It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Trump pledges "major investigation into voter fraud"

page: 17
68
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

What a strange argument.

Surely the native American tribes lived there first? Lets put all their signs in their lost languages.

The majority of the population is english speaking, I imagine almost all naturally born citizens there speak english as their first language.




posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I just do not see a problem with voter ID and registration. I don't care who you vote for just that you are legal to vote and alive.
The Left suggests that to require proof to vote disenfranchises the poor and is only a scheme for the right to limit that voter base who happens to be mostly liberal, but the reality is it would only disenfranchise those who should not vote in the first place and who just happen to be Liberal for their own best interest.

We are talking 2017 people!! Really? There is no way we can incorporate identification in our voting processes without alienating anyone's voting rights?

There has been studies on this and it is suggested that about 14% of non-citizens (illegal aliens) have registered to vote and we can assume they would vote Democrat to say the least. The question we need to answer is how easy is it for a non-citizen to register? If we find out that it is quite simple then we could speculate a good number would want to vote for Hillary since she suggested to provide them all tickets to citizenship. Another question could be even if they do vote can it affect election results and I provide two examples below where it can.



Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.


With 3 to 4 million (maybe much more) illegals living in CA they have a rather good network and if it is easy to register to vote in CA why would they not do it in very large numbers if it was in their best interest to do it?





edit on 25-1-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
The problem is that most state (and federal) voting/election laws are so weak, if an ineligible person wanted to register to vote and vote fraudulently, there would be no red flags in the system and therefore no evidence to find.

Here's the thing, names if they exist can be checked.

In the voting machine fraud found some where basically 90+% pro hillary-detroit news. If no names are found and say entire regions are basically 90+% pro hillary, well that can be called into question. if names are found they can be cross-checked(for legal status).

You think there won't be any anomalies in the data if fraud did take place?



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Exactly. It seems that California's election system is purposely designed to prevent accurate investigations.



Facts. How?

Spanish/Mexicans are the original (non-native) citizens of California.

You gonna use profiling?


They could start by investigating voters who did not provide a DL#, ID#, or SS# when they registered to vote.

The HAVA left it up to the states to do that precise investigation and they are not doing it. No one's rights and civil liberties would be violated if that's the route they go with an investigation.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Xenogears

Yes, there could be red flags in the data that's compiled.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: MotherMayEye

So you are assuming that 3 million illegal Mexicans all know how to navigate the complexities of California's bureaucracy to do this? Question, did YOU know this loophole before some reporter or you actually navigated the red tape to figure it out? What makes you think that Mexicans of the illegal variety are this informed?


Obama was nebulous when asked if illegals should vote in the election. If the veritas is any indication, it is conceivable that ways to facilitate any procedure might be in place. After all why this insistence on a weak border and allowing for more and more illegal immigrants?

Also many illegals worried by all the media hub hub regards basically implying trump deporting everyone("fake news from MSM"), you can be sure they were highly motivated to do everything in their power to fight trump.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hosovac
He won why investigate





posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: queenofswords

The HAVA is the real culprit, and it's the federal law. It mandates that the states must register voters who don't provide a DL# and/or a SS#. Registrants that provide neither just get assigned a Voter ID number.



BTW - - just so you know - - I support verified Voter ID cards.

But, we're profiling Mexicans in CA - - aren't we?

Spanish/Mexicans are the original (non native) citizens of CA.

Honestly, how do you solve this without profiling?



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Exactly. It seems that California's election system is purposely designed to prevent accurate investigations.



Facts. How?

Spanish/Mexicans are the original (non-native) citizens of California.

You gonna use profiling?


They could start by investigating voters who did not provide a DL#, ID#, or SS# when they registered to vote.

The HAVA left it up to the states to do that precise investigation and they are not doing it. No one's rights and civil liberties would be violated if that's the route they go with an investigation.


But, they would.

You are profiling those of Spanish/Mexican heritage.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Here's one suggestion I made:

Link



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Exactly. It seems that California's election system is purposely designed to prevent accurate investigations.



Facts. How?

Spanish/Mexicans are the original (non-native) citizens of California.

You gonna use profiling?


They could start by investigating voters who did not provide a DL#, ID#, or SS# when they registered to vote.

The HAVA left it up to the states to do that precise investigation and they are not doing it. No one's rights and civil liberties would be violated if that's the route they go with an investigation.


But, they would.

You are profiling those of Spanish/Mexican heritage.


Legal citizens with Spanish/Mexican heritage have SS#'s and sometimes even DL#s. And anyone can register to vote without those numbers not just people of Spanish/Mexican heritage.

Besides the HAVA (federal law) already provides the states with the responsibility to verify registrants who don't provide those numbers. They aren't taking any measures to do it, but it is completely lawful for them to do so.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

Here's one suggestion I made:



Just so you know - - - I do not support disenfranchised voters.

If you want to vote - - you'll figure out how to get to the polls and vote. And I believe most states now have early mail in voting.

If you move - - it is your responsibility to correct your voting registration, etc.

I do support verified voter ID cards.

Redistricting - - - now that's another story.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

Here's one suggestion I made:



Just so you know - - - I do not support disenfranchised voters.

If you want to vote - - you'll figure out how to get to the polls and vote. And I believe most states now have early mail in voting.

If you move - - it is your responsibility to correct your voting registration, etc.

I do support verified voter ID cards.

Redistricting - - - now that's another story.







I don't think there have been any plans announced to restrict voting, at least not that I have seen from Trump.
I don't think anyone support that.

edit on 25/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

Here's one suggestion I made:



Just so you know - - - I do not support disenfranchised voters.

If you want to vote - - you'll figure out how to get to the polls and vote. And I believe most states now have early mail in voting.

If you move - - it is your responsibility to correct your voting registration, etc.

I do support verified voter ID cards.

Redistricting - - - now that's another story.







No one would be disenfranchised by simply verifying their eligibility to vote. My voter registration was verified because I provided my SS# for verification under the HAVV. If you don't provide your DL# or SS#, then you should still have to be verified some other way.
edit on 25-1-2017 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Exactly. It seems that California's election system is purposely designed to prevent accurate investigations.



Facts. How?

Spanish/Mexicans are the original (non-native) citizens of California.

You gonna use profiling?


They could start by investigating voters who did not provide a DL#, ID#, or SS# when they registered to vote.

The HAVA left it up to the states to do that precise investigation and they are not doing it. No one's rights and civil liberties would be violated if that's the route they go with an investigation.


But, they would.

You are profiling those of Spanish/Mexican heritage.


Legal citizens with Spanish/Mexican heritage have SS#'s and sometimes even DL#s. And anyone can register to vote without those numbers not just people of Spanish/Mexican heritage.

Besides the HAVA (federal law) already provides the states with the responsibility to verify registrants who don't provide those numbers. They aren't taking any measures to do it, but it is completely lawful for them to do so.


It's so easy to buy documentation today - - - very few would be caught this way.

Are you aware of the exponential increase of illegal Chinese crossing the Mexican border?



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: sad_eyed_lady

I suppose this is the kind of fake evidence that we can expect from the Trump Administration's investigation into illegal immigrant voter fraud.

Thanks for proving my point by presenting a deliberately edited and cut video, as evidence that Obama said something that he did not. And, why Latinos should fear that their neighborhoods will be singled out for voter intimidation tactics.

Prefer to watch the whole interview? Knock yourself out.











posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: queenofswords
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Exactly. It seems that California's election system is purposely designed to prevent accurate investigations.



Facts. How?

Spanish/Mexicans are the original (non-native) citizens of California.

You gonna use profiling?


They could start by investigating voters who did not provide a DL#, ID#, or SS# when they registered to vote.

The HAVA left it up to the states to do that precise investigation and they are not doing it. No one's rights and civil liberties would be violated if that's the route they go with an investigation.


But, they would.

You are profiling those of Spanish/Mexican heritage.


Legal citizens with Spanish/Mexican heritage have SS#'s and sometimes even DL#s. And anyone can register to vote without those numbers not just people of Spanish/Mexican heritage.

Besides the HAVA (federal law) already provides the states with the responsibility to verify registrants who don't provide those numbers. They aren't taking any measures to do it, but it is completely lawful for them to do so.


It's so easy to buy documentation today - - - very few would be caught this way.

Are you aware of the exponential increase of illegal Chinese crossing the Mexican border?



Just like SS#s are crosschecked with the SS database, all documentation offered should be crosschecked with the agency that is supposed to maintain the document being offered.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Its going to be so yuge, but right after he puts hillary in jail, i cant wait.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:33 PM
link   


deny ignorance



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

There's absolutely no direct evidence of widespread voter fraud in the 2016 presidential election. We've got a single disputed analysis from 2014 of data from 2012 that is being used to support the notion that there might have been widescale fraudulent voting by non-citizens in 2016.


Conflicting views do in fact warrant an investigation on something this important.


So wide ranging estimates based on a single disputed analysis warrant a massive investigation? Okay. Then where's the announcement about the investigation into Trump staff's ties to the Kremlin? The investigation into Russian hacking? There are multiple lines of evidence in that regard but Trump supporters are absolutely against even talking about it.

Am I wrong?



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join