Does this photo show Rove & Ralston breaking the law? You be the judge.

[bleever]

Election night, November 2004, in the White House:




Remember how Al Gore got in all sorts of trouble because he might have made a few campaign-related phone calls from the VP's office, instead of leaving the building to use a different phone? The relevant law is called the Hatch Act. Here's a little history, and what the law actually says as it applies to the activities in the above photo.

'Many Republicans, however, were convinced that WPA workers had gone further, intimidating staff members, pressuring clients, and using public funds for political purposes. This concern explains the Hatch Act's most restrictive provision—that persons below the policymaking level in the executive branch of the federal government must not only refrain from political practices that would be illegal for any citizen but must abstain from "any active part" in political campaigns.'

http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/ah_040900_hatchact.htm

'In 1993, Congress passed legislation that significantly amended the Hatch Act as it applies to federal and D.C. employees (5 U.S.C. §§ 7321-7326). (These amendments did not change the provisions that apply to state and local employees. 5 U.S.C. §§ 1501- 1508.) Under the amendments most federal and D.C. employees are now permitted to take an active part in political management and political campaigns. A small group of federal employees are subject to greater restrictions and continue to be prohibited from engaging in partisan political management and partisan political campaigns.'

http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm

And getting down to the nitty-gritty:

'Permitted/Prohibited Activities for Employees Who May Participate in Partisan Political Activity

These federal and D.C. employees may-

* be candidates for public office in nonpartisan elections
* register and vote as they choose
* assist in voter registration drives
* express opinions about candidates and issues
* contribute money to political organizations
* attend political fundraising functions
* attend and be active at political rallies and meetings
* join and be an active member of a political party or club
* sign nominating petitions
* campaign for or against referendum questions, constitutional amendments, municipal ordinances
* campaign for or against candidates in partisan elections
* make campaign speeches for candidates in partisan elections
* distribute campaign literature in partisan elections
* hold office in political clubs or parties

These federal and D.C. employees may not-

* use official authority or influence to interfere with an election
* solicit or discourage political activity of anyone with business before their agency
* solicit or receive political contributions (may be done in certain limited situations by federal labor or other employee organizations)
* be candidates for public office in partisan elections
* engage in political activity while:
- on duty
- in a government office
- wearing an official uniform
- using a government vehicle
* wear partisan political buttons on duty'

http://www.osc.gov/ha_fed.htm

So whether or not this photo depicts Rove in the act of stealing the election with his bank of computers following precinct-level voting returns, it would seem to constitute prima facia evidence of an egregious violation of the Hatch Act, on his part and that of Susan Ralston.


See also this previous thread, with more good info and analysis:

"Susan Ralston: Traitorgate, Abramoff scandal, AND election theft witness?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5467221



A federal prosecutor looking to untangle the activities of certain persons of interest might find this information of value.

:)