Statement by the Press Secretary on the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity

a reply to: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler

Despite substantial evidence of voter fraud, many states have refused to provide the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity with basic information relevant to its inquiry. Rather than engage in endless legal battles at taxpayer expense, today President Donald J. Trump signed an executive order to dissolve the Commission, and he has asked the Department of Homeland Security to review its initial findings and determine next courses of action.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Just like the FBI and the DOJ the states are refusing to provide basic information. I see a pattern.

By saying it's a national security issue (which it is) States won't really have a choice but to let the feds do their job.

Your picture is misleading. All states require some sort of identification (even if just a utility bill) to vote AND you have to be registered to vote - at which time they vet who you are and that you are eligible to vote.

I know this because I'm a deputy volunteer voter registrar for my county. This year I'll participate in the elections as an election volunteer and see the process for myself.

The states have made this information (voter registration) available (shockingly, it's public information and you can actually look up your neighbors on voter rolls.) What the Feds wanted was even more personal than your name and address and many states said "no. Too far."

What did the Feds want? Here's the list:

The information the commission is seeking includes registrants' full names, addresses, dates of birth, political parties, the last four digits of their social security numbers, a list of the elections they voted in since 2006, information on any felony convictions, information on whether they were registered to vote in other states, their military status, and whether they lived overseas.
Source

The Feds don't need to know that sometimes I vote Republican and sometimes I vote Democrat. As to felonies, convicted criminals who have served their sentence and been "papered" (authenticated as served their time) are allowed to vote and the Fed doesn't need to know that, either.

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You should quit citing Trump. His beliefs are not on the mark.

States did hand over the initial voter rolls when asked... but when the Feds came back and asked for more, they rejected that. Check your favorite news sources from late June/early July of 2017.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

What's your point? That Trump's tweet is more credible than actual studies and data collected for this issue? Do you know what the phrase "deny ignorance" means by any chance or do you take anything that supports your biases at face value?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Yeah. ALL the studies that have said over and over for years not that voter fraud doesn't happen on a widespread scale are all wrong and Trump is correct because he said so. Nevermind those studies were carried out scientifically and thoroughly, that is obvious fake news when Trump says otherwise!

Yeah it only happens a little bit so its ok... of course, that doesnt count all the illegals and chain migrant famikies who were made legal, who are influincing our elections but have no intention to embrace our way of life.

a reply to: 3n19m470

No one said that because it happens a little bit that it is ok. Don't put words in my mouth. Though I should point out that of the FOUR proven cases of voter fraud from 2016, most of them were Trump supporters.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

True or False:

Since the Census is the determining factor in the number of House seats allocated to each state, those states with large numbers of illegal immigrants get extra seats (and more power to determine appropriations, electoral votes, etc.) at the expense of others.

I don't think voting in the traditional sense will matter in the long run if things become more decentralized. Besides, Russia will probably hack our elections in 2018 in addition to interfering again. They want us to doubt the legitimacy of our Democracy.

I've read that one of the goals of the cryptocurrency movement is to eliminate the "ruling class" by decentralizing things. I've been working out a method for a "company" to function without any rulers. Everyone would be a peer. The potential is high, as LOTS of money gets wasted because the people who are in leadership positions abuse power to make more money than they are worth.

All of the money that gets wasted being spent on the rulers, such as CEO's, politicians, etc. would go directly to initial investors, workers, and even customers.

I'm guessing that once people find out this kind of system exists where there is no need for rulers, people will go ahead and use it and the rulers will be out of a job.

It will look very attractive because the amount of money saved will be staggering, and it would go right back into the population. There would be no ruling class in the traditional sense.

Anyway, I'm not as informed as I should be about this, but I'm throwing out a long-shot prediction that if the Russians compromise our traditional election systems, and an alternative system comes out soon after, it might look appealing, especially considering the bankers already messed up in 2008. Something that solves both of these problems would cause a debate, for sure.

This relates to voting because I believe that within the next 20 years, voting will be replaced by another, possibly similar, method. It is possible that a decentralized government appears at some point.

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: Krazysh0t

True or False:

Since the Census is the determining factor in the number of House seats allocated to each state, those states with large numbers of illegal immigrants get extra seats (and more power to determine appropriations, electoral votes, etc.) at the expense of others.

Article 1, Section 2 of the US constitution makes no mention of citizens, only Persons. Any state with high immigrant (legal or illegal) populations would get more people. The House represents all persons not just citizens or voters in their districts.

a reply to: Pyle
fairus.org...
The following says it perfectly:

It is insulting to our national adherence to the rule of law to confer domestic political power on persons illegally in the country. The size of the illegal alien population has become so large that this issue should no longer be ignored by the nation's policymakers or the courts.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Did QAnon leak that Trump was going to drop the investigation? It would be odd if they didn't, since I predicted nothing would come of this from the start. Trump lost the popular vote but won the election. He should have settled for that, instead of running the risk of exposing the fraud that put him in office. Remember, several states reported that their voter roll databases had been hacked.

originally posted by: Pyle

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: Krazysh0t

True or False:

Since the Census is the determining factor in the number of House seats allocated to each state, those states with large numbers of illegal immigrants get extra seats (and more power to determine appropriations, electoral votes, etc.) at the expense of others.

Article 1, Section 2 of the US constitution makes no mention of citizens, only Persons. Any state with high immigrant (legal or illegal) populations would get more people. The House represents all persons not just citizens or voters in their districts.

Correct. The Founders counted slaves and Indians as part of the population. Southerners had no problem getting representation based on the number of non-voting slaves they held. Why shouldn't Northerners get representation based on the number of non-voting immigrants they have?

a reply to: DJW001

Did QAnon leak that Trump was going to drop the investigation?

I wouldn't say the investigation is dropped, rather transferred to The Department of Homeland Security.

As I stated in the OP, by saying it's a national security issue (which it is) States won't really have a choice but to let the feds do their job.

originally posted by: EvidenceNibbler
a reply to: DJW001

Did QAnon leak that Trump was going to drop the investigation?

I wouldn't say the investigation is dropped, rather transferred to The Department of Homeland Security.

As I stated in the OP, by saying it's a national security issue (which it is) States won't really have a choice but to let the feds do their job.

It also means the results can be kept secret if Trump doesn't like what they say. Do you trust the DHS? Seems it would bewhat Trump would call the "deep state." Can't wait for it to spring its first leak.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Not answering that red herring question as it has nothing to do with voter fraud.