THE BURNED OVER DISTRICT

Any attorney actively involved in voter fraud should have their license pulled.

In the final days of the 2004 presidential election," Jacobson's report explains, "the Democratic National Committee [had filed] an injunction against the Republican National Committee in New Jersey federal court, alleging its involvement in using lists of returned mail to challenge 35,000 newly registered Ohio voters. This tactic, also known as voter caging, is historically employed to suppress votes from minority and low-income citizens who tend to vote Democratic."

The judge in the case, Dickinson R. Debevoise, ultimately rejected Hunter's sworn testimony and found the RNC in violation of an earlier consent decree forbidding it to use "ballot security measures" such as caging.

In granting the injunction," Jacobson writes, "[Judge] Debevoise specifically addresses Hunter's statement denying that the Party was involved in vote caging activities. He finds her sworn testimony -- made as a witness -- unsupported by the facts in the case. ... 'Miss Hunter's information and belief,' he concludes, 'is belied by the evidence developed during the brief period of discovery.'"

Legal experts Jacobson interviewed suggested that Hunter's testimony appeared to have been deliberately designed to mislead the court, which would amount to a breach of legal ethics. Velvet Revolution's filing levels the same charge, relying heavily on Jacobson's research and reporting.

"Caroline Hunter breached her legal duty and violated the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct by giving misleading sworn testimony, belied by the facts, in the U.S. Federal Court in Newark, New Jersey," the complaint reads.

It would be nice to give her a little jail time as well, or better yet have her roll over those who directed her fraud.