U.S. Attorneys: Asleep at the Switch How About Election Fraud? The Long Road to Democracy Weekly Comment & Links (Comment below Links here) Michael Collins The sacked eight, as we’ll call the fired federal prosecutors, are a hot topic nationwide. Their inauspicious Dec. 7, 2006 firing became a major controversy when New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias caused a furor in early March by actually objecting to his firing. It seems his former sponsor for that position, the intense Senator Pete Domenici, (R-NM) had called attorney Iglesias and implied (as in insisted) that that he prosecute some Democrats before the midterm elections. 
“Scoop” Independent News
Washington, DC
Sen. Domenici
Senator Domenici is not amused.
Why? We can only guess but as things look now, the prosecutions would have benefited Domenici’s heir apparent, Cong. Heather Wilson, (R-NM). Seems Heather was in a fix. She’d been accused of sequestering a file that New Mexico Department of Children, Youth and Families had on her husband. There was bad publicity with the implication of nepotism (Wilson was head of the department at the time).
This meant that her tight race was going to be even tighter. Democratic challenger Patricia Madrid had any number of things going for her: a comfortable lead in the polls, the support of a popular governor, and high name recognition. Heather couldn’t count on the same breaks got from the state’s voting machines in 2004. This was a real fight.
Wilson won which by just under 900 votes. This raises some questions. First, what if Iglesias had charged the two Democrats Domenici fingered? Would the Wilson margin have been greater? Second, were there any election irregularities or machine malfunctions worth looking into? That’s a pretty tight margin for a race with over 210 thousand votes. Madrid’s pre election polling alone should have triggered at least a look see. In the late breaking polls, Madrid lead Wilson 53% to 46%. Was there a Wilson surge or could it be…
Heather Wilson
Heather's happy
There were controversies in New Mexico’s 2004 elections. Greg Palast investigated and found thousands turned away from voting due to restrictive voter identification laws (just the type encouraged by the “voter fraud” prevention program). He also noted:
Last year, I flew to New Mexico to investigate the 33,981 cast but not counted ballots of that state in the 2004 race. George Bush "won" New Mexico by 5,988 votes. Or did he? I calculated that, of the all the ballots rejected and "spoiled," 89% were cast by voters of color. Who won New Mexico? Kerry won--or he would have, if they had counted the ballots.
U.S. Attorney Iglesias didn’t do much prosecuting for “voter fraud” in 2004, nor did he do much election fraud investigating and prosecuting either. Voter fraud occurred at a rate of 24 cases between 2002 and 2006. This type of fraud is an individual act and, in the aggregate, is a non event impacting an immeasurably small fraction of the vote. U.S. Attorney’s, some even trained on vote fraud by Iglesias, spend a lot of time studying this super microscopic fictional crime wave, thus legitimizing it. They spend exactly no time studying and investigating “election fraud,” the theft of hundreds of thousands of votes.
1 | 2
