It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Associated Press, MSM Committing Voter ID Fraud! Exposed in Indiana.

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 04:52 AM
After the Indiana May primaries, the Associated Press ran a story July 10 decrying how voter ID laws had prevented legitimate Indiana voters from casting their ballots:
Legitimate voters blocked by photo ID laws

When Edward and Mary Weidenbener went to vote in Indiana's primary in May, they didn't realize that state law required them to bring government photo IDs such as a driver's license or passport.

The husband and wife, both approaching 90 years old, had to use a temporary ballot that would be verified later, even though they knew the people working the polling site that day. Unaware that Indiana law obligated them to follow up with the county election board, the Weidenbeners ultimately had their votes rejected — news to them until informed recently by an Associated Press reporter.

The story was picked up and reported back home on the front page of the Austin American Stateman, and across the country, including Tne Miami Herald and Minnesota Public Radio.

I recognized the name of the prominent local veterinarian and his wife, and wondered how an educated community leader could have been abused by a system meant to protect against voter fraud. Unfortunately, I chalked it up to "the system," and let it go.

Fortunately, didn't let it go so easily.

Today, it was reported that the Indiana Secretary of State had looked further into the story as well, and revealed it for the fraudulent misrepresentation we have come to expect from the MSM in their devotion to all things Obama and willingness to distort facts, ignore the truth and flat-out lie to serve their united agenda to see Obama re-elected at any cost:

It turns out ... that ... the reporter, Mike Baker, failed to reveal that the voters in question actually have photo IDs and have used them in previous elections.
Baker started off with what seemed like a frustrating story about two elderly Indiana voters ... who were unable to vote in Indiana’s May primary ...supposedly because “they didn’t realize that state law required them to bring government photo IDs such as a driver’s license or passport.”

This assertion was not true at all, it was later determined.

AP Makes Bogus Charge of Voter Disenfranchisement

As it turns out, the Weidenbeners lived in a retirement community that included the polling place where they have voted for much of their lives! They frequently walked to dinner from their home to the dining hall where they'd cast their votes.
And, although they could've voted without IDs via early ballot, they never followed up on their provisional ballots by taking the community shuttle or asking their nearby 51-year old son to take them to the county vourthouse to verify their eligibility.

The AP never said a word about whether or not these elderly voters had photo IDs. ... It turns out that not only do the Weidenbeners both have valid Indiana driver’s licenses, but they also have passports, according to the Office of the Indiana Secretary of State.

Either of those IDs is acceptable under Indiana’s law. Contrary to the AP story, they told the Office of the Secretary of State that they were well aware of the voter ID requirement and had voted in prior elections in Indiana, since the voter ID became effective after showing their photo IDs at their polling place.

Although the Weidenbeners apparently forgot to bring their IDs to their polling place for the May primary, they live in a retirement community with an assisted living center, a communal dining and activity facility, and a number of detached houses for independent living. Their polling place is located within the assisted living center, adjacent to the dining room. It is so close to where they live that the Weidenbeners usually walk over to the dining room for meals. Thus, it would have been easy for them to have returned to their home to get their IDs, then gone back to their poll to vote an actual ballot.
Instead, however, the Wedienbeners cast a provisional ballot. Their home is only 2.24 miles from the county courthouse where they could have gone after the election to show their photo IDs so that their provisional ballots would have counted. And transportation would not have been a problem; they could get there via their own car, a city bus, or a community shuttle bus.
The AP also neglected to mention that since the Weidenbeners are over 65, they could vote by absentee ballot without an ID..

All of this flies in the face of the fact that after Indiana adopted their Voter ID law in 2006, the number of Democrat voters increased, and Obama carried the state in 2008!

Clearly, the intent here was to create the false impression that voter ID requirements somehow disadvantaged these people who were otherwise entitled to vote. If they'd voted a few days earlier in "Early Voting," there was no ID required; and, they had 10 days after their provisional ballots to get the shuttle or their son to take them on the 5-minute ride to show their drivers' licenses. Nothing in the photo ID law prevented these people from having their ballots counted if they;d done what they'd done for years before!

Of course, the Statesman didn't follow this up or point out the obvious facts and falsehoods, nor did the Herald, or Minnesota Public Radio, or the Rochester Democrat; all of whom dutifully parroted the AP distortion and misrepresentations to fit their mutual agendas.

And, somewhat tellingly, none of them reported that the Weidenbeners cast their primary ballots for Mitt Romney.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 05:18 AM
Voter fraud on my planet? Get out of here! Surely you jest because the government would never, ever do something to cheat, lie, or steal from its people.

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 07:51 AM
reply to post by Em2013

If the opponents of identification requirements tried to legitimately address facts, perhaps there could be a reasoned debate. Instead, they resort to distortions, straw men and outright lies in their desperation to preserve the few remaining "secret weapons" that harken back to the "good old days" when a drink and a pack of cigarettes guaranteed a "precinct captain" 50 or 60 extra votes.

Nonetheless, recent unprecedented voter ID laws, sponsored principally by Republican conservatives in 10 states, require a government-issued photo ID before citizens can cast a vote that will count. Restrictive legislation is proposed or pending (some being litigated) in other states.

Sadly, these kinds of stringent voting restrictions reflect partisan shenanigans at their worst, making the voting process burdensome and discouraging for millions of eligible voters, effectively and purposely disenfranchising many. Most heavily impacted are students, minorities, low-income individuals, the young, seniors and the disabled because acquiring ID-supporting documents can be costly and access to ID-issuing offices challenging.

Recent? Most of these laws have been in effect for at least 10 or more years.
Unprecedented? Give me a break!
"Stringent voting restrictions?" Soince when is being asked to prove you are who you say you are, "Stringent?"
"Burdensome and discouraging for millions of voters? No one has ever claimmed that this has impacted any more than a couple thousand people scattered across the country, some of whom never have and do not intend to ever vote or otherwise participate in community or political life.

See what I mean?

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:20 AM
I often wondered why we are made to go to a specific spot, within a specific amount of time, in order to cast our vote.

In todays age, why can't we just log into a website from our home computer and vote. If the website was secure, and some rules were put in place, there would be little to no chance for voters fraud. (If we can spend billions on war, we can spend a few dollars on a secure website for voting)

You wouldn't have people who were biased counting votes, no one would be allowed to access the computer that was talying the votes, it would be shown as the votes came in exactly who was in the lead in real time on the website by state, so, they wouldn't really be able to fudge the numbers.

Just can't figure out how to keep someone from making multiple votes from different computers. Unless you had to use your DL# to log in to vote, and they threw out any duplicate votes from your name, plus cross referenced the IP address to your location?

Anyhow, obviously I am no expert, but, I know the experts could make it work, if they wanted to. But I guess they don't.

Now, I understand that they really don't want voters fraud to go away. Because then the people may actually be able to choose their own president.


posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:39 AM
I am surprised the Austin paper didn't follow up after more info on the original story was released. But it is Austin.

it's getting harder to believe in what the news writes in today's world.

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:41 AM
uhmm...i read the story, and there was no"flat-out lie" by the MSM....molehill equals mountain...briebart has lost all credibility with me anyway, so i start with the presumption that any briebart "news" story is false.
let me give an example of how rediculous this voter law was, for this "close-to-90yr-old" couple...

if you owned a liquor store, and a friend that you were in the same high-school graduation class with comes in, and you knew he was 40 years old, the same as you, and he picks up a six-pack of beer and starts walking toward the counter. and when he came up to the counter to asked him for his government-issued photo ID and he didn't have it, you then told him he couldn't prove he was old enough, so you refused to sell him that six-pack. that is the same type of lunacy that this "supposed problem with voter fraud" represents
where's all this freedom and liberty talk now?, and how about all of you that want government to quit telling you how to run your life?...and you are able to live your life without the government watching every little thing you do.

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:52 AM

Originally posted by jdub297

Fortunately, didn't let it go so easily.

Sorchaa Fall, Glen Beck, Breitbart, WHI Ulsterman, are all names that have more proven lies behind them than anything else.

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 12:53 PM
It seems to me that the biggest group of "disenfranchised" voters are the crooks themselves

Yes voting is a right.

But if you can't show yourself as true, how do we know you genuinely have that right ?

In today's corrupt world, it's the crooks that are actually forcing legitimacy.

They hate it too

If you want to vote and you are genuine,

Then show your fricken I.D. !!!

posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 02:24 PM

Originally posted by jimmyx
uhmm...i read the story, and there was no"flat-out lie" by the MSM....molehill equals mountain...briebart has lost all credibility with me anyway, so i start with the presumption that any briebart "news" story is false.
let me give an example of how rediculous this voter law was, for this "close-to-90yr-old" couple.. .

Sure, and the Democrat poll watcher would just stand-by and do nothing as the long-time Republican friends chatted for awhile about what a crappy state the country is in, before the Republican poll worker hands his buddy a ballot or two and says, "Hey, you don't need to show me any ID."

I don't know if you just do not understand how the real world works or if you're just doing as you've been coached.
Same with the alcohol "example." All it takes is one TABC agent to witness one transaction and a 20-year old business could be shut down and fined.

How much of an "intrusion" is this?
Talking about molehills and mountains; what hypocrisy!.

Even if Mickey Mouse or Benito Mussolini published the expose', it wouldn't change the fact that the AP reporter mislead and misrepresented facts to suit its agenda. It was the Indiana Secretary of State and the agency's attorney who revealed the truth.

Facts is facts, whether you like them, or their source, or not.


posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 05:33 AM
reply to post by jdub297

Ah but I think you've missed my sarcasm but that's okay. You've posted some valuable insight to this thread

top topics


log in