by Ed Naile
Remember when we caught some vote thieves at State Senator Martha Fuller-Clark’s Voter Fraud Motel in Portsmouth’s residential district?
Let’s re-cap because that incident is still relevant, as we will see.
Four transient, non-domiciled campaign workers were caught living in Fuller-Clark’s home. Four of several more voters using that voter fraud motel to vote were “investigated” by NH’s Elections Unit of the AG’s Office. Steven LaBonte was the guy in charge back then.
Here is the fake news story the local paper produced, without asking simple questions:
AG: No voter fraud by residents at Sen. Fuller Clark’s home
“PORTSMOUTH — The state attorney general’s office concluded there is no evidence of voter fraud related to four workers for the Obama for America campaign who cast votes during the last two presidential elections while using state Sen. Martha Fuller Clark’s address as their own. The four people established a physical presence at Fuller Clark’s home, “which continued for several months,” and that was their domicile until they moved after the elections, concluded Assistant Attorney General Stephen LaBonte.”
LaBonte uses the term “established a physical presence.”
This little example of word play was his pathetic excuse to let campaign workers, staying the Voter Fraud Motel, off the hook for voting illegally in NH.
Establishing a presence is a legal term for immigration and taxes – but is not the requirement to vote in NH, an established domicile is the requirement. See Newburger v. Peterson 1972:
“We are sensitive to the compelling need “to preserve the basic conception of a political community”. Dunn v. Blumstein, supra, 92 S. Ct. at 1004. But the challenged New Hampshire law forces persons who are in every meaningful sense members of New Hampshire political communities to vote in communities elsewhere which they have long departed and with whose affairs they are no longer concerned, if indeed the former community still recognizes the right.”
Since none of the transient, no rent, flop-house, campaign workers ever “departed” their established domiciles back home – they voted in NH illegally. This is a simple matter.
Mr. LaBonte:
These campaign workers had to file state and federal taxes back home – what did the tax records show? Did the campaign workers use Martha Fuller Clark’s Voter fraud Motel as their domicile filing out-of-state taxes?
The Obama workers had driver’s licenses. Did anyone check them to see if they were changed as per NH state statutes? It was 30 days back then.
Where were their cars registered for the months they were squatting in Portsmouth?
And our vote thieves were registered to vote in other states. Were absentee ballots unavailable to them? One illegal voter, Griffith, used an absentee ballot in NH, but it was too difficult to vote at home? He was the attorney. Surprised?
Did any campaign transient notify their home state they changed addresses?
Did Assistant AG LaBonte address those questions?
These campaign workers had scurried back home by the time the story broke so LaBonte had his hands full trying to help them out. That is where “established a presence” came in handy.
Here we are in 2020 and the Democrats, along with Obama’s VP Joe Biden needs help – as in all the out-of-state college students he can muster because they vote predominately left wing.
In a last-minute effort to gin up the student vote, the NH AG’s Election Unit comes up with an announcement about student voters not present in NH because of the Chinese flu attack on our country.
Papers and public radio come up with headlines that make it look like any college student can vote in NH – not from “home.”
(Remember, this paper’s reporter refused to testify against out-of-state vote thief, Carl Robert Gibson, who attempted to commit real voter suppression while here in 2015 while working for the Sanders campaign. Gibson admitted to the reporter he did attempt to commit voter suppression.)
Here is the first paragraph of the article mentioned above:
“New Hampshire’s Attorney General’s Office has rejected a request by the state Republican Party to prevent college students from voting in New Hampshire if they returned to their out-of-state homes because of the pandemic.”
The phrase: “they returned to their out-of-state homes” has a funny ring to it. I guess that would be the homes from which they pay out-of-state tuition. The home they could not declare their NH domicile to pay in-state tuition. The home which they could legally vote from, hold driver’s licenses, serve on a jury, get other state licenses, etc.
The newest Assistant AG Elections Unit lays out what it takes to vote legally in NH, student or not:
“On Wednesday, the Attorney General’s Office maintained that state law allows college students who have established a domicile in New Hampshire to vote in the Granite State – even if they return home temporarily.”
“Return home” pops up again. Why not say “return to their former domicile or live out of state?” We all know many out-of-state students are going home because over 5,000 people voted same-day in 2016 and never became domiciled. These 5,000 and many more, were mostly from college towns These are the votes the Democrats want to make sure they get again. With a little help from the AG’s Election Unit and the fake news – they have a good chance.
As the article goes on, we drift into the term “physical presence” which is irrelevant. Physical presence isn’t a component of same-day voting in NH. But is does muddy the water.
Anyone, even confused students, can drop anchor at an actual physical address in NH and become domiciled the next day. Register your car, license the dog, drop the kids off at the new school, get a bank account, start paying electric bills, join a rescue squad, church. Next thing you know – you are a legitimate citizen of NH. See: Madison v. Every.
Could the AG’s Office or the fake news define “physical presence?”
I’ll bet not.
They can’t even define the word we use in the State Constitution and college registration forms: domicile.