Citizens' Oversight Maryland---Maryland Progressives
CINDY WALSH FOR MAYOR OF BALTIMORE----SOCIAL DEMOCRAT
Citizens Oversight Maryland.com
  • Home
  • Cindy Walsh for Mayor of Baltimore
    • Mayoral Election violations
    • Questionnaires from Community >
      • Education Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Housing Questionnaire
      • Emerging Youth Questionnaire
      • Health Care policy for Baltimore
      • Environmental Questionnaires
      • Livable Baltimore questionnaire
      • Labor Questionnnaire
      • Ending Food Deserts Questionnaire
      • Maryland Out of School Time Network
      • LBGTQ Questionnaire
      • Citizen Artist Baltimore Mayoral Forum on Arts & Culture Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Transit Choices Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Activating Solidarity Economies (BASE)
      • Downtown Partnership Questionnaire
      • The Northeast Baltimore Communities Of BelAir Edison Community Association (BECCA )and Frankford Improvement Association, Inc. (FIA)
      • Streets and Transportation/Neighbood Questionnaire
      • African American Tourism and business questionnaire
      • Baltimore Sun Questionnaire
      • City Paper Mayoral Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Technology Com Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Biker's Questionnair
      • Homewood Friends Meeting Questionnaire
      • Baltimore Historical Collaboration---Anthem Project
      • Tubman City News Mayoral Questionnaire
      • Maryland Public Policy Institute Questionnaire
      • AFRO questionnaire
      • WBAL Candidate's Survey
  • Blog
  • Trans Pacific Pact (TPP)
  • Progressive vs. Third Way Corporate Democrats
    • Third Way Think Tanks
  • Financial Reform/Wall Street Fraud
    • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau >
      • CFPB Actions
    • Voted to Repeal Glass-Steagall
    • Federal Reserve >
      • Federal Reserve Actions
    • Securities and Exchange Commission >
      • SEC Actions
    • Commodity Futures Trading Commission >
      • CFTC Actions
    • Office of the Comptroller of the Currency >
      • OCC Actions
    • Office of Treasury/ Inspector General for the Treasury
    • FINRA >
      • FINRA ACTIONS
  • Federal Healthcare Reform
    • Health Care Fraud in the US
    • Health and Human Services Actions
  • Social Security and Entitlement Reform
    • Medicare/Medicaid/SCHIP Actions
  • Federal Education Reform
    • Education Advocates
  • Government Schedules
    • Baltimore City Council
    • Maryland State Assembly >
      • Budget and Taxation Committee
    • US Congress
  • State and Local Government
    • Baltimore City Government >
      • City Hall Actions
      • Baltimore City Council >
        • Baltimore City Council Actions
      • Baltimore Board of Estimates meeting >
        • Board of Estimates Actions
    • Governor's Office >
      • Telling the World about O'Malley
    • Lt. Governor Brown
    • Maryland General Assembly Committees >
      • Communications with Maryland Assembly
      • Budget and Taxation Committees >
        • Actions
        • Pension news
      • Finance Committees >
        • Schedule
      • Business Licensing and Regulation
      • Judicial, Rules, and Nominations Committee
      • Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee >
        • Committee Actions
    • Maryland State Attorney General >
      • Open Meetings Act
      • Maryland Courts >
        • Maryland Court System
    • States Attorney - Baltimore's Prosecutor
    • State Comptroller's Office >
      • Maryland Business Tax Reform >
        • Business Tax Reform Issues
  • Maryland Committee Actions
    • Board of Public Works >
      • Public Works Actions
    • Maryland Public Service Commission >
      • Public Meetings
    • Maryland Health Care Commission/Maryland Community Health Resources Commission >
      • MHCC/MCHRC Actions
    • Maryland Consumer Rights Coalition
  • Maryland and Baltimore Development Organizations
    • Baltimore/Maryland Development History
    • Committee Actions
    • Maryland Development Organizations
  • Maryland State Department of Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Public Schools
    • Algebra Project Award
  • Baltimore City School Board
    • Charter Schools >
      • Charter Schools---Performance
      • Charter School Issues
    • Public Schools >
      • Public School Issues
  • Progressive Issues
    • Fair and Balanced Elections
    • Labor Issues
    • Rule of Law Issues >
      • Rule of Law
    • Justice issues 2
    • Justice Issues
    • Progressive Tax Reform Issues >
      • Maryland Tax Reform Issues
      • Baltimore Tax Reform Issues
    • Strong Public Education >
      • Corporate education reform organizations
    • Healthcare for All Issues >
      • Universal Care Bill by state
  • Building Strong Media
    • Media with a Progressive Agenda (I'm still checking on that!) >
      • anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com
      • "Talk About It" Radio - WFBR 1590AM Baltimore
      • Promethius Radio Project
      • Clearing the Fog
      • Democracy Now
      • Black Agenda Radio
      • World Truth. TV Your Alternative News Network.
      • Daily Censured
      • Bill Moyers Journal
      • Center for Public Integrity
      • Public Radio International
      • Baltimore Brew
      • Free Press
    • Far Left/Socialist Media
    • Media with a Third Way Agenda >
      • MSNBC
      • Center for Media and Democracy
      • Public Radio and TV >
        • NPR and MPT News
      • TruthOut
  • Progressive Organizations
    • Political Organizations >
      • Progressives United
      • Democracy for America
    • Labor Organizations >
      • United Workers
      • Unite Here Local 7
      • ROC-NY works to build power and win justice
    • Justice Organizations >
      • APC Baltimore
      • Occupy Baltimore
    • Rule of Law Organizations >
      • Bill of Rights Defense Committee
      • National Lawyers Guild
      • National ACLU
    • Tax Reform Organizations
    • Healthcare for All Organizations >
      • Healthcare is a Human Right - Maryland
      • PNHP Physicians for a National Health Program
      • Healthcare NOW- Maryland
    • Public Education Organizations >
      • Parents Across America
      • Philadelphia Public School Notebook thenotebook.org
      • Chicago Teachers Union/Blog
      • Ed Wize Blog
      • Educators for a Democratic Union
      • Big Education Ape
    • Elections Organizations >
      • League of Women Voters
  • Progressive Actions
    • Labor Actions
    • Justice Actions
    • Tax Reform Actions >
      • Baltimore Tax Actions
      • Maryland Tax Reform Actions
    • Healthcare Actions
    • Public Education Actions
    • Rule of Law Actions >
      • Suing Federal and State government
    • Free and Fair Elections Actions
  • Maryland/Baltimore Voting Districts - your politicians and their votes
    • 2014 ELECTION OF STATE OFFICES
    • Maryland Assembly/Baltimore
  • Petitions, Complaints, and Freedom of Information Requests
    • Complaints - Government and Consumer >
      • Sample Complaints
    • Petitions >
      • Sample Petitions
    • Freedom of Information >
      • Sample Letters
  • State of the Democratic Party
  • Misc
    • WBFF TV
    • WBAL TV
    • WJZ TV
    • WMAR TV
    • WOLB Radio---Radio One
    • The Gazette
    • Baltimore Sun Media Group
  • Misc 2
    • Maryland Public Television
    • WYPR
    • WEAA
    • Maryland Reporter
  • Misc 3
    • University of Maryland
    • Morgan State University
  • Misc 4
    • Baltimore Education Coalition
    • BUILD Baltimore
    • Church of the Great Commission
    • Maryland Democratic Party
    • Pennsylvania Avenue AME Zion Church
    • Maryland Municipal League
    • Maryland League of Women Voters
  • Untitled
  • Untitled
  • Standard of Review
  • Untitled
  • WALSH FOR GOVERNOR - CANDIDATE INFORMATION AND PLATFORM
    • Campaign Finance/Campaign donations
    • Speaking Events
    • Why Heather Mizeur is NOT a progressive
    • Campaign responses to Community Organization Questionnaires
    • Cindy Walsh vs Maryland Board of Elections >
      • Leniency from court for self-representing plaintiffs
      • Amended Complaint
      • Plaintiff request for expedited trial date
      • Response to Motion to Dismiss--Brown, Gansler, Mackie, and Lamone
      • Injunction and Mandamus
      • DECISION/APPEAL TO SPECIAL COURT OF APPEALS---Baltimore City Circuit Court response to Cindy Walsh complaint >
        • Brief for Maryland Court of Special Appeals >
          • Cover Page ---yellow
          • Table of Contents
          • Table of Authorities
          • Leniency for Pro Se Representation
          • Statement of Case
          • Questions Presented
          • Statement of Facts
          • Argument
          • Conclusion/Font and Type Size
          • Record Extract
          • Appendix
          • Motion for Reconsideration
          • Response to Defendants Motion to Dismiss
          • Motion to Reconsider Dismissal
      • General Election fraud and recount complaints
    • Cindy Walsh goes to Federal Court for Maryland election violations >
      • Complaints filed with the FCC, the IRS, and the FBI
      • Zapple Doctrine---Media Time for Major Party candidates
      • Complaint filed with the US Justice Department for election fraud and court irregularities.
      • US Attorney General, Maryland Attorney General, and Maryland Board of Elections are charged with enforcing election law
      • Private media has a responsibility to allow access to all candidates in an election race. >
        • Print press accountable to false statement of facts
      • Polling should not determine a candidate's viability especially if the polling is arbitrary
      • Viability of a candidate
      • Public media violates election law regarding do no damage to candidate's campaign
      • 501c3 Organizations violate election law in doing no damage to a candidate in a race >
        • 501c3 violations of election law-----private capital
      • Voter apathy increases when elections are not free and fair
  • Maryland Board of Elections certifies election on July 10, 2014
  • Maryland Elections ---2016
September 24, 2014

 

US Justice Department of Justice

Criminal Division --- Public Integrity Section/Election Crimes

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington DC 20530

 

Tax Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington DC  20530

 

RE:  Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland 2014 lawsuit claiming systemic election irregularities that discriminate against candidates and platforms.

 

To Whom It Concerns,

 

Cindy Walsh for Governor of Maryland filed a lawsuit contesting the 2014 Democratic Primary election results in Maryland Circuit Court of Baltimore City on July 11, 2014 and the complaint was assigned a case number and after 60 days and the election ongoing, a trial date has not been filed.  Cindy Walsh is self-representing and is now moving to Mandamus to set the trial date or dismiss so plaintiff can pursue justice in this complaint.  The court has not responded to plaintiff or defendants’ motions.  This is an expedited case by Maryland law and the general election is ongoing creating great injustice for the plaintiff while the defendant is campaigning as if no election challenge has been filed.

The plaintiff will move this case to Federal Court as the elements of the case involve not only Maryland Election Commission and Maryland public officials but it includes media and 501c3 organizations that chose to violat4e Federal election law.  I am also claiming False Statement charges, mail fraud, and honest services fraud as regards arbitrary and corrupt use of polling and posting of candidate lists.  This is why I am sending this to both the Criminal Department, Public Integrity/Election crimes and the Tax Department.

I filed a complaint earlier in the election with the FEC hoping they would find that such election irregularities would create violations of election campaign finance law and now I am moving to Federal Court with the lawsuit I have attached as a DRAFT.  I request that the US Justice Department investigate this complaint not only as a single event but this practice I relay is systemic over multiple election cycles.  It has created an election crisis in Maryland as 80% of registered Democrats and 80% of registered Republicans do not even vote in primaries because they want none of the candidates ‘selected’ to be highlighted by media and 501c3s participating in these elections.  This is not apathy, it is the fact that elections have been captured by incumbents to the point of open exclusion of candidates having a platform different from those currently in office and wanted by that super-majority of voters that chooses not to vote.  Candidates and voters are told only selected candidates will participate in election functions needed to obtain name and platform recognition.  We are told ‘if you do not like the candidates we put before you then don’t vote’.  This was literally spoken over the air be WYPR commentators.  The election violations are willful, deliberate, and done with malice in collusion with the Maryland State Democratic Party Committee and the media and 501c3 organizations choosing to participate in these election primaries and general elections.

My responsibility in this Maryland Circuit Court lawsuit challenging these Democratic Primary results is simply that election irregularities changed the result of the election for Democratic candidate for Governor.  My case is clearly without a doubt the election irregularities changed the results of the election but I cannot get a trial date to even present this case as the general election nears.  I request that not only would the US Justice Department investigate the irregularities in this complaint against media and 501c3 organizations operating in Maryland but investigate as well why the Maryland Circuit Court in Baltimore is failing to provide Due Process and justice in the election challenge.  Below I include the Federal Statutes that would allow the Federal Justice Department to become involved in this state election for governor.  The violations of IRS and FCC election laws are already Federal venue.

I have details of each defendant’s charge in my DRAFT of the Federal Court lawsuit available upon request and the original complaint with Amendment of the Maryland Circuit Court of Baltimore City case. 

Please contact me as to the department’s ability to handle this complaint.  As you know I am in need of immediate relief regarding the ongoing election for governor.

 

Thank you,

 

Cindy Walsh

2422 N. Calvert St

Baltimore, Maryland 21218

443-825-7031

I am self-representing

 

Attaining federal jurisdiction over State election crime.

 

These generally include election frauds that involve the necessary participation of public officer, notably election officials acting “under color of law”.

State action

In Federal Civil Rights Acts, dating back to 1875, any activity by the government of a state, any of its components or employees (like a sheriff), who uses the “color of law” (claim of legal right) to violate an individual’s civil rights.  Such “state action” gives the person whose rights have been violated by a governmental body of official the right to sue that agency or person for damages.

 

Statutes Applicable to Nonfederal Elections

18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242 –

 

any scheme that involves the necessary participation of public officials, usually

election officers or notaries, acting “under color of law,” which is actionable as a derogation of the “one person, one vote” principle of the FourteenthAmendment, i.e., “public schemes;”

 

STATUTES

 

 

 

Conspiracy Against Rights and Deprivation of Constitutional Rights.

 

18 U.S.C. § 241

 

 

Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to“conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the

Constitution or laws of the United States.” Violations are punishable by imprisonment for up to ten years or, if death results, by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or by a sentence ofdeath.

 

The Supreme Court long ago recognized that the right to vote for federal offices is among the rights secured by Article I, Sections 2 and 4, of the Constitution, and hence is protected by Section 241.

United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299 (1941); Ex parte Yarborough,110 U.S. 651 (1884). Although the statute was enacted just after the Civil War to address efforts to deprive the newly emancipated slaves of the basic rights of citizenship, such as the right to vote, it has been interpreted to include any effort to derogate any right that flows from the Constitution or from federal law.

 

Section 241 has been an important statutory tool in election crime prosecutions. Originally held to apply only to schemes to corrupt elections for federal office, it has recently been successfully applied to nonfederal elections as well, provided that state action was a necessary feature of the fraud. This state action requirement can be met not only by the participation of poll officials and notaries public, but by activities of persons who clothe themselves with the appearance of state authority, e.g., with uniforms, credentials, and badges. Williams v. United States, 341 U.S. 97 (1951).

 

Section 241 does not require that the conspiracy be successful, United States v. Bradberry, 517 F.2d 498 (7th Cir. 1975), nor need there be proof of an overt act. Williams v. United States, 179 F.2d 644, 649 (5th Cir. 1950), aff’d on other grounds, 341 U.S. 70 (1951); Morado, 454 F.2d 167. Section 241 reaches conduct affecting the integrity of the federal election process as a whole, and does not require fraudulent action with respect to any particular voter. United States v. Nathan, 238 F.2d 401 (7th Cir. 1956). The use of Section 241 in election fraud cases generally falls into two types of situations: “public schemes” and “private schemes.” A public scheme is one that involves the necessary participation of a public official acting under the color of law.

 

Deprivation of Rights under Color of Law.

18 U.S.C. § 242

 

 

Section 242, also enacted as a post-Civil War statute, makes it unlawful for anyone acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive a person of any right, privilege, or immunity secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

 

 

Prosecutions under Section 242 need not show the existence of a conspiracy. However, the defendants must have acted illegally “under color of law,” i.e., the case must involve a public scheme, as discussed above. This element does not require that the defendant be a de jure officer or a government official; it is sufficient if he or she jointly acted with state agents in committing the offense, United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787 (1966), or if his or her actions were made possible by the fact that they were clothed with the authority of state law, Williams v. United States, 341 U.S. 97 (1951); United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299 (1941).

 

Because a Section 242 violation can be a substantive offense for election fraud conspiracies prosecutable under Section 241, the cases cited in the discussion of Section 241 that involve public schemes (i.e., those involving misconduct under color of law) apply to Section 242.

 

 

 

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

 

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail Fraud. 18 U.S.C. § 1341

 

The federal mail fraud statute prohibits use of the United States mails, or a private or commercial interstate carrier, to further a “scheme or artifice to defraud.” 18 U.S.C. § 1341. Violations are punishable by imprisonment for up to twenty years.

 

Salary theory of mail fraud

 

Schemes to obtain salaried positions by falsely representing one’s credentials to a hiring authority remain prosecutable under the mail fraud statute after McNally. The objective of such “salary schemes” is to obtain pecuniary items by fraud; such schemes are therefore clearly within the scope of the common law concepts of fraud to which McNally sought to restrict the mail fraud statute.

 

 

Election fraud schemes can present related issues concerning the quality and value of the public officer hired thereby.  The Supreme Court observed in McNally that deceit concerning the quality and value of a commodity or service remains within the scope of the mail fraud statute.  McNally, 483 U.S. at 360 (emphasis added). Election fraud schemes involve an aspect of material concealment insofar as the “value” of the services the public is paying for are concerned: the public “hired” the candidate because it was falsely led to believe this candidate received the most valid votes, and consequently received services from a qualified individual that were thus of lower value.

 

 

Honest Services Fraud ----18 U.S.C. § 1346

 

 Defined “scheme or artifice to defraud” to include “the intangible right of honest services.”

 

Moreover, jurisprudence in the arena of public corruption has generally confined Section 1346 to schemes involving traditional forms of corruption that involve a clear breach of the

fiduciary duty of “honest services” owed by a public official to the body politic, e.g., bribery, extortion, embezzlement, theft, conflicts of interest, and, in some instances, gratuities.

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.