Quest for the "credible academic" won't end at Stanford Law

The lectures and edicts from the academy never seem to stop.  First there were demands that Election Law Center update comments at a pace acceptable to some academics.  Now it's lectures to Jonathan Tobin containing the dusty tropes that voter fraud isn't "widespread" and thus shouldn't be talked about in polite company.  Never mind that "widespread" always remains undefined.

The latest lecture from the academy is directed toward Tobin's piece Are You Sure There's No Voter Fraud.

The complaint is that no "credible academic" has found "widespread" voter fraud.

Both quotes are unintentional laugh lines.

Lets focus on the "credible academic."  Putting aside the oxymoronic nature of the term, all I could think of is the entirely incredible Stanford Law Professor Pam Karlan.

Pam Karlan is incredible because she has published demonstrably false and dishonest scholarship in the Duke law journal.  The scholarship from this academic is a rolling lie. 

These arguments—that the Brown case was the first Section 2 case brought by the Bush DOJ, and that for five years no case was brought to protect minority voters—are common untruths told by critics of the Bush administration. Stanford Law professor Pam Karlan peddled this nonsense in a published law review article that falsely states 'for five of the eight years of the Bush Administration, [they] brought no Voting Rights Act cases of its own except for one case protecting white voters.' In a footnote, Karlan says she relied on Obama Voting Section chief Chris Herren for information for her article."

 

The Brown case was not the first case to protect voters under Section 2 brought by the Bush DOJ.  Nor was there ever a gap of five years where no case was brought to protect minority voters. Karlan is outright making things up. She entirely ignores multiple Section 2 cases


The scholarship from the incredible academic Pam Karlan is a rolling lie which has never been corrected or retracted.  It was a lie designed to smear the Bush administration, and that's why she gets a pass from all of the other "credible academics."

None of the Credible Academics have had a single word to say about Karlan's false scholarship.  But they can be forgiven for being cowards.  Part of being a Credible Academic on the left is to never criticize another Credible Academic.  See, "Credible" is another way of saying "left leaning simpatico."

All of the Credible Academics probably count Pam Karlan among the Credible Academics.

This is what reveals the Credible Academics as ultimately in the tank for dishonest scholarship.  Otherwise, they'd speak up about her lies.

Naturally none of the Credible Academics are interested in doing actual hard social science on voter fraud.  Not a single Credible Academic has comprehensively reviewed instances of voter fraud. Whenever purported inventories of voter fraud are undertaken, they always under report and leave out cases.

We can take some solace that these little read and rarely seen lectures from Credible Academics don't usually escape an audience of captive students, academics in the echo chamber and occasionally some leftist blogs.

 
Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
  • No comments exist for this post.
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.