Election Officials: Trump Administration Requests Will Likely Lead to Voter Suppression, Privacy Violations

WASHINGTON – Today, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) and Judiciary Committee Democrats sent letters to the National Association of Secretaries of State and the National Association of State Election Directors raising concerns that recent requests of them from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the White House voter fraud commission (Commission) may lead to voter suppression and privacy violations. In letters sent this week to secretaries of state and election officials in all 50 states, DOJ asks states to provide voter registration list maintenance procedures and the Commission asks states to provide detailed voter-roll information. Both letters appear to encourage greater voting purges by states.

“We have little doubt that if complied with, these letters – issued unilaterally without any vote or public discussion – would lead to an unprecedented, nationwide voter suppression effort,” wrote CBC Chairman Cedric Richmond (D-La.), and Co-Chairs of the CBC Task Force on Civil and Voting Rights, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), and Congresswoman Terri A. Sewell (D-Ala.).

Department of Justice Letter

“The letter from the DOJ appears to signal the initiation of a federal effort to prevent lawful voters from being able to vote, either by bullying states into removing such voters from their rolls, or by suing the states outright. We have previously seen such purging efforts conducted at the state level, littered with errors and inaccuracies, and inevitably performed in a manner which discriminates against minority voters.”

White House Voter Fraud Commission Letter

“We also have grave concerns that compliance with Mr. Kobach’s letter would result in unprecedented violations of American’s privacy rights and potentially violate federal law.  The breadth of the information requested, including name, address, birth dates, political party affiliation, voting history, Social Security numbers, and military status, among other personal information is not only overwhelming, but chilling from a civil rights and liberties perspective.  In addition to being used to conduct further discriminatory voter purges, one shudders to think of the many ways this information could be misused.” 

CBC Letter to National Association of State Election Directors by Beverly Tran on Scribd

CBC Letter to National Association of Secretaries of State by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Statement for the Hearing, “Combating Crimes against Children: Assessing the Legal Landscape,” by the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers. Jr.

Today’s hearing by this subcommittee will discuss the serious and disturbing issue of the criminal victimization of children.  With all of our efforts to fight the various forms of child exploitation, it continues to be a threat to our young people. 

However, we have developed strategies to both prevent and respond to these crimes, and to assist the many children who are victims.  I trust we will learn about the strategies that are working and how we can do better. 

In April of last year, the Department of Justice reported to us that the main threats in this area in the next five years will be:  child pornography, sextortion, child sex trafficking, sex offender registry violations, and child sex tourism.

The response to these crimes involves an intricate network of federal, state, and local law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies, and private, nonprofit organizations and advocates, supported by direct federal funding authorizations and grant programs, all working together to keep our youngest constituents safe from harm.

Today we will hear from individuals, representing some of the entities involved in this very necessary mission.  Their roles illustrate the ways we can do more and do better. 

First, we in Congress must recognize that, while we can enact federal legislation, state and local law enforcement are on the front lines and we must support their partnerships with federal agencies.  The Internet Crimes against Children Task Force program, funded through the Justice Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, provides training and technical assistance and regularly conducts undercover online investigative operations.

Since Congress mandated creation of this program, 3,500 federal, state, and local law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies have joined to form 61 coordinated regional task forces.  These task forces are especially important now, because we are seeing a tremendous increase in crimes perpetrated against children on the Internet.

Detective Patrick Beaver, from the Loudon County Virginia Sheriff’s Office, will speak with us today about the successes his office has had working with the Northern Virginia Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force to conduct an operation targeting internet predators last year.

Next, we must provide specialized assistance to families, victims, and law enforcement to help prevent child abductions, recover missing children, identify and assist victims of child pornography and child sex trafficking.  That is the mission of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and we will hear from their representative today about what they are experiencing in providing this assistance. 

As a former local and federal prosecutor, Ms. Francey Hakes will also help tell us about the challenges at the state and federal levels in fighting these crimes and enforcing our laws. 

All of this will help us as we consider legislation to amend and reauthorize important statutes such as the Adam Walsh Act and the Trafficking Victims Protection Act.  

Clearly, we must do more to prevent and investigate these crimes – and especially assist their many victims.  When we do apprehend and convict offenders, we must recognize that most of them will be released back into society at some point.  

The Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act is intended to establish a nationwide system of monitoring and tracking sex offenders, particularly after they are released from prison.  Currently, there are over 850,000 registered sex offenders in this country.

If we are going to have such a system, we must ensure that it is used in appropriate circumstances and in the most effective manner.  However, only 17 states are in substantial compliance with its requirements.

States, policy makers, researchers, and advocates continue to object to the requirements established by SORNA for many reasons.

One of the most pervasive criticisms of SORNA is the inclusion of juveniles on registries. Ms. Nicole Pittman is here with us today to discuss the real impact of juvenile registration – on the juveniles, their families, and the overall effectiveness of SORNA.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on this important topic.  We all wish that child exploitation could be eradicated, but the problem persists.  With what we learn today, I hope we can work together to come closer to achieving our goal.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

MORE THAN 50 HOUSE DEMOCRATS CALL ON OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO COMPLETELY DISMANTLE DISCRIMINATORY NSEERS REGISTRATION SYSTEM BEFORE NEW ADMINISTRATION BEGINS

Washington, DC – In the wake of reports about the Trump Administration’s plans to create a special registration program for Muslims, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security Ranking Member Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) and Representatives Luis V. Gutiérrez (D-IL), Judy Chu (D-CA) and Keith Ellison (D-MN), led more than 50 House Democrats in calling for President Barack Obama to completely dismantle the regulatory framework behind the discriminatory National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS) before his administration ends.  The Obama Administration effectively ended the program in 2011; however, the apparatus remains. House Democrats are calling for the NSEERS regulatory framework to be eliminated.

The letter was signed by Representatives John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Luis V. Gutiérrez (D-IL), Judy Chu (D-CA), Beto O’Rourke (D-TX), Grace Meng (D-NY), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Jared Huffman (D-CA), Norma J. Torres (D-CA), Scott Peters (D-CA), Allen Lowenthal (D-CA), James A Himes (D-CT), Xavier Becerra (D-CA), Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA), José E. Serrano (D-NY), Mike Quigley (D-IL), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Suzan K. DelBene (D-WA), Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Michael E. Capuano (D-MA), Joseph P. Kennedy, III (D-MA), Doris Matsui (D-CA), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Colleen Hanabusa (D-HI), David E. Price (D-NC), Donald S. Beyer, Jr. (D-VA), James McGovern (D-MA), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Raul M. Grijalva (D-AZ), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Nydia M. Velázquez (D-NY), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Michael M. Honda (D-CA), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA), Debbie Dingell (D-MI), Mark Takano (D-CA), John Lewis (D-GA), David N. Cicilline (D-RI), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Betty McCollum (D-MN), Ted Lieu (D-CA), Seth Moulton (D-MA), Linda T. Sánchez (D-CA), Tony Cárdenas (D-CA), André Carson (D-IN), Joseph Crowley (D-NY), Grace F. Napolitano (D-CA), Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-VA), and Michael F. Doyle (D-PA). 

House Democrats Request To Dismantle NSEERS 12-1-16 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. for the Markup ofH.R. 5203, the ‘‘Visa Integrity and Security Act of 2016”

 

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

Strengthening the security of the immigration and visa issuance process is a critical issue for all Americans. 

As one who believes our Nation should be a beacon of freedom and liberty, I very much appreciate the need to effectively combat terrorism, while maintaining our commitment to core values.

Unfortunately, H.R. 5203, the “Visa Integrity and Security Act,” fails to honor those core values.

This failing can largely be attributed to the fact that the bill reflects absolutely no input from Democratic Members of the Committee. Nor has this measure been the subject of any legislative hearing. 

Bereft of informed testimony and expert analysis, we have essentially no information about the bill's potential costs, both fiscal and social.  Yet, even a superficial review of H.R 5203 reveals its many flaws. 

To begin with, the bill – without any exception for age or any other factor -- singles out every national of Iran, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen by requiring that the Department of State complete individualized security opinions for visa applicants from these countries. 

As a result, vast amounts of agency time and resources would be dedicated to completing security advisory reports on, for example, infants, toddlers, and others who clearly pose no security risk.

An even more troublesome aspect of this provision is that it singles out a handful of majority Muslim countries thereby dehumanizing entire populations by treating all of their nationals as potential terrorists. 

Clearly, the more we dehumanize entire populations based on religion, the less likely they will become our allies against the real threat, namely, terrorists who seek to do our Nation harm.

History has shown that arbitrary across the board judgments based on broad characteristics, such as nationality, do nothing to enhance our security and only cast a cloud of suspicion over entire communities here in our country. 

Another critical flaw of this bill is the serious privacy concerns it presents.  Although H.R. 5203 mandates DNA testing for biological family-based immigrant applications, the bill has no provisions safeguarding this massive new database of DNA, that would include the DNA of potentially millions of non-criminals and American citizens.

Finally, this bill would require significant costs to implement, yet offers no comprehensive fix to our broken immigration system.

Just one provision of this bill -- the Visa Security Program -- would come at the cost of $120 million without meaningfully targeting law enforcement and intelligence resources on actual threats.

An immigration reform bill – such as the measure that passed the Senate in 2013 or the bill that had 201 House cosponsors in the last Congress – would allow law-abiding immigrants to come out of the shadows and get right with the law. 

Measures such as those it would make us safer by enabling law enforcement and intelligence agencies to focus resources on the most pressing cases.

Rather than rushing to consider legislation absolutely devoid of deliberative process, we should devote our efforts to developing meaningful and informed solutions.

Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 5203, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©