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: 18
68
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

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.


Yes, but I doubt its the numbers complainers think it is.

Most illegals of Spanish/Mexican descent that I know entered the last Amnesty program.

I see it more as a witch hunt.




posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I see it as protecting the weight of the votes cast by millions of eligible voters. Watering down votes with illegal votes is disenfranchisement, too.

People who cast fraudulent votes are worse than witches and deserve to be sniffed out.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
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?





I would think this is one piece of information being used to form Trump's view. Hopefully it is not the only one. There is evidence of other related issues, for example the mess with the voter rolls. I think even some Democrats have admitted they need cleaning up. Trump has promised a major investigation.
As for disputes on studies, I am not sure I could find any study in politics that was not disputed.

The investigation into Trump campaign ties to Russia is underway.
The investigation into Russian hacking is complete and we've had the report and conclusions.

Seems consistent in relation to the types of observations required to initiate an investigation.

Obviously these are important matters.

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



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

I see it as protecting the weight of the votes cast by millions of eligible voters. Watering down votes with illegal votes is disenfranchisement, too.

People who cast fraudulent votes are worse than witches and deserve to be sniffed out.


I think its a waste of time and money - - because I don't think the numbers are there.

Maybe work to improve the system, but not waste time on an election that's over.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
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?




Here's the thing, the idea that RUSSIANS might have influenced the media... When saudis and mexicans have put big money into our media to influence elections, and even the vatican influences through churches. The idea that their supposed influence means anything to the validity of the election, is ridiculous stupidity.

And it is always implied that they hacked the voting machines but not outright stated. The russians did not hack the election. AT THE worst they HACKED some emails and provided them to wikileaks, nothing to do with whether the election is valid or not. Since when is news or public information enough to question the validity of an election?

If some random hacker did it, well wouldn't that call the validity of the election too by that logic? Or is it only if some state does it?

How about the fact that most MSM is basically in the pockets of a few oligarchs? Oh they're allowed to influence the election with abaddon?

As said without california trump wins the popular vote, california alone was enough to turn the popular vote around, and from what's been said here it seems their voting procedures might even interfere with proper investigations.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
The same people who were pushing for recounts are now calling foul on this? Oh, the irony.

It's about time a real investigation took place. There's a reason why sanctuary city states push back so hard against voter ID laws... and most of them happen to be controlled by Democrats.





posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:45 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: 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.


Yes, but I doubt its the numbers complainers think it is.

Most illegals of Spanish/Mexican descent that I know entered the last Amnesty program.

I see it more as a witch hunt.



Good grief, the whole point is that the number is unknown.
It will be good to finally have a proper investigation to find out, no?



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I'd be cool with fixing the system because I can easily see the loopholes that can be exploited and need fixing. But if there's important information that can be gleaned from investigating the last election, I am ok with that, too.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Konduit
There's a reason why sanctuary city states push back so hard against voter ID laws... and most of them happen to be controlled by Democrats.



Should we bring up Diebold voting machines?

Voter fraud is not exclusive to one party.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:48 PM
link   
Under Oath:




posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

I'd be cool with fixing the system because I can easily see the loopholes that can be exploited and need fixing. But if there's important information that can be gleaned from investigating the last election, I am ok with that, too.



There's always loopholes, aren't there.

Yes, I can see a systematic approach to tightening up the system.

BUT - - - not because of Trump's butt hurt ego hysterics. He Won.

There is zero logical reason - - - not to mention the expense - - - of proving illegal voting for this presidential election.

It's just more deflection.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

I see it as protecting the weight of the votes cast by millions of eligible voters. Watering down votes with illegal votes is disenfranchisement, too.

People who cast fraudulent votes are worse than witches and deserve to be sniffed out.


I think its a waste of time and money - - because I don't think the numbers are there.

Maybe work to improve the system, but not waste time on an election that's over.


Well, through the HAVV we can see just how many bunk, bogus, or just plain wrong voter registrations (including the deceased), in California, are caught via SS# cross-checking:

Link

The number of non-matches are soooo unbelievably high. There are TEN TIMES as many non-matches as there are matches!!

So, I say it's probably a really good idea that we take a look at the voter registrations of people who didn't even provide a SS# or DL# for crosschecking.


edit on 25-1-2017 by MotherMayEye because: Added 'deceased'



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

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.


Yes, but I doubt its the numbers complainers think it is.

Most illegals of Spanish/Mexican descent that I know entered the last Amnesty program.

I see it more as a witch hunt.



Good grief, the whole point is that the number is unknown.
It will be good to finally have a proper investigation to find out, no?


Trump won.

Investigating this past election is a waste of time and money. And a deflection.

Only working to tighten up loopholes for future elections makes sense.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

I'm fine with moving forward for future elections.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Konduit
There's a reason why sanctuary city states push back so hard against voter ID laws... and most of them happen to be controlled by Democrats.



Should we bring up Diebold voting machines?

Voter fraud is not exclusive to one party.


Yes for gods sakes yes!!!!!!

I agree with you it is not just one party. The reason that this idea is being mocked is because establishment people on BOTH sides know there have been shenanigans, and they don't want to be caught.

I looked substantially into the 2012 republican Primary and all of the odd discrepancies that went against Ron Paul. And who could forget Hillary winning like 10 coin flips in a row to beat Bernie in the one primary!

I don't know that Trump will look into all of these issues, but I do know that establishment people on both sides don't want him to look.

So I am for this investigation, though I will hold my breath that it will actually lead to any real change.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

I see it as protecting the weight of the votes cast by millions of eligible voters. Watering down votes with illegal votes is disenfranchisement, too.

People who cast fraudulent votes are worse than witches and deserve to be sniffed out.


I think its a waste of time and money - - because I don't think the numbers are there.

Maybe work to improve the system, but not waste time on an election that's over.


Well, through the HAVV we can see just how many bunk, bogus, or just plain wrong voter registrations, in California, are caught via SS cross-checking:

Link

The number of non-matches are soooo unbelievably high. There are TEN TIMES as many non-matches as there are matches!!

So, I say it's probably a really good idea that we take a look at the voter registrations of people who didn't even provide a SS# or DL# for crosschecking.


MME, is this saying that 5.4m people sent by the State of California as new voters for verification (due to having no drivers licence during voter registration) could not be found???
edit on 25/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

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.


Yes, but I doubt its the numbers complainers think it is.

Most illegals of Spanish/Mexican descent that I know entered the last Amnesty program.

I see it more as a witch hunt.



Good grief, the whole point is that the number is unknown.
It will be good to finally have a proper investigation to find out, no?


Trump won.

Investigating this past election is a waste of time and money. And a deflection.

Only working to tighten up loopholes for future elections makes sense.


It seems sensible to review the last election to understand what to clean up though, or even if anything needs to be cleaned up.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

I see it as protecting the weight of the votes cast by millions of eligible voters. Watering down votes with illegal votes is disenfranchisement, too.

People who cast fraudulent votes are worse than witches and deserve to be sniffed out.


I think its a waste of time and money - - because I don't think the numbers are there.

Maybe work to improve the system, but not waste time on an election that's over.


Well, through the HAVV we can see just how many bunk, bogus, or just plain wrong voter registrations, in California, are caught via SS cross-checking:

Link

The number of non-matches are soooo unbelievably high. There are TEN TIMES as many non-matches as there are matches!!

So, I say it's probably a really good idea that we take a look at the voter registrations of people who didn't even provide a SS# or DL# for crosschecking.


MME, is this saying that 5.4m people sent by the State of California for verification (due to having no drivers licence during voter registration) could not be found???


It's saying that 5.4 million registrations came back returned because the SS# they offered was not a match for anyone having their name and date of birth OR the person was deceased.

Yep.

Incredible, eh?

California's stats are by far one of the worst.



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Annee

I see it as protecting the weight of the votes cast by millions of eligible voters. Watering down votes with illegal votes is disenfranchisement, too.

People who cast fraudulent votes are worse than witches and deserve to be sniffed out.


I think its a waste of time and money - - because I don't think the numbers are there.

Maybe work to improve the system, but not waste time on an election that's over.


Well, through the HAVV we can see just how many bunk, bogus, or just plain wrong voter registrations, in California, are caught via SS cross-checking:

Link

The number of non-matches are soooo unbelievably high. There are TEN TIMES as many non-matches as there are matches!!

So, I say it's probably a really good idea that we take a look at the voter registrations of people who didn't even provide a SS# or DL# for crosschecking.


MME, is this saying that 5.4m people sent by the State of California for verification (due to having no drivers licence during voter registration) could not be found???


It's saying that 5.4 million registrations came back returned because the SS# they offered was not a match for anyone having their name and date of birth OR the person was deceased.

Yep.

Incredible, eh?

California's stats are by far one of the worst.


Good God!
This in itself warrants an investigation!

In terms of an audit, presumably this data can be used to check actual votes in the election to find out if any of those 5.4m appear? Or would these returns ensure no vote could be made?
edit on 25/1/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2017 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Konduit
There's a reason why sanctuary city states push back so hard against voter ID laws... and most of them happen to be controlled by Democrats.



Should we bring up Diebold voting machines?

Voter fraud is not exclusive to one party.


Yes for gods sakes yes!!!!!!

I agree with you it is not just one party. The reason that this idea is being mocked is because establishment people on BOTH sides know there have been shenanigans, and they don't want to be caught.


I followed the 2000 election from the beginning (on another board) and Blackboxvoting.org from its inception.

If any election was ever stolen by illegal tampering - - that one was it.

I just don't think illegal voters in CA is significant - - and to investigate an election that's already been decided is stupid (especially since the amount of voters in CA makes no difference in the Electoral vote) - - not to mention it would be a waste of money.

Trump is obviously butt hurt that he didn't get a majority of popular vote. Childish reason to push this.



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join