Bloomberg's Curious Position on Election "Fraud"...

[BradBlog]

Bloomberg Charges 'Fraud' in NYC Primary, But Believes 'No Legal Issue at Stake'
The Mayor's Curious Position Follows Reports That Obama Received Zero Votes in Nearly 80 Precincts, Including Harlem, During Unofficial Super Tuesday Tally...

"If you want to call it significant undercounting, I guess that's a euphemism for fraud," the tin-foil hat-wearing conspiracy theorist Mayor --- who would not be welcome to post at the Daily Kos --- is quoted telling the New York Post today.

Politico's Ben Smith follows up today to report that a Bloomberg spokesman "reiterated the charge in an e-mail," but curiously notes that Bloomberg, who "controls the police department" in New York City would not be launching an investigation.

"Loeser said he didn't think there was actually a legal issue at stake in the preliminary, unofficial vote counts."

So if we have all of that straight, the NYC Mayor's office confirmed they believe there was "fraud" at work in the city's Primary Election, but don't believe there are any "legal issues at stake." Interesting position...

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5722

BTW, if you haven't seen the coverage of the inaccuracies being reported today on NJ's Sequoia DRE's, I posted a link in LBN here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3190609
...with the full story posted over at BRAD BLOG a few minutes ago right here:
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5718

[Wilms]

1. I doubt I'm the only one who thinks this soap opera is about maligning levers.

Of course, it could also simply be part of the high school level drama otherwise known as the Democratic Party Primary.

[Stevepol]

2. Can somebody tell me what makes fraud such a major problem

when it involves money (embezzlement) or identify theft, etc. etc.

But when it involves the outright and blatant theft of the vote, it becomes such a minor offense that nobody even bothers to check into it. Or they forget about it once the election is over.

Somewhere, sometime, enough people will eventually have enough of a desire to have fair elections that the US can begin the real process of restoring democracy to this banana republic.

[Wilms]

4. What is so "outright and blatant" about this story.

It's unofficial results. And that's been sufficiently explained.

Official results are determined with all parties examining all the machine.

But that's not as exciting as "outright and blatant".

[rosesaylavee]

3. Explain to me why this guy is attractive to Democrats?

I don't get it. He can't get worked up about election fraud - what other freedoms lost don't upset him?

[Jim Sagle]

5. He isn't attractive to Democrats, but hte media says he is, and that's what counts.

[rosesaylavee]

6. That's right. What was I thinking?

I forgot to drink the koolaid this morning. Don't tell, ok?